“The work of God”?

[tonea2003]

That’s not me.

The most vivid dream I’ve ever had is what prompted me to start reading the Gospels and when I got to the end of John, it was kind of like a light switch.

Still took me weeks and weeks to get to that point, it doesn’t happen overnight and it’s very difficult.

You start by contemplating it in your head and by the time you do change, you feel it in your chest, like a feeling of being in love.

I was completely atheist until it happened.

Sounds mental I know and I’ll be called a loon but that’s the truth.

so what is it? the that's it moment the piece of the jigsaw that made it all fit together, because surely if its that clear to you(and god should make it clear to everyone if it had any sense) then it should be enough for people like myself.

 

[tonea2003]

Glad to see you are standing up for your faith. It takes true grit.
I certainly believe in God and that Jesus was put on this earth to show us the way.
Nobody on this thread has produced any coherent argument to prove it is not true. If they could come up with a better reason as to why people would die for a cause they KNOW to be a lie then they might tweak my amusement.
But thats unlikely.

and no one on here(ever) has given a reasonable argument that it is true

and further more you have absolutely no idea if this man(if he even existed) was dying for a cause in the first place, let alone be a deity.

the burden of proof does not lie with the atheist as they are not making the claim, you are, you've just said it.
give me a good reason to believe.
what is it that you can share that would change anyone of our minds as you are so certain.

 

[urban genie]

The gospel of Matthew drops the biggest hint who Jesus (or joshua if you take his hebrew name before tranlated into greek) was

The likelyhood of their being two people called Yeshua brought up before a roman govenor both for the crime of causing insurection is none existant.

Jesus Christ and Jesus Barrabas are the saem person, a jewish revolutionary fighting Roman occupation and corruption withing the Rabbi leaders.


Of course after his execution how best does his followers in his restance group remember and carrying on his cause? You venerate him and pass on tales of his superhuman power and create myths and legends to carry on his work, this morphs into a religious cult that then grows.

Christianity was the perfect religion though for nations where it took hold early on, armenia, ethiopia etc as it teaches be happy with your lot and don't kick off and you will be rewarded when you die which is perfect for despots to control the population.

A religion of subJugation not freedom

Opium of the masses baby

 

[Brightwell’s left peg]

Glad to see you are standing up for your faith. It takes true grit.
I certainly believe in God and that Jesus was put on this earth to show us the way.
Nobody on this thread has produced any coherent argument to prove it is not true. If they could come up with a better reason as to why people would die for a cause they KNOW to be a lie then they might tweak my amusement.
But thats unlikely.

It doesn’t take grit to stand up for your faith. Faith by definition is believing something without evidence, so all you need to do is just keep deluding yourself.

As for putting the onus on Atheists to disprove your delusions, that is a typical religious cop out, but I’ll go with it. Can you please disprove my belief that up in space there is a rainbow coloured unicorn currently having tea with Elvis. Until such point as you can disprove it, it’s more believable than anything you currently believe in.

 

[Saddleworth2]

You’ve got a very warped view of the Bible, one filled with a lot of hate and resentment.

Unfortunately organised religion can often do that to a person.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

The Bible doesn't say the Jews built the pyramids. There is no credible basis for this claim. But, that doesn't mean the Hebrews were never enslaved in Egypt.

The earliest reference to 'Israel' is found in an inscription discovered in Egypt known as the "Merneptah Stele". The first Hebrews to settle in Egypt were Joseph(as), his father Jacob(as) [whose other name is Israel] and his brothers. Isn't that a coincidence ?

The article doesn't say there is no evidence at all of a Hebrew-Canaanite war, what it proves is that the complete and total annihilation of Canaanites couldn't have happened.

Regarding the exodus, perhaps the traditional understanding that the mount Sinai was the one in Sinai peninsula was wrong. The new site of the mountain that has been proposed is in northern Saudi Arabia, the red sea crossing site to be in the Gulf of Aqaba rather than the Gulf of Suez. Plenty of evidences to support this is shown here.



All the details regarding the new site are fully Biblical as well. Verse by verse explained here.

​

Jewish priests, in making a history for their race, have given us but a shadow of truth here and there; it is almost wholly mythical. The author of "The Religion of Israel," speaking on this subject, says:

"The history of the religion of Israel must start from the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt. Formerly it was usual to take a much earlier starting-point, and to begin with a religious discussion of the religious ideas of the Patriarchs. And this was perfectly right, so long as the accounts of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were considered historical. But now that a strict investigation has shown us that all these stories are entirely unhistorical, of course we have to begin the history later on."[54:1]
The author of "The Spirit History of Man," says:

"The Hebrews came out of Egypt and settled among the Canaanites. They need not be traced beyond the Exodus. That is their historical beginning. It was very easy to cover up this remote event by the recital of mythical traditions, and to prefix to it an account of their origin in which the gods (Patriarchs), should figure as their ancestors."[54:2]
Professor Goldzhier says:

...

We have already seen, in the last chapter, that Bacchus was called the "Law-giver," and that his laws were written on two tables of stone.[59:3] This feature in the Hebrew legend was evidently copied from that related of Bacchus, but, the idea of his (Moses) receiving the commandments from the Lord on a mountain was obviously taken from the Persian legend related of Zoroaster.

Prof. Max Müller says:

"What applies to the religion of Moses applies to that of Zoroaster. It is placed before us as a complete system from the first, revealed by Ahuramazda (Ormuzd), proclaimed by Zoroaster."[59:4]
The disciples of Zoroaster, in their profusion of legends of the master, relate that one day, as he prayed on a high mountain, in the midst of thunders and lightnings ("fire from heaven"), the Lord himself appeared before him, and delivered unto him the "Book of the Law." While the King of Persia and the people were assembled together, Zoroaster came down from the mountain unharmed, bringing with him the "Book of the Law," which had been revealed to him by Ormuzd. They call this book the Zend-Avesta, which signifies the Living Word.[59:5]

[Pg 60]

According to the religion of the Cretans, Minos, their law-giver, ascended a mountain (Mount Dicta) and there received from the Supreme Lord (Zeus) the sacred laws which he brought down with him.[60:1]

Almost all nations of antiquity have legends of their holy men ascending a mountain to ask counsel of the gods, such places being invested with peculiar sanctity, and deemed nearer to the deities than other portions of the earth.[60:2]

According to Egyptian belief, it is Thoth, the Deity itself, that speaks and reveals to his elect among men the will of God and the arcana of divine things. Portions of them are expressly stated to have been written by the very finger of Thoth himself; to have been the work and composition of the great god.[60:3]

Diodorus, the Grecian historian, says:

The idea promulgated by the ancient Egyptians that their laws were received direct from the Most High God, has been adopted with success by many other law-givers, who have thus insured respect for their institutions.[60:4]

The Supreme God of the ancient Mexicans was Tezcatlipoca. He occupied a position corresponding to the Jehovah of the Jews, the Brahma of India, the Zeus of the Greeks, and the Odin of the Scandinavians. His name is compounded of Tezcatepec, the name of a mountain (upon which he is said to have manifested himself to man) tlil, dark, and poca, smoke. The explanation of this designation is given in the Codex Vaticanus, as follows:

[Pg 61]

Tezcatlipoca was one of their most potent deities; they say he once appeared on the top of a mountain. They paid him great reverence and adoration, and addressed him, in their prayers, as "Lord, whose servant we are." No man ever saw his face, for he appeared only "as a shade." Indeed, the Mexican idea of the godhead was similar to that of the Jews. Like Jehovah, Tezcatlipoca dwelt in the "midst of thick darkness." When he descended upon the mount of Tezcatepec, darkness overshadowed the earth, while fire and water, in mingled streams, flowed from beneath his feet, from its summit.[61:1]

Thus, we see that other nations, beside the Hebrews, believed that their laws were actually received from God, that they had legends to that effect, and that a mountain figures conspicuously in the stories.

Professor Oort, speaking on this subject, says:

"No one who has any knowledge of antiquity will be surprised at this, for similar beliefs were very common. All peoples who had issued from a life of barbarism and acquired regular political institutions, more or less elaborate laws, and established worship, and maxims of morality, attributed all this—their birth as a nation, so to speak—to one or more great men, all of whom, without exception, were supposed to have received their knowledge from some deity.
"Whence did Zoroaster, the prophet of the Persians, derive his religion? According to the beliefs of his followers, and the doctrines of their sacred writings, it was from Ahuramazda, the God of light. Why did the Egyptians represent the god Thoth with a writing tablet and a pencil in his hand, and honor him especially as the god of the priests? Because he was 'the Lord of the divine Word,' the foundation of all wisdom, from whose inspiration the priests, who were the scholars, the lawyers, and the religious teachers of the people, derived all their wisdom. Was not Minos, the law-giver of the Cretans, the friend of Zeus, the highest of the gods? Nay, was he not even his son, and did he not ascend to the sacred cave on Mount Dicte to bring down the laws which his god had placed there for him? From whom did the Spartan law-giver, Lycurgus, himself say that he had obtained his laws? From no other than the god Apollo. The Roman legend, too, in honoring Numa Pompilius as the people's instructor, at the same time ascribed all his wisdom to his intercourse with the nymph Egeria. It was the same elsewhere; and to make one more example,—this from later times—Mohammed not only believed himself to have been called immediately by God to be the prophet of the Arabs, but declared that he had received every page of the Koran from the hand of the angel Gabriel."[61:2]

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/31885/31885-h/31885-h.htm#Page_48

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

It doesn’t take grit to stand up for your faith. Faith by definition is believing something without evidence, so all you need to do is just keep deluding yourself.

As for putting the onus on Atheists to disprove your delusions, that is a typical religious cop out, but I’ll go with it. Can you please disprove my belief that up in space there is a rainbow coloured unicorn currently having tea with Elvis. Until such point as you can disprove it, it’s more believable than anything you currently believe in.

Not only that, he has to prove he isn't a murderer or he is one. I don't have to prove he is one, I'm just showing true grit by believing in it, he has to prove in every single day of his life that in every 24 hours that's passed he hasn't killed someone at some point. I await his irrefutable evidence.

 

[Saddleworth2]

I’d actually love to wind people up this much but sadly I’m not.

You would think differently if you’d experienced the same dream, although it did take me many weeks to change my mind.

I take my hat to you for sharing this so honestly on a forum like this. You must have known the reaction you would get but then you do love a good debate ;-).
The first 10 years of my life were spent in a gentle dip into the waters through sunday school and church. As soon as I hit my teens that was binned I'm afraid. I have quite a bit of experience of the results of a catholic upbringing, both the good and the bad through marriage. Have never met anyone that has had a late conversion like you have described.

If I'm totally honest I don't have a concrete belief either way. I often used to think quite deeply as a child about the nature of the universe and our place in it. How could we be the only world in the whole of creation to hold sophisticated life? I still don't believe that question has been answered definitively. I may well keep my options open just in case I need to :-)

 

[Saddleworth2]

Will this become the new Brexit thread. Believers vs Unbelievers?
I fear it will be a little one sided.

 

[Ban-jani]

Absolutely mate. Fair enough. As I said, I'm interested in it from a psychological point of view. I did try to switch from talking about you to make a general point about religious belief in my post though (from what I've heard other converts say), but I can see why that might still come across as a comment on your belief (which of course it partly was, but not intended as an attack).

But would it be accurate to say that it was not a normal process of reading and learning about something? It was different to, say, reading a book about physics and realising that something you thought was true is actually wrong?

It was fairly normal but to be honest, without the event I wouldn’t have changed, so maybe you are right in a small way but it would only be a small way.

I really did read and learn though and 6 weeks afterwards I wasn’t a believer, I was still an atheist. I was reading Matthew and I had lots of issues with it, whether or not that could happen, surely that bit is a metaphor etc. Do I believe the general story and not specifics etc.? All this went through my head. I was cross referencing what parables meant via the Internet and I was checking whether aspects could be historically backed up. I even read some stuff from minimalist scholars, who whilst in a tiny minority, are still obviously professionals and they’re a minority of scholars who think the whole story is a myth. So I definitely didn’t just jump in like a naive, gullible, agreeable emotional wreck, and believe everything. I tackled the book as I would have a science book and I wasn’t really going through any sort of tough time, I was of pretty sound mind.

A friend of mine, she didn’t have that at all, she was an atheist and very sceptical, her husband convinced her to go to church, he was a person who would say he was Christian but wasn’t really, bit like an armchair fair weather Rag and she thought everyone was barking mad, then she read the New Testament and after a few months started to believe it herself, she didn’t have any event that prompted it or pushed her to faith, other than her husband asking her to try it. She told her dad she was being baptised and he nearly fell off his chair.

So it does happen but people tend to switch during a difficult time or after something profound happening to them.

What I will just repeat is how difficult it is to completely change your world view, it’s very hard to look yourself in the mirror and make that change and it’s even harder to then tell people who think you’re an atheist, that you’re no longer one.