Monday, October 15, 2007

Comparative Religion Slaughterhouse Of The Mind

A immature college adult female sit downs down at her desk on the first twenty-four hours of a course of study on comparative religion. She believes it's a good deal. She acquires college recognition for a insouciant reappraisal of her ain Christian religion and acquires to larn about other human race religions.

The professor comes in the room fashionably late. He's casually dressed in dowdy clothing and his hair is in a thin grey ponytail that's sol tight it stretch alongs all the furrows out of his face. What follows in that first social social class and throughout the remainder of the semester is a conflict for the psyches of the pupils in the class.

The professor's secular, atheistic, materialist prejudice is revealed from the first clip he open ups his mouth. He nevertheless gives all faiths a modicum of regard except for traditional Christian Religion for which he uncovers unvarnished disdain.

The professor, when dealing with the Christian faith, onslaughts it in a mode commonly used in comparative faith social classes in college. His bright shining prevarication is the claim that in the early centuries of Christian history there were respective "Christianities," each with their ain sacred texts, competing with each other on a more than or less equal footing to go the dominant mainstream branch.

(Incidentally, the homicide enigma thriller, The District Attorney Vinci Code, promoted the position that a women's rightist Gnostic religious sect had the greater claim to be the true Christian faith.) The truth is far different. The truth is that traditional apostolic Christianity, which is the Christian Religion of the New Testament, was the mainstream word form of Christian Religion from the very earlier years of the church.

The Gnostic religious sects are very different from traditional Christian Religion and are by no agency on an equal scholarly terms with the traditional Christian faith.

Nevertheless, this "60's geek" professor with his persuasive words is able to agitate the religion of some immature Christian students. A careful pupil who takes some clip to make some research will see through the "strawman" the professor have put up.

The "strawman" maneuver is commonly used in arguments and lectures. It dwells of distorting Christian Religion into a scarecrow of inaccuracies and contradictions and then attacking the scarecrow and giving the feeling that Christian Religion have been disproven.

Let me give a thumbnail study of early Christian church history. The faith of the ancient Greeks was Olympianism which is similar to the Hindooism of present twenty-four hours India. The Romans essentially adopted Olympianism but referred to the assorted Gods by Latin instead of Grecian names.

Hindus believe that the stuff human race is "Maya" which intends illusion. The Hindus essentially believe that stuff physical objects don't really exist. The ancient Grecian Olympians similarly had a contempt for the stuff world.

To them, anything physical or stuff was less than the kingdom of spirit and was corrupt. This is why many people of the ancient human race had a difficult clip accepting the Christian philosophy of the incarnation.

The embodiment is the Christian philosophy that Jesus, Himself being divine, was born as a babe and grew to manhood. In other words Supreme Being took on human flesh and dwelt among us.

The Olympian, Hindu-like religion dominated the thought of the Pagans of the ancient world. It is from this dirt that Gnosticism grew. Gnosticism was a syncretism (mixture) of Christian Religion and Olympianism. Full blown Gnosticism didn't look until the 2nd or 3rd centuries AD.

The sacred textual matters of Gnosticism were written in the 2nd and 3rd centuries which takes them a long manner from the historical events of the life of Jesus Of Nazareth and the apostles. Traditional Christian Religion and its sacred textual matters which consist the New Testament were mainstream and generally accepted from the earlier years of Christian church history long before Gnosticism reached full flower.

The best scholarship shows that the books of the New Testament were written in the first century. They were universally accepted by the early Christians and were later formally codified as the New Testament.

The Gnostic Hagiographa effort to link Jesus to a Grecian philosophical and spiritual worldview. The Gnostic Hagiographa do small reference of existent events of existent history. The traditional Gospel and epistles of the New Testament rightfully link Jesus Of Nazareth to the Hebrew worldview and do many mentions to existent events that occurred in existent history.

The New Testament demoes that Jesus was the promised Messiah of State Of Israel who came in fulfilment of over 300 Old Testament prophecies. No other faith, including Gnosticism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism and Jainism have anything to compare with the Old and New Testament record of prognostication and fulfilment of prophecy.

Most sacred Hagiographa of other religions incorporate no prognostications at all. I have got often said that the many 100s of Book prognostications and their fulfilments are like God's signature on His holy book and turn out that Supreme Being inspired the authorship of the Bible.

The professor in that comparative faith social class would make well to look into the substance of prognostication and fulfilment of prophecy. If he makes he will happen that traditional biblical Christian Religion is beyond compare! Gnosticism is a religion different from Christian Religion and it came centuries later.

4 comments:

Rev. Illuminatus Maximus said...

The embodiment is the Christian philosophy that Jesus, Himself being divine, was born as a babe and grew to manhood. In other words Supreme Being took on human flesh and dwelt among us.

--------------

This sounds a lot like the greek superhero Hercules, the son of the God Zeus and a mortal woman. He also ascended to the right hand of his father too when he died.

PerryS said...

You make a lot of assertions but you don't cite any references or give any sources. Learn something about the topic you're pontificating on. Read Bart Ehrman and try again.

Warrior on the Mountain said...

I would like to know more about this topic; can you please cite some sources or suggest some further reading?

I share the concern that some non-Christian entities are, whether knowingly or not, making inaccurate arguments to invalidate the Christian faith. At present I cannot discuss the topic well because I don't know as much as you appear to...but if you start me off with some sources I might be able to change that.

Thank you!

jamezilla said...

Stop perpetuating this false story.