LordReed:


So in other words I must accept your explanation for the similarities? I can propose no other way by which it could be?

Maybe you could do better by answering the last question.
Let me put it in perspective clearly. The questions would be;
Why do most of the flood story have it caused by man's transgression?
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"

Why do most of the flood story have it being a result of divine destruction
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"
And others which it is clear that your explanations does not just follow. It is not about you accepting mine, but yours clearly don't just follow

keppler:

Maybe you could do better by answering the last question.
Let me put it in perspective clearly. The questions would be;
Why do most of the flood story have it caused by man's transgression?
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"

Why do most of the flood story have it being a result of divine destruction
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"
And others which it is clear that your explanations does not just follow. It is not about you accepting mine, but yours clearly don't just follow

All the cultures that have flood stories are all centered around large bodies of water, all of them have vengeful gods that could not be placated, all of them have knowledge of boat building, all of them have significant experience with flooding. Why is it now far fetched to propose that their similar environments would generate similar stories?

It was global!

Where these atheists often catch you guys is by prescribing the sample they want when you're talking about faith in God and at the same time they're the ones prescribing the sample test to prove their evolution.

If an atheist is asking you to call God and do something He did in Bible times for him (atheist) to confirm the existence of God, why not demand from the atheists a sample of where a goat evolved into a fish? After all they're trying to impress in the minds of their listeners how life came by chance as taught by their theory so they don't need to tell us how that happened but impossible again now!

The truth is God doesn't perform any spectacular act if such an act doesn't have anything to do with His plan and purpose so don't think because God did something at one time in the past then He must do it again just to please an atheist Naaaaaaaaaaaaa!

He sent an eighty year old man (Moses) to go and deliver a multitude of people out of slavery from the world's most powerful nation of that time, Moses performed a lot of miraculous signs to prove to Pharaoh that this thing no be seré seré, the Israelites were released from Egypt not through the effort of an army so many Egyptians and other Nationals left Egypt to go with this awesome God, when they went to spy on Jericho Rahab (a prostitute) declared to the spies all the things her people have heard about this wonderful God but what about the Israelites that God was performing all these things in their own eyes and in their favour? Did they appreciate Him? NO!
So even if God should come down now and speak from the sky {Exodus 19:9 compare to John 12:28-30} this atheists will not worship Him rather they'll look for excuses from nowhere to tell you why they can't worship someone who won't force them! Luke 16:31

GeneralDae:

When the bible says the world, it doesn't always mean the entire world. It simply meant the world as they knew it in those days. It was more or less a local flood, and the evidence for a major local flood is good.

LordReed:


All the cultures that have flood stories are all centered around large bodies of water, all of them have vengeful gods that could not be placated, all of them have knowledge of boat building, all of them have significant experience with flooding. Why is it now far fetched to propose that their similar environments would generate similar stories?

Alright, I rest my case

keppler:

Alright, I rest my case

What case? You have no case to rest. LoL

keppler:

Maybe you could do better by answering the last question.
Let me put it in perspective clearly. The questions would be;
Why do most of the flood story have it caused by man's transgression?
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"

Why do most of the flood story have it being a result of divine destruction
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"
And others which it is clear that your explanations does not just follow. It is not about you accepting mine, but yours clearly don't just follow

Maybe you could also answer:

LordReed:


Also if you are adamant that the only way these things could be are due to shared heritage then are you willing to accept that Jesus' death and resurrection story is from previous cultures gods death and resurrection stories?

Hmmm,well, in this narrative of flood encapsuling Noah and his family's survive et all, I find an intriguingly interesting issue that circles around how Noah's progeny became the antecedents of humans with such a vast genetic pool content as we have today.
I implore that you don't come with the concept of mutation as it is a fundamental aspect of the theory of evolution which perhaps,most adherents of the abrahamic religion rebuff.
The issue of how this mind boggling diversity in race came about continues to linger on my mind.
Or perhaps,man has been existing before Adam was created. The Bible seems to highlight the supremacy of the race that came from Adam, hence it might not have found worthy bringing into introduction the story of humans who existed before Adam was created. This to Mee seems to be the only if not one of the reasons why humans have such genetic diversity.
As an alacritous seeker of knowledge, I do wish to be enlightened.

LordReed:


Maybe you could also answer:

It still reinforces my point. Having read about pagan copycat thesis, I have learned that apart from the fact that they are mostly fabrications and exaggerations, the most important thing which relate to your questions is:
Often, when some sort of parallel is made between paganism and Christianity that looks legitimate (and not an extreme exaggeration or fabrication), it has been found the similar characteristic doesn’t appear in that pagan religion until long after Christianity had been established. Thus, it appears Christianity influenced the pagan religion, not the other way around
https://confidenceinchrist.net/2018/05/22/is-jesus-just-a-pagan-copycat/.
You may visit the page to get the full context

In conclusion, there's always a true event which diverges with time or influences other ideas

keppler:

It still reinforces my point. Having read about pagan copycat thesis, I have learned that apart from the fact that they are mostly fabrications and exaggerations, the most important thing which relate to your questions is:
Often, when some sort of parallel is made between paganism and Christianity that looks legitimate (and not an extreme exaggeration or fabrication), it has been found the similar characteristic doesn’t appear in that pagan religion until long after Christianity had been established. Thus, it appears Christianity influenced the pagan religion, not the other way around
https://confidenceinchrist.net/2018/05/22/is-jesus-just-a-pagan-copycat/.
You may visit the page to get the full context

In conclusion, there's always a true event which diverges with time or influences other ideas

LoL! The Osiris myth was well established by 24th century BCE so any suggestion that Christianity was the one that influenced it holds no water.

What is also funny is when I suggest that similarities are not indicative of a shared heritage you are quick to the challenge but in this case you want to deny that shared heritage and turn it around. Very funny. LMFAO!

LordReed:


LoL! The Osiris myth was well established by 24th century BCE so any suggestion that Christianity was the one that influenced it holds no water.

What is also funny is when I suggest that similarities are not indicative of a shared heritage you are quick to the challenge but in this case you want to deny that shared heritage and turn it around. Very funny. LMFAO!

I wished you had read the link I provided as it answered your objections already. The myth is actually older than the life, death and resurrection of Jesus but the parallels did not emerge until after his death. This was what I maintained that the parallels could still be argued that it came from the life of Jesus. Hence, shared "heritage".
Not funny at the end of the day

keppler:

I wished you had read the link I provided as it answered your objections already. The myth is actually older than the life, death and resurrection of Jesus but the parallels did not emerge until after his death. This was what I maintained that the parallels could still be argued that it came from the life of Jesus. Hence, shared "heritage".
Not funny at the end of the day

What parallels? Osiris died and was resurrected, this is central to the myth. Which other parallels are you referring to?

Oh it is funny, very.

LordReed:


What parallels? Osiris died and was resurrected, this is central to the myth. Which other parallels are you referring to?

Oh it is funny, very.

I'm afraid you're not conversant with the pagan copycat theories. I like that you want to use such analogy that but it actually reinforces my point if you actually read the theories (scholarly at least).
First, the parallels are not the type of parallels we get with the flood stories where you have a GLOBAL FLOOD with EXACT DETAILS which can be found in all the flood stories. These are what are referred to as PARALLELS and it is best interpreted through the Biblical lens as the survivors passing down the stories through generations, with the dispersal at Babel such that every group went with same story which would definitely get "corrupted" with time as is common with oral traditions.

Now to your example, what are referred to parallels are not really parallels as skeptics only try to prove that
1. Jesus never existed
2. The gospels are fraud
3. The stories in the gospels are copied from MANY OTHER gods which are combined in the person of Jesus.
So we have a 180 degrees out of phase of what you are saying. One single event found with variants in several stories against several events found in one single story.

Now to your objection, there are other parallels of alleged virgin birth, son of god etc which all have no evideurnce predating Jesus but after him. And your resurrection is still a form of forcing a Christian term on his story as he did not resurrect in the sense of the word but appeared to rule the underworld. Which reinforces my point that Christianity influenced the later alleged parallels that skeptics have tried to show. Not forgetting what they really want to prove as stated above.

Now, it actually get funny

keppler:

I'm afraid you're not conversant with the pagan copycat theories. I like that you want to use such analogy that but it actually reinforces my point if you actually read the theories (scholarly at least).
First, the parallels are not the type of parallels we get with the flood stories where you have a GLOBAL FLOOD with EXACT DETAILS which can be found in all the flood stories. These are what are referred to as PARALLELS and it is best interpreted through the Biblical lens as the survivors passing down the stories through generations, with the dispersal at Babel such that every group went with same story which would definitely get "corrupted" with time as is common with oral traditions.

Your claim that the flood stories have the same exact details is not correct. Even the chart you referenced shows there are several details that do not appear in other flood stories so I don't see why you are making a point of it.

Now to your example, what are referred to parallels are not really parallels as skeptics only try to prove that
1. Jesus never existed
2. The gospels are fraud
3. The stories in the gospels are copied from MANY OTHER gods which are combined in the person of Jesus.
So we have a 180 degrees out of phase of what you are saying. One single event found with variants in several stories against several events found in one single story.

Now to your objection, there are other parallels of alleged virgin birth, son of god etc which all have no evideurnce predating Jesus but after him. And your resurrection is still a form of forcing a Christian term on his story as he did not resurrect in the sense of the word but appeared to rule the underworld. Which reinforces my point that Christianity influenced the later alleged parallels that skeptics have tried to show. Not forgetting what they really want to prove as stated above.

Now, it actually get funny

The Osiris myth has no parallels with virgin birth (except with reference in a matter of speaking to his son Horus) so I can't possibly be talking about that. Osiris was a king and a descent of Ra or Atum the creator (Jesus is said to be the son of god the creator and a king). He was killed by his enemy (Jesus is said to have been crucified under the direction of Satan his enemy). He did resurrect long enough to copulate with Isis and then is said to have become the ruler of the realm of the dead (Jesus resurrected long enough to show himself to his disciples. Jesus isn't on earth right now is he? And the only humans able to get where he is now are dead people is it not?). These were well established before the advent of Christianity so it is funny you are trying very hard to deny the parallels. Very funny indeed.

LordReed:


Your claim that the flood stories have the same exact details is not correct. Even the chart you referenced shows there are several details that do not appear in other flood stories so I don't see why you are making a point of it.




The Osiris myth has no parallels with virgin birth (except with reference in a matter of speaking to his son Horus) so I can't possibly be talking about that. Osiris was a king and a descent of Ra or Atum the creator (Jesus is said to be the son of god the creator and a king). He was killed by his enemy (Jesus is said to have been crucified under the direction of Satan his enemy). He did resurrect long enough to copulate with Isis and then is said to have become the ruler of the realm of the dead (Jesus resurrected long enough to show himself to his disciples. Jesus isn't on earth right now is he? And the only humans able to get where he is now are dead people is it not?). These were well established before the advent of Christianity so it is funny you are trying very hard to deny the parallels. Very funny indeed.

I didn't make my point clear when trying to point out and emphasize 'details'. What I meant to point out was that they have a global flood and have exact details scattered among them. They all don't have ALL THE DETAILS in them but the details are fairly distributed in such stories. That is what the chart showed.


This time, I guess you didn't get my point. I said that the myth of Osiris existed before the life of Jesus on earth but what is RECORDED which have what appears to resemble the life of Jesus appeared LONG AFTER Jesus' death. And many other alleged parallels (which don't meet up with the flood parallels) appear after Jesus' death. This still agree with my point that Christianity must have influenced such alleged parallelism. And I explained the 180 degrees out of phase with that of the flood, which wouldn't make your analogy follow in the first place. Funny isn't it?

keppler:

I didn't make my point clear when trying to point out and emphasize 'details'. What I meant to point out was that they have a global flood and have exact details scattered among them. They all don't have ALL THE DETAILS in them but the details are fairly distributed in such stories. That is what the chart showed.


This time, I guess you didn't get my point. I said that the myth of Osiris existed before the life of Jesus on earth but what is RECORDED which have what appears to resemble the life of Jesus appeared LONG AFTER Jesus' death. And many other alleged parallels (which don't meet up with the flood parallels) appear after Jesus' death. This still agree with my point that Christianity must have influenced such alleged parallelism. And I explained the 180 degrees out of phase with that of the flood, which wouldn't make your analogy follow in the first place. Funny isn't it?

Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

Meanwhile here is what the article you reference says about religious stories similarities:

4. Logical Leaps
Logically, we have to remember that even if a similarity exists between Jesus and a pagan god (and it doesn’t run into the issues mentioned above), even that doesn’t automatically mean they are related, copied, or influenced. A connection must be proven. Religions, by nature, will have some general things in common, like beliefs about an afterlife. Further, many religions have some sort of tradition with a common meal. Similarity doesn’t prove dependence.

Which is my point exactly, both for the Jesus stories and the flood stories. Yes very funny indeed. LMAO!

LordReed:


Your claim that the flood stories have the same exact details is not correct. Even the chart you referenced shows there are several details that do not appear in other flood stories so I don't see why you are making a point of it.




The Osiris myth has no parallels with virgin birth (except with reference in a matter of speaking to his son Horus) so I can't possibly be talking about that. Osiris was a king and a descent of Ra or Atum the creator (Jesus is said to be the son of god the creator and a king). He was killed by his enemy (Jesus is said to have been crucified under the direction of Satan his enemy). He did resurrect long enough to copulate with Isis and then is said to have become the ruler of the realm of the dead (Jesus resurrected long enough to show himself to his disciples. Jesus isn't on earth right now is he? And the only humans able to get where he is now are dead people is it not?). These were well established before the advent of Christianity so it is funny you are trying very hard to deny the parallels. Very funny indeed.

Myths and history are parallels, interesting.

Image123:


Myths and history are parallels, interesting.

A man named Jesus may have existed but it by no means validates a resurrection story or any of the fantastical tales told about him. Ever heard of Paul Bunyan? Look him up if you haven't.

LordReed:


A man named Jesus may have existed but it by no means validates a resurrection story or any of the fantastical tales told about him. Ever heard of Paul Bunyan? Look him up if you haven't.

Is Paul Bunyan the Saviour of the world or the Son of God?

Image123:


Is Paul Bunyan the Saviour of the world or the Son of God?

Paul Bunyan and Jesus are examples of tall tales told about likely real people.

LordReed:


Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

Meanwhile here is what the article you reference says about religious stories similarities:

4. Logical Leaps
Logically, we have to remember that even if a similarity exists between Jesus and a pagan god (and it doesn’t run into the issues mentioned above), even that doesn’t automatically mean they are related, copied, or influenced. A connection must be proven. Religions, by nature, will have some general things in common, like beliefs about an afterlife. Further, many religions have some sort of tradition with a common meal. Similarity doesn’t prove dependence.

Which is my point exactly, both for the Jesus stories and the flood stories. Yes very funny indeed. LMAO!

I have maintained that your analogy is like the fallacy of comparing apples and orange. One is religion which basically would have similar concepts (and some studies even showed that they mostly come from still one source, that monotheism diverged into polytheism just as there are many sects of Christianity coming from one source. Just with the difference of there being a written document which can not be altered, still proving my point anyway) while the other is about a story about an event which its type cannot be found again, but such unique story was found among different folks in various places.
Your argument of them having knowledge of the boat building and sea would hold more ground if there are other stories found in various cultures which mention stuff which should be global. We don't have any of this.
So, comparing apples and orange (even if I had allowed such fallacy in the first place) in order to stay a float is really funny

keppler:


I have maintained that your analogy is like the fallacy of comparing apples and orange. One is religion which basically would have similar concepts (and some studies even showed that they mostly come from still one source, that monotheism diverged into polytheism just as there are many sects of Christianity coming from one source. Just with the difference of there being a written document which can not be altered, still proving my point anyway) while the other is about a story about an event which its type cannot be found again, but such unique story was found among different folks in various places.
Your argument of them having knowledge of the boat building and sea would hold more ground if there are other stories found in various cultures which mention stuff which should be global. We don't have any of this.
So, comparing apples and orange (even if I had allowed such fallacy in the first place) in order to stay a float is really funny

LoL! Your argument was wrecked by the very same article you referenced and all you can say is fallacy this and fallacy that. Bwahahahahahaha!

Notice how you skipped answering my question: Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

BTW Jewish monotheism came from monolatry and before that polytheism, get your facts straight.

LordReed:


Paul Bunyan and Jesus are examples of tall tales told about likely real people.

Who believes in Bunyan, billions of people believe in and claim to encounter Jesus. You should be smart enough to see the difference.

LordReed:


LoL! Your argument was wrecked by the very same article you referenced and all you can say is fallacy this and fallacy that. Bwahahahahahaha!

Notice how you skipped answering my question: Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

BTW Jewish monotheism came from monolatry and before that polytheism, get your facts straight.

i must have had a similar line of discussion with you before. Authenticity is not based solely on first to appear, your point is mute. There are many fake versions and models that come out before the original. Remember your friend the devil is a thief and liar.

Image123:


i must have had a similar line of discussion with you before. Authenticity is not based solely on first to appear, your point is mute. There are many fake versions and models that come out before the original. Remember your friend the devil is a thief and liar.

It's moot not mute.

My point is similarity is not an indication of shared heritage. The article keppler referenced made it even doubly clear.

Image123:


Who believes in Bunyan, billions of people believe in and claim to encounter Jesus. You should be smart enough to see the difference.

Billions of people claim to encounter things you don't believe so that is not a point.

kingxsamz:
Oh no, don't do that. That's God's story. Let's not ruin God's story with logic.
God did it and your logic doesn't matter. His ways are not the ways of man.

Like, i can't tell if you're being sarcastic or serious

LordReed:


It's moot not mute.

My point is similarity is not an indication of shared heritage. The article keppler referenced made it even doubly clear.

Thanks for the spelling correction.

Is Keppler claiming a shared heritage between Jesus and Osiris? Whatever the answer though, always remember that thieves and counterfeiters can be very smart and fast in their dubious ways. The devil was in Heaven for a while, he knows how things work there.

LordReed:


Billions of people claim to encounter things you don't believe so that is not a point.

The point is that there's billions of difference between Bunyan and Jesus. If you can't see that, ask your spouse, may be able to explain better.

Image123:


Thanks for the spelling correction.

Is Keppler claiming a shared heritage between Jesus and Osiris? Whatever the answer though, always remember that thieves and counterfeiters can be very smart and fast in their dubious ways. The devil was in Heaven for a while, he knows how things work there.

He was claiming shared heritage with respect to flood stories from various regions of the world. I introduced the Osiris myth as a way to underscore the fact that similarities in religious tales does not indicate a shared heritage. If you believe the flood stories are all linked then be necessity you have to accept that dying and rising gods are all linked. Disavowing one disavows the other likewise. The article makes it abundantly clear that you cannot assume links because of similarities, you have to prove they are linked.

Image123:


The point is that there's billions of difference between Bunyan and Jesus. If you can't see that, ask your spouse, may be able to explain better.

That is irrelevant. Tales tales are tall tales whether it's of your favorite god character or otherwise.

FatherOfJesus:
What year did the Grand Canyon form and what year did the Noah flood recorded to have happened?

Seems you lot do not have common sense. According to radiometric evidence, Grand Canyon formed 70million years ago, Noah’s flood didn’t happen 70million years ago, give us the date of when it happened. Grand Canyon is an evidence that a flood happened in North America 70million years ago not a global flood

Humans didn’t roam the planet 70million years ago

So you believe the world is millions of years old?

Adjovi:




So you believe the world is millions of years old?

Nope, I don’t believe that rather I understand that the earth is not younger than 4.5billion years old.

I can tell you how