Plagiarism In The Bible

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Did I miss where you provided evidence for Satan having a son?

If so, could you provide it again?

Genesis 3. If the Messiah is from the line of Eve, then the anti-messiah is naturally from the serpent.

a reply to: puffinkron247

How are books in a library any more credible than the internet? Google is a virtual library isn't it? It also contains A LOT more information than any library ever could.

Maybe it's just a case of you using intellectual laziness to dismiss what's been presented in this thread? Why not take your own advice and head to your local library and study up a bit on other religions and compare them?

You ask people to do the leg work for you then promptly turn around and accuse others of not going to a library and studying for themselves. A bit hypocritical don't you think? That's usually the case with intellectually lazy (or as you put it: "dumb") people.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Did I miss where you provided evidence for Satan having a son?

If so, could you provide it again?

Genesis 3. If the Messiah is from the line of Eve, then the anti-messiah is naturally from the serpent.

So, your answer is no, then? I don't mean for this to be a big thing, but ... you were asking for textual references a moment ago so I thought you'd have your own. You don't have a reference along the lines of "and Satan had a son Apollyon"?

a reply to: Gryphon66

The implication is made by the text. Apollyon is angel-man (the angel from the abyss who's number is the number of a man-666), he rules from Mystery Babylon which Zephaniah 2:13-15 identifies as Nineveh, he is the first of 7 kings (Nimrod, who established Nineveh and Babel which became Assyria and Babylon). There are many hints that narrow the search down to one man, Nimrod.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Abednego

Or if Satan is the serpent, How can he impregnate a woman? Assuming he is a spiritual being.

Angels have the power to incarnate and impregnate human women, Gen 6:4.

bullshinto
science+common sense+logic=LOL

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I have just as much proof as you do, it's all a matter of perspective. Believe what you want, I'm not proselytizing, just giving my perspective.

a reply to: Jenisiz

Jenisiz,
I'm certainly no expert on the subject(s) at hand, but I've got a few things you might consider. Perhaps it'll shed some light on why people defend Christianity.

Firstly, I'd be a little surprised if someone told me the Bible *didn't* draw on other sources, because it does. There are several parts in the Old Testament that reference other books: something like "But these things are all written in the book of so-and-so," and some of the New Testament writers reference or quote various texts that are not themselves included in Scripture. I don't find it surprising that the Epic of Gilgamesh recounts the story of a flood: both stories might be derived from the same event. In fact, while I'm sure there are parallels between Buddha and Jesus, I'd be pretty surprised if the Jewish writers of the New Testament had even heard of him, given the distance, both literally and culturally. (If someone's got info otherwise, please correct me.)

Secondly, I doubt (and this is my non-expert opinion) that you've got as rock-hard a case as you imagine. I've read the book of Job, and even a quick skimming shows it's nothing like the Legend of Keret (at least if the Wiki article is correct.) Similarities, sure, but Hunger Games and Divergent have similarities, and, as far as I know, there's no plagiarism there. (Then again...)

Thirdly, when it comes to the parallels between Jesus and various other mythologies (the "dying god" motif) some Christian writers (by which I mean C.S. Lewis) have written that there would be "problems" if there were not parallels between the Christian stories and myths. (One of the big things Lewis is into is the idea that myths reflect deeper truths.) I can't do the subject the justice Lewis can, but I think you should know that there are Christian thinkers who take the approach the similarities between various myths and the Christian story is a strength for the Christian faith, not a weakness. (I'm not up on my Lewis, so forgive me for my simple distillation!)

a reply to: JimNasium

Jimbo You forgot to add...

"Organized Religion™ is for folks afraid of Hell, 'Spirituality' is for folks that have already been...."

This "common passerby" opines One now would be bed to Live sans any "rule book".. This covers at least One of the 3 things to avoid in polite conversation. This would preclude this One from discussing religion™ Now if they also omit politics™ and sex, they should get along just fine...

namaste

a reply to: Grovit

bullshinto science+common sense+logic=LOL

Angels are beings of energy from another dimension. Since science (which has been rewritten multiple times to suite our emotional needs) is based on mankind's limited observation, which is restricted to a 4-D realm, you have no justification for such a childish comment. Try looking up one day and ask yourself if physical life all there is.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The "implication" is it? What implication is made by what text, specifically?

Or, like I said, you don't have any textual basis for Satan having a son called Apollyon?


Abaddon/Apollyon (Hebrew/Greek) (the underworld/the destroyer -->destruction) is mentioned in The Revelation.

Abaddon is mentioned in the OT in Job and Psalms.

Do you have a textual reference for Abaddon/Apollyon of Rev 9 mentioned in concert with the Beast of Rev 13?

Or is this just a pet theory of yours? If so, bully, but perhaps you could just say that.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

yeah sure
whatever you say

edit*

is that what the bible says?
talks about other dimensions and such

You are all perfectly suited to argue with each other, except for one person who made a very solid point, which will be mostly ignored.

a reply to: StalkerSolent

Thank you for your insight. Several of the stories however provided in the New Testament, as well as the previous, have been heavily edited. It goes to reason that I'm sure these stories were even more connected. Through simple research, we find even the names have been modified but ties still exist to their previous callings. These are all indications of porting and modifying. It's just surprising how certain ideas are stripped to fit those in powers desires.

a reply to: Jenisiz

One thread of truth makes its way through Egypt into the mind of Moses. All the surrounding areas of the world allowed Moses to write this narrative into the language of the Phoenicians, the later continued in Greek. All nations have a part to play in the overall sequence. The origin of the Mystery is from the tablets in Heaven. Between the mysteries and the narrative of our accuser, we will free ourselves of the influence of error. Destiny is set into motion and cannot be stopped.

Book of Enoch (Hermes)

For I know the mysteries of the Holy Ones, for the Lord showed them to me and made them known to me, and I read them in the Tablets of Heaven. 107.1 And I saw written on them, that generation up on generation will do wrong, until a generation of righteousness shall arise, and wrongdoing shall be destroyed, and sin shall depart from the earth, and everything good shall come upon it.

104.10 And now I know this mystery; that many sinners will alter and distort the words of truth, and speak evil words, and lie, and concoct great fabrications, and write books in their own words. 104.11 But when they write my words exactly in their languages, and do not alter or omit anything from my words, but write everything exactly, everything that I testified about before; then I kn ow another mystery: 104.12 That books will be given to the righteous an d wise and will be a source of joy and truth and much wisdom. 104.13 And books will be given to them, and they will believe in them and rejoice over them; and all the righteous who have learnt from them all the ways of truth will be glad. 105.1 And in those days, says the Lord, they shall call and testify to the sons of the Earth about the wisdom in them. Show it to them for you are their leaders and the rewards will be over all the Earth.

---As you state, the Bible is a composite. Thankfully, it is here for us to use as a key. Without it, we would never be able to identify the adversary and accuser. By its words, we will have peace for 1000 years, a short time of trouble again, then an end to death and suffering.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: puffinkron247

How are books in a library any more credible than the internet? Google is a virtual library isn't it? It also contains A LOT more information than any library ever could.

Maybe it's just a case of you using intellectual laziness to dismiss what's been presented in this thread? Why not take your own advice and head to your local library and study up a bit on other religions and compare them?

You ask people to do the leg work for you then promptly turn around and accuse others of not going to a library and studying for themselves. A bit hypocritical don't you think? That's usually the case with intellectually lazy (or as you put it: "dumb") people.

You have to ask why a library is a better resource then using the Internet for studying religions....

I never asked others to do the leg work for me, I'm asking for evidence you've done the leg work rather then claiming a single site yout produced backs up your claims ( a list verse page at that).

I've already done the leg work in my past why should I do it again? to prove you don't know # all about what you're talking about?


You can call me dumb, I'm only a human, but it's obvious you don't think things through when you come on here claiming the bible copied budhism saying Jesus was a copy of budha because they both taught in the temple at age 12.

The first writtings on budha that we have came after the 66 books of the bible were written, much like most if not all the writtings that you can draw such similarities from.

You came here with a bunch of claims and just a quick Google search lays many of your claims to rest. Why bother doing the leg work for someone who things list verse is a credible source for scholarly information? Anyone who agrees with that sentiment is foolish.

I'll just do what basically did: find a website that holds the same opinion as me and copy and paste it's "evidence" with out providing some sort of credible citation.

Mahabharata and Bhagavad Gita: The Mahabharata was an evolving work that probably started sometime in the 200’s BC and ended in the 400’s AD. The work was constantly being added to, and it was corrupted so badly that we cannot be sure words were not interpolated hundreds of years later. The Bhagavad Gita is part of the Mahabharata and is thought by many to be written sometime around 200 - 300 BC. The familiarity with the Greeks as “famous fighters” places the Mahabharata after Alexander, and its alarm at the Buddhist edukas replacing Hindu temples makes a date around the time of Asoka likely. The Romans are mentioned only in passing in a list of possible peoples, thus placing the epic probably before the time of Rome’s greatness. (Raychaudhuri, 41, 42, 32) Nevertheless, many still consider a post-Christian date for the Mahabharata and the Bhagavad Gita possible in the range of 200 BC – 200 AD. (Banerjee, 45) Pisani puts forward a strong argument that the Mahabharata was written between 100 - 300 AD, because it mentions Sakas (Scythians) who invaded around then, Parthians (Pahlavas) who had gained their independence from the Greeks, Huns (Hunas), and Romans (Romakas) who they had not established contact with before the time of Augustus. However, Moti Chandra states that the Hunas were really the Hiungnu, not the Huns, and that India could have heard legends about all these groups previous to contact. Furthermore, he points out that the Mahabharata mentions Antiochus, who ruled the Seleucids Empire in the 100’s BC. Moti Chandra dates it in the 100’s BC. The growing consensus for the Bhagavad Gita seems to be it was written in the 100’s BC, although some scholars place it earlier than that. In any case, the Mahabharata was badly corrupted after its initial writing. (Jaiswal, 12,13) The pre-Christian date of the Bhagavad Gita is only a small victory for christmythers. Although the Bhagavad Gita contains general metaphorical similarities to Christ’s discourses (especially as it relates to John’s gospel), there are no strong parallels with Christian legend that would indicate two legends evolved from the same story. Stronger parallels occur in the much later works mentioned above. In fact, all of the parallels mentioned below by the christmyth theorists come from post-Bhagavad Gita and post-Christian sources, with the exception of Krishna calling himself the “light” and the “beginning, middle, and the end,” a claim Krishna put forward in the Bhagavad Gita.

jesusbelievesinevolution.com...
IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS
MOD NOTE: Posting work written by others

IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS
MOD NOTE: Posting work written by others

IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS
MOD NOTE: Posting work written by others

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Abednego

Or if Satan is the serpent, How can he impregnate a woman? Assuming he is a spiritual being.

Angels have the power to incarnate and impregnate human women, Gen 6:4.

I'm aware of that verse, but I think they don't have the power to incarnate (they are not that powerful, even God has to use a woman to incarnate), they cannot change matter (they probably could manipulate it to look like they were made of flesh, but still we have the issue of how to impregnate a woman).

Sorry everyone I tried to make my posts for jennisez but was confused because I can't see enlightened ones name as it is blanked out on my mobile phone.

To Jennisez, can you please tell me which texts predate Jesus? If it's such basic knowledge you should easily be able to provide a credible source rather then just tell me to watch the history channel. That is a laugh. Har har

Do you have anything to say in regards to what I posted above showing you got it backwards?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: puffinkron247



Maybe it's just a case of you using intellectual laziness to dismiss what's been presented in this thread? Why not take your own advice and head to your local library and study up a bit on other religions and compare them?

.

Hardly anything presented in this thread amounts to more than a major league hack job. This idea that the Israeli writings and the gospels were plagiarized from previous works is so full of holes as to demonstrate the colander sort of intellect required to support it.