|
|
Post by jody on Feb 15, 2013 11:15:48 GMT 10
I doubt it is the end of it.....as too many here believe something else to be reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 16, 2013 1:38:09 GMT 10
That's right Buzz. Hold on to your opinions, plug your ears, close your eyes, and hum tunelessly to yourself. After all, if you don't allow yourself to experience any objections, you must clearly be right.  |
|
|
|
Post by fat on Feb 16, 2013 10:27:12 GMT 10
"That's an end to it.'
Oh how I wish that would be true.
|
|
|
|
Post by fat on Feb 16, 2013 16:53:05 GMT 10
<sigh> My hopes dashed yet again.  |
|
|
|
Post by jody on Feb 16, 2013 17:57:57 GMT 10
It isn't fundamentalism Buzz...it is Faith.
|
|
|
|
Post by fat on Feb 16, 2013 23:26:27 GMT 10
with all due respects to you jody I will say nothing more 10, 9, 8, ... |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 17, 2013 3:15:41 GMT 10
Well it is an end to it fat. If someone is presented with the reality and they reject it in preference to some load of old cobblers, there is no point saying anything more because clearly that person is a Fundy and unreachable by reason. I think that with every response I send to you. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 23, 2013 21:57:31 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 23, 2013 22:55:22 GMT 10
well Dip the reality that you will not face because of your delusion, is that it is irrefutable that Judaism is a corruption of Zoroastrianism. The reality it that Judaism is a Post Exile Religion, copied from the Persians. What we know as Judaism, as distinct from the ancient religion of Israel, is a post-exilic phenomenon. Being “post-exilic” meant that it was indebted to the Persian Zoroastrian kings and administrators who provided for the Jews to “return” from exile. The Reverend Black was not the first to state this view. Lawrence H Mills was an American professor at Cambridge who translated much of the Avesta and published Zarathustra, Philo, The Achaemenids and Israel, in 1903 and Our Own Religion in Ancient Persia in 1913, both of which revealed the indebtedness of Judaism to Zoroaster and the Persians. Even further back, C W King writing in 1887 said that the Jews had their angels, the immortality of the soul, belief in a future life, the Last Judgement and the idea of rewards and punishments after death, “the latter carried on in a fiery lake”, from the “Zoroastrian scheme”. G F Moore in 1927 concluded: Many scholars are convinced that this whole system of ideas was appropriated by the Jews from the Zoroastrians. According to the Arda Viraf 1:2, Zoroaster taught about 300 years before Alexander the Great, but Assyrian inscriptions put him before then. Oleg Petrov, author of the Temple of Zoroaster website, tells us that, according to Zoroastrian tradition, he flourished in 588 BC, 258 years before Alexander, who conquered the Persians in 330 BC. Zoroaster is said to have converted Vishtaspa when he was 40 years old. If this is assumed to have been when he “flourished” then Zoroaster was born about 628 BC, and died about 551 BC, because tradition made him 77 years old when he died. Western scholars would date him much earlier on the basis of the Gathas, Mills thus judging them to be 900-700 BC. If Eduard Meyer (1908) is right, the name Mazdaka, a proper name of Medes in 715 BC, shows the Zoroastrian religion was already predominant in Media before then. Meyer, therefore, followed Dunker (Geschichte des Altertums) in dating Zoroaster at 1000 BC. Dr Mary Boyce dates him before 1000 BC on the basis of similarities in the Gathas to the Vedas, and the primitive pastoralism of them, suggesting that they were not written for a settled society. Whether this is going too early or not, Zoroaster belongs in the prehistory of Iran. Gautama, the Buddha, was born about 550 BC, Confucius about the same time and Lao Tse, if he lived at all, was about 600 BC, so Zoroaster predated all of these great thinkers. www.askwhy.co.uk/judaism/0260IranGods.phpLook up the Cyrus Cylinder and read his proclaimations and prayers. Here is an example of one, " May all the gods whom I settled in their sacred centers ask daily of Bêl and Nâbu that my days be long and may they intercede for my welfare. May they say to Marduk, my lord: "As for Cyrus, the king who reveres you, and Cambyses, his son, [lacuna]." The people of Babylon blessed my kingship, and I settled all the lands in peaceful abodes. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 24, 2013 13:55:02 GMT 10
Cyrus Cylinder.
One of the earliest artifacts of Zoroastrianism: It suggests that Cyrus was a polytheist.
Game. Set. Match.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 2, 2013 7:02:35 GMT 10
It is irrefutable that Judaism is a corruption of Zoroastrianism, and it ought to be widely taught as Professor Lawrence Mills repeatedly said a hundred years ago. That no attempt has been made by the Jewish and Christian religions, by teachers or by scholars, they are proved to be dishonest, and one can only conclude that they are intent on perpetuating the lies that their religions are original. How many times must you be told? Cyrus paid homage to Marduk because either Marduk was the name of Ahura-Mazda or was made by Ahura-Mazda. You have a big problem with reality. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 2, 2013 11:00:57 GMT 10
If you are so certain you are right, then why are you the one getting angry?
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 2, 2013 22:13:07 GMT 10
Its victimisation and devaluation and invalidation from a bully that gets me angry - Then your self-loathing must be excruciating. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 3, 2013 23:05:58 GMT 10
Well, you don't have to worry about that anymore, Buzz.
I've stopped wasting my time on you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 9, 2013 5:32:40 GMT 10
How many times must you be told? Cyrus paid homage to Marduk because either Marduk was the name of Ahura-Mazda or was made by Ahura-Mazda. ...And what of that reference to "gods" (plural)? Or Bel and Nabu? Keep digging Buzz |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 9, 2013 5:34:30 GMT 10
You have stopped engaging with reality. The reality is that Judaism is a corruption of Zoroastrianism. That is irrefutable. You do not accept that reality because you are deluded. If you accepted the reality that Judaism is a corruption of Zoroastrianism - as Mills and Boyce made clear - then you would have to realize that Christianity is completely false. You remain with that flat earth delusion despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Both Mills and Boyce are eminent scholars who understood the reality and all you can do to maintain your delusion is to devalue them and invalidate them and to say that their position is "nonsense", when it it the reality. You are mentally ill, and religiosity is indicative of mental illness. You have a high degree of religiosity and that shows your mental illness. Boyce and Mills are just 2 voices in a choir. Do you know how many Bible Scholars there are? |
|
|
|
Post by fat on Mar 9, 2013 8:35:42 GMT 10
Perhaps a choir implies harmony??
I think it is the reading of their work we are presented here with which is discordant rather than their work itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Mar 9, 2013 12:42:50 GMT 10
Buzz I thought you bid adieu to the religion board??
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 9, 2013 13:16:48 GMT 10
So you are saying Boyce agrees with the OT account.
If the Hebrews lived alongside the Persians, during this time of course there would be two accounts of the same story
I fail to see the problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 9, 2013 13:27:33 GMT 10
Buzz, you are anti-religious, correct?
Then you ought to know to counter with something more than an argumentum ad verecundiam.
You are never going to win your atheist audience if your plan is to replace a pontiff authority figure with one of another sort.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 9, 2013 13:40:23 GMT 10
A) They are not the only authorities on the subject matter, and they are outside of their field when commenting on OT manuscripts.
B) Broad consensus which is disputed.
|
|
|
|
Post by fat on Mar 9, 2013 15:22:44 GMT 10
Buzz - I realise you think are answering Fat but you are in reality answering what you thought Fat wrote, not what he wrote.
I did not dispute the validity of the work of your scholars.
|
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Mar 9, 2013 19:36:14 GMT 10
I'm pretty sure that between Adam's creation and Moses there are 2 thousand years... in that 2 thousand years, there was always a faithful God fearing man. Most of the time man-unkind acted like crazed debauched maniacs.. The truth about God was relayed verbally by the ancient Israelite.
And the reason why religion was similar is because they ALL were from the same family...
I don't know why Buzz thinks he has stumbled on some new idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 9, 2013 22:11:09 GMT 10
I'm pretty sure that between Adam's creation and Moses there are 2 thousand years... in that 2 thousand years, there was always a faithful God fearing man. Most of the time man-unkind acted like crazed debauched maniacs.. The truth about God was relayed verbally by the ancient Israelite. And the reason why religion was similar is because they ALL were from the same family... I don't know why Buzz thinks he has stumbled on some new idea. True. I'm fairly certain the Hebrews didn't exist until the time of Jacob. Before that time, I'm certain they followed some monotheistic notion that was similar. Trouble is, Buzz hasn't really discredited the validity of Judaism, rather he's affirmed the events that had occurred in the OT. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Mar 9, 2013 22:27:16 GMT 10
Buzz - I realise you think are answering Fat but you are in reality answering what you thought Fat wrote, not what he wrote. I did not dispute the validity of the work of your scholars. then it is irrefutable that Judaism is a corruption of Zoroastrianism and not real. You claim to hold no Dogma. Yet, you're just as rigid and stubborn with your beliefs as any Dogmatists. |
|
