God being concept exist since humans began to thinking...do you think god can ever die as concept?...much before religions of present day came into being , god as concept existed...though that god got replaced by present god theme but the concept of all powerful being continues to live...what are your views on it?
Atheism could spread across the globe; or people could change their conception of God. I guess that could in some way be viewed as the death of the old ideas.
I think, even if all religions disappear the idea of a Creator will never disappear. From the beginning of time people have believed that an invisible power created everything. There is no tribe or group of people in the world that has not thought that.
If it hasn't died by now I don't think it ever will.
FYI, God is not a concept !! He is Super Natural...
He's the one who gave you the right to live and create an HubPages account !!!
As far as His end is concerned, I don't think it will ever happen, cuz somehow, somewhere people will continue to worship, No Matter What !
God as a concept is dead to many and will always be dead to most because to those it is a concept that is incomplete thus misunderstood which ultimately is false/dead.
No, a living God can't die. No matter what you believe, have you ever heard of anyone's god dying. Not that I am aware of ...
As a Christian, I know that my God is alive and well because I have a daily relationship with Him.
Thanks for an interesting question.
As long as people have the fear of death/unknown, there'll be gods.
So long as there are those who believe, then God will not die. I am one of them who believe in God. So long as the Earth exists there will be those that believe and others that do not believe.
A small correction. So long as human beings exist, there will be people who believe others(both Theists and atheists) and people who use their own reasoning.
I guess the concept wont die-but it has been dynamic for ages- flowing from the greek or ancient gods to the continental gods in different ages.
In this century however- talking about christianity; the pentecostal churches have kept holding on to God and when you ask about the concept of hell and heaven- for some it is a reality. But just ask a logical question-our forefathers or great great great grandparents who never knew Jesus or the supposed God with the trinity- where would they be in eternity---even the hard core believer cant explain or give an answer.
So to conclude- men would keep the banner of God has it was from the beginning but making sense of many dogmas and doctrines in a new century would be an exclusive reserve of maybe few.
Can a big crunch happen in reverse to a big bang due to gravity collapsing upon itself via cosmic expansion? Same question, really...
My God has always existed, always will exist, and is eternal. Religions may change, but the concept of the most high power shall never die.
Concepts cannot be eternal as concepts require a brain to dream it up. When you die, your concept of your god will go with you.
The only thing that could survive your death would be an object, like a rock or the moon. So is your god an object or a concept?
You are blank and void when it comes to why did the concept develop in the first place? The visible things of this world are framed by the invisible things of this world. The visible is temporary and the invisible is eternal.
You must forgive AKA Winston, as he is merely a follower of the "dead rock religion." In their eyes, if it ain't a rock or an object, it doesn't exist. How sad, I know...
For what it's worth, a big part of why so many people fall away from the various religions is because the adherents of so many are condescending in exactly the way you just did right there.
Do you really think a comment like that will move anyone closer to seeing the beauty and wonder of your deity? Do you think that remark gives a glimmer of what is in store for those who take the time to see as you do? Or do you think perhaps it suggests (keep in mind, I said "suggests") a type of small-minded pettiness that can't even hold itself to civility at the least suggestion of doubt or, worse, well-thought-out arguments that speak of doubt.
Remarks like that do so much more to undermine the very thing you are trying to hold up than anything a non-believer can ever, ever say.
You don't understand... That character has been preaching the "dead rock religion" on here for nearly two years.
Changing stubborn thoughts, is hardly something I'd try at the moment.
...But replying to nonsense, is just as justified from my end as it is for theirs, right? This ain't Sunday school, the last time I checked...
What is a non-believer anyway? The whole concept sounds so zombie-like... I don't follow organized religions, albeit I'm not an atheist either, so what is your stance?
My stance is that we have no clue and in our lifetimes probably never will. Sure, God or Jesus or Allah or Zeus or the Spaghetti Monster or whatever else may show up and straighten us all out, but that's never been how it worked before. It's always some regular dude coming down off a mountain top having seen some commandments nobody else has, coming out of a cave where a bush explained it all, having seen a bull or a shower of gold, or having dug up some golden records that nobody else ever sees, etc. So, given how it seems to always work, I'm not holding out any hope of any clear "truth." Even if they did show up, gods seem to always do it in stupid, completely unbelievable, unverifiable and esoteric way, and always through people who, for whatever reason, can never muster more than a tiny following before vanishing into the fog of time and, if recent enough for decent history, don't hold up to scrutiny AT ALL. SO, we'll never know, in my opinion based on what's come before.
There just isn't AN answer, regardless of how devoted or cruel adherents to any religion will be. No matter how many facts unbelievers will cite.
Every self proclaimed "atheist" I know will go into a long diatribe about evolution and the big bang and all the obvious evidence we have before us. They say it proves god does not exist.
I say it proves human religion is retarded in all its current states, or at least mainly so, with some good moral direction and fabulous human wisdom mixed in if you can extract the "truth" of some of it from the idiocy of the rest. But it does not prove god does not exist.
As for science, Steven Hawking put out his work about how god isn't necessary. Everyone read that (at least those who give a crap did), and the Christians crapped themselves by the third sentence, convincing themselves he'd said god does not exist. The atheists just as reckless reading it were sure that he "proved" god doesn't exist. All he proved was that, based on our understanding (and I take a huge leap claiming "our" from stuff only he really gets... and could be wrong) god is not required based on what we know. Not required. Based on what we know.
Doesn't mean He doesn't exist. Doesn't mean he does. Just means we have a lot more to learn. He could have thrown the switch. Or it could have just happened like Hawking says. To claim you know, anyone knows, is just stupid to me, raging arrogance based on nothing tangible.
Faith is hope. Atheism is pragmatism. Both are wonderful components of the human existence. I hate that the adherents of those have decided they have to be mortal enemies when the question is really not one that can be answered definitively by either side. It's like puppies hating kittens because there can only be one form of cuteness in the universe.
That's my stance.
(And yes, I know nobody will read this. It's Friday night, I've had a great day working on my new book and, well, everyone else at my house is watching a movie. )
How wonderful is the world, where love is in the air, where forces attract each other, where fields interact and where concepts are eternal!
That was fairly lame sarcasm, even for a simple-minded, 2D thinker.
3D to be specific.
And it is better to be a thinker, than to be simple minded and not thinking at all!
Then why do you often use 2D, simple-minded thoughts for 3D, complex questions? 3D for 4D, either way, you are usually a D behind; LOL!
You can ask questions in 3D? In my world only objects are 3D!
You can provide answers in 3D? In my world, questions are generally 4D!
Yep, you claim that everything is crazy that your 2D thoughts can't comprehend. Oh, how productive... Just think, if everyone thought like that, the computer would have never been invented, for example... Blah!
Does your thoughts are on paper for it to be 2D, then use brain instead!
I hope you edit your 2D thoughts soon or perhaps learn better English, because that gibberish you just wrote is quite unintelligible, to say the least.
I hope you edit your 2D thoughts soon or perhaps learn better English, because that gibberish you just wrote is quite unintelligible, to say the least, to an unintelligent fellow.
Oh, so now that you have no thoughts of your own, you copy & paste what I wrote and then add four words to it. Yeah, well, when I typed that, it at least made sense, but when you said it, well... LOL!
What you typed made sense to you? That is a start, for an inane fellow!
Inane? You're one to talk, since all you usually chatter about is objects, rocks or how concepts don't exist. Do you ever think for yourself? Hell, do you even think that thinking exists? Oh, I get it; it's a verb. LOL! What a mechanical drone you are that lusts for robotic reasoning...
Please continue, you make a good laugh. Thinking exists? Then you go and buy some immediately, you have a severe lack of 'it'!!
As YOUR thought processes dictate absence of actuality, not mine.
Your thought process has no touch with reality. But you claim thoughts exist in your world, so buy some and be wiser!
Or use the refurbished ones that you use? Ha-ha!
In my part of the world, thinking is still a verb so cannot be transferred!!
Don't watch too many Harry potter movies!
I never watched any of those movies. I'm not real big into fantasy flicks, actually.
Oh, you have mistaken, but you are at least trying.
If thinking doesn't exist then how can people be brainwashed and adopt the thoughts of others? Assuming it doesn't exist, as you say, then this should never happen, right? Ha!
That's gibberish, which is all you can offer as an answer to the question because having to critically define your beliefs destroys them.
Is your god an object or a concept? It's a simple question.
Maybe he'll answer you soon.
But during the meantime, I have a question for you:
How can a God or Creator be limited to an object in this realm?
If I was a computer programmer or designed graphic, simulation-type games, for example, how could I, the creator, be involved inside the game itself, other than creating the conditions in which the game could play in?
Just asking a simple question, as it is not outside the realm of possibilities that the funnels that create don't exist in the same dimension, however that sounds...
Or, we can keep it simple and talk about rocks all day; blah, blah!
My God is a Spirit, but you can call it what you want.
Thank you for telling us that your god resolves to a nothing. Spirit is simply a supernatural, incorporeal being. A synomym for incorporeal is immaterial.
To have any followers at all from the realm of the reasonable, your first challenge is to explain rationally how an immaterial something can exist. If something is defined as nothing, how can that nothing also be a something?
You may wish to believe in this fantastic notion that there are living nothings that can interact - indeed be a part of - reality. But there is no more objective testable evidence of the spirit world than there is of leprechauns, while there is less rational reasoning because at least leprechauns have shape and are thus objects. Spirits are by definition, nothings.
It really gets trying when people, who have nothing but their own faith as validation of their individual beliefs, parade faith-claims as an ultimate truth when in fact they are no different than a naked king, out for a stroll, thinking he is fully clothed.
If people were asked 300 years ago if man could travel to the moon or even fly as the birds, than I am sure that the person believing with the dream could not have possibly proved it to the nay sayers, the nonbelievers. "No show me", only research and development following a dream. Similar is the faith.
So, following the dead rock religion doesn't produce much fruit.
How does your belief resolve this dilemma. 1.You claim your god is all-knowing. 2.You claim your god is all powerful. 3.You claim your god wants me to acknowledge him and worship him. It follows from 1 your god knows what it would take to make me believe. It follows from 2 that your god has the power to make this happen. However, neither has happened. How do you explain that?
God has not created us robots. Robots made to effect love is not true love. It appears that God wants us to choose him in all our ways. We must take the first step, and God shall take two steps.
If you have a better way of creating an eternal human; going from our temporary material form on Earth to an eternal spirit, than I would love to hear your way. But, I assure you, the dead rock religion shall reveal nothing.
Your repeated claim of occult knowledge - of being able to know the motivations of a god - which are impossible for humans to know - is tiresome. Neither you nor anyone else can know what happens after we die, so stop pretending you do know.
God's only die when people stop believing in them. Unless you think Zeus, Hera and the rest of the Olympus crew are still up there on Olympus, just frumpy and pissed off that nobody cares anymore. Thor, Loki, Quetzalcoatl, etc.
If there is a force that is the source of all life, I guess it could die in the sense we understand it. But, not 'death' within the arena of its true existence. I would assume its complete death would cause the death of life as we know it.
For me God is always to do good, to feel good, to think good and a matter of inner strength, i.e., to spread wellness and goodness in this world. Like we avoid cheating in our exams fearing the examiner will caught and expel us from the classroom, but there are few rogues who still cheat without fearing examiner. So God should always exist to instill discipline in humankind and good behavior and have a good heart for others.
If aliens ever visited, All the world may look to atheism or change their concepts of god.
That's true, if you exclude the atheism bit from your statement, as aliens are spiritually advanced for the most part - due to having ascertained the aspects of reincarnation along with viewing the body as a vessel for the soul; thanks for sharing... Yeah, a little grey guy told me that once...
Not sure this helps. Jesus the way, the life, and the truth. I think these three concepts answer this question. Though there are some, most people don't deny the existence of Jesus. The best thing to do is to see if Jesus was telling the truth or lying. Look into it. Jesus self proclaimed this himself. He wasn't just a good teacher...believe me, He said some crazy stuff. So he's a liar, crazy, or who He says he is. I think that if you don't believe in God, then you have nothing to lose by looking into the "good teacher," Jesus. Note: it will probably involve reading the bible If you can explain why Jesus said He was the Way, the Life, and the Truth...you'll find God. My two cents.
Uummm... i think there are quite a lot of people who deny that jesus existed. Bearing in mind that his whole life story was lifted from ancient egyptian mystery religions, and of course the fact that no historical or archeological evidence (beyond heresay), of his exsistence has ever been found.
Sorry, I was speaking very generally. But I changed that part. If you wouldn't mind I'd like to see a source for "lifted from ancient egyptian mystery religions" As I've never really heard that before. I'd be willing to look at that. Thanks!
A number of ancient mystery religions used the same basic " jesus story", long before his alleged birth. There is plenty of information about this out there, here's one for starters: http://jdstone.org/cr/files/mithraschristianity.html
Hey Thanks for the link! There does seem to be a lot of similarities. The Old Testament told about Jesus' coming thousands of years before (first prophecy occurring in Genesis). This to me, doesn't invalidate Jesus, in fact...if anything it has the ability to help prove him. I think it's incredible that God can orchestrate an entire history. It also makes sense, since the Israelite were in Exile in Persia for a while. They would have taken the Torah with them, along with their prophecy. It was nice chatting with you!
Have you even considered how easy it would be to write a narrative description of an apparent fulfillment of prophecy when you are looking at the original prophecy and know what it said?
Even then, the Old Testament prophecies are not specific enough to be without a doubt about Jesus. Basically, they are vague references to which later writers added the details by making the life a Jesus seem to correspond. This is very much like cold reading technique, where generalities are tossed out and the audience provides details from their lives.
First of all, Mithra is often mistaken for Mithras. Mithra is the Iranian god and Mithras was the Greek version where Mithraism peaked between the 3rd century and 4th. There are similarities between Mithra and Mithras but Mithras is a variation and there were even different stories of Mithra.
THE ORIGINS OF THE MITHRAIC MYSTERIES
(Oxford University Press, 1991)
“Owing to the cult's secrecy, we possess almost no literary evidence about the beliefs of Mithraism. The few texts that do refer to the cult come not from Mithraic devotees themselves, but rather from outsiders such as early Church fathers, who mentioned Mithraism in order to attack it, and Platonic philosophers, who attempted to find support in Mithraic symbolism for their own philosophical ideas. However, although our literary sources for Mithraism are extremely sparse, an abundance of material evidence for the cult exists in the many Mithraic temples and artifacts that archaeologists have found scattered throughout the Roman empire, from England in the north and west to Palestine in the south and east. The temples, called mithraea by scholars, were usually built underground in imitation of caves. These subterranean temples were filled with an extremely elaborate iconography: carved reliefs, statues, and paintings, depicting a variety of enigmatic figures and scenes. This iconography is our primary source of knowledge about Mithraic beliefs, but because we do not have any written accounts of its meaning the ideas that it expresses have proven extraordinarily difficult to decipher.”
How would Christians copy the story of Mithra, if your claim is true, why was virtually no literature? That is the problem with mystery religions.
“Mithraism was an initiatory order, passed from initiate to initiate, like the Eleusinian Mysteries. (Gnosticism and Christianity did this at first, but were written down.) It was not based on a body of scripture, and hence very little written documentary evidence survives. Soldiers and the lower nobility appeared to be the most plentiful followers of Mithraism. There's some evidence in some locations of the empire women were involved. Recently revealed discrepancies such as these suggest that Mithraic beliefs were (contra the older supposition) not internally consistent and monolithic and varied from location to location. This is the problem with secretive "religions" lacking a written scripture.”
Mithras, derived from Mithra, was never a baby. Mithra/Mithras were born from a rock as an adult.
http://books.google.co.za/books?id=xRy8 … mp;f=false
Mithraic Studies, Mithras, “wearing his Phrygian cap, issues forth from the rocky mass. As yet only his bare torso is visible. In each hand he raises aloft a lighted torch and, as an unusual detail, red flames shoot out all around him from the petra genetrix.” Franz Cumon, “The Dura Mithraeum” in John R. Hinnells (ed.), Mithraic Studies: Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies (Manchester University Press, 1975), 173.
http://withalliamgod.wordpress.com/2011 … istianity/
Manfred Clauss, German Professor for Ancient History in The Roman Cult of Mithras, writes:
“The literary sources here are few but unmistakable: Mithras was known as the rock-born god. The inscriptions confirm this nomenclature: one even reads D(eo) O(omipotenti) S(oli) Invi(cto), Deo Genitori, r(upe) n(ato), ‘To the almighty God Sun invincible, generative god, born from the rock’….Mithras also appears in the archaeological record as the rock-born god. Many images represent the god growing out of a rock with both arms raised aloft….After the bull-slaying, the rock-birth is the most frequently represented event of the myth, either as a detail on reliefs or, quite commonly, as a free-standing image.” (Clauss, The Roman Cult of Mithras)
Picture of Mithras from rock:
Only one shepherd witnessed his birth which must have been quite a sight!
Irrelevant since Jesus was never born on the 25th. Mithras was born on the 25th.
Mithra never died. He was taken up to heaven in a chariot
Some try and argue that Mithra had a virgin mother called called Anahita but she was actually his consort.
http://withalliamgod.wordpress.com/2011 … istianity/
Attis was born from an almond. Lol.
In the earliest known version of the myth, the androgynous Cybele, possessing male and female characteristics, was castrated by the gods. From the severed male organs grew an almond tree by whose fruit Nana, daughter of the river god Sangarius, conceived and gave birth to Attis.
Beloved by the earth goddess Cybele, who drove him mad as punishment for his infidelity, he castrated himself and bled to death. Violets sprang from his blood, and Zeus turned him into a pine tree.
He was not a savior crucified on a tree. He WAS A TREE!
There was no resurrection.
There are several stories about what happened to Attis in death.
“Atys was found by the priests of Cybele under a fir-tree, at the moment he was expiring. They carried him into the temple of the goddess, and endeavoured to restore him to life, but in vain. Cybele ordained that the death of Atys should be bewailed every year in solemn lamentations, and that henceforth her priests should be eunuchs.”
“The oracle commanded that Attis should be buried, and divine honours paid to Cybele; but as the body of the youth was already in a state of decomposition, the funeral honours were paid to an image of him, which was made as a substitute. (Diod. iii. 58, &c.) According to a fourth story related by Pausanias (vii. 17. § 5), Atys was a son of the Phrygian king Calaus, and by nature incapable of propagating his race. When he had grown up, he went to Lydia, where he introduced the worship of Cybele. The grateful goddess conceived such an attachment for him, that Zeus in his anger at it, sent a wild boar into Lydia, which killed many of the inhabitants, and among them Atys also. Atys was believed to be buried in Pessinus under mount Agdistis. (Paus. i. 4. § 5.) He was worshipped in the temples of Cybele in common with this goddess. (vii. 20. § 2;AGDISTIS; Hesych. s. v. Attês.) In works of art he is represented as a shepherd with flute and staff. His worship appears to have been introduced into Greece at a comparatively late period. It is an ingenious opinion of Böttiger (Amalthea, i. p. 353, &c.), that the mythus of Atys represents the twofold character of nature, the male and female, concentrated in one.”
Zeus slept with Semele, Dionysus’ mother:
Semele was the daughter of Cadmus and Harmonia, and the mother, by Zeus, of the god Dionysus. Because Zeus slept with Semele secretly, Hera only found out about the affair after the girl was pregnant.
Zeus had 14 kids so Dionysus was not his “only begotten son”.
Zeus destroys the pregnant mother with a lightening bolt:
However, Zeus rescued the unborn child from the mother's ashes and sewed it in his thigh until it was ready to be born. Thus Dionysus is sometimes called "the twice-born."
Dionysus was the god of wine. He didn’t turn water into wine.
“Having grown to manhood, Dionysus wandered through many lands, teaching men the culture of the vine and the mysteries of his cult. He was followed by an entourage of satyrs, sileni, maenads, and nymphs”
It is true that Dionysus was a travelling teacher. He taught people how to make wine.
The most famous part of his wanderings in Asia is his expedition to India, which is said to have lasted three, or, according to some, even 52 years. (Diod. iii. 63, iv. 3.)
He did not in those distant regions meet with a kindly reception everywhere, for Myrrhanus and Deriades, with his three chiefs Blemys, Orontes, and Oruandes, fought against him. (Steph. Byz. s.v. Blemues, Gazos, Gêreia, Dardai, Eares, Zabioi, Malloi, Pandai, Sibai.) But Dionysus and the host of Pans, Satyrs, and Bacchic women, by whom he was accompanied, conquered his enemies, taught the Indians the cultivation of the vine and of various fruits, and the worship of the gods; he also founded towns among them, gave them laws, and left behind him pillars and monuments in the happy land which he had thus conquered and civilized, and the inhabitants worshipped him as a god. (Comp. Strab. xi. p. 505; Arrian, Ind. 5; Diod. ii. 38; Philostr. Vit. Apollon. ii. 9; Virg. Aen. vi. 805.)
Dionysus was killed by the Titans and they ripped him to pieces.
“However, Rhea brought him back to life. After this Zeus arranged for his protection and turned him over the mountain nymphs to be raised.
Dionysus wandered the world actively encouraging his cult. He was accompanied by the Maenads, wild women, flush with wine, shoulders draped with a fawn skin, carrying rods tipped with pine cones. While other gods had templaces the followers of Dionysus worshipped him in the woods. Here they might go into mad states where they would rip apart and eat raw any animal they came upon.”
http://www.greekmythology.com/Other_God … nysus.html
Tax to king? Lol. Krishna was Devaki’s eighth child. King Kamsa only killed Devaki’s seven other children and wanted to kill Krishna, too, because a prophecy revealed that King Kamsa would be killed by Krishna.
http://www.krishnasmercy.org/dotnetnuke … fault.aspx
“LORD SHREE KRISHNA was the eighth child of Devki and Vasudeva. What were the names of his earlier seven siblings.
"Vasudeva and Devaki had 7 (Seven) children earlier before Krishna. Two of his other siblings also survived, Balarama (Devaki’s seventh child who transferred to the womb of Rohini, Vasudeva’s first wife). According to Bhagavat Purana it is believed that Krishna was born without a sexual union, by "mental transmission" from the mind of Vasudeva into the womb of Devaki. Hindus believe that in that time, this type of union was possible for achieved beings”
Krishna was born in a prison."
“On the day Kamsa's sister Devaki was married off to Vasudeva, an akashvani or voice from the sky was heard prophesying that Devaki's 8th son would be the destroyer of Kamsa. The frightened Kamsa immediately unsheathed his sword to kill his sister but Vasudeva intervened and implored Kamsa to spare his bride, and promised to hand over every new born child to him. Kamsa relented but imprisoned both Devaki and her husband Vasudeva.”
http://hinduism.about.com/od/lordkrishn … _birth.htm
The death of Krishna:
"One day while he sat in the forest, a hunter mistook him for a deer and shot an arrow at him. The arrow pierced Krishna's heel, his only vulnerable spot. After Krishna died, his spirit ascended to Goloka, a heavenly paradise, and his sacred city of Dvaraka sank beneath the ocean."
What the f? Called KRST? The writer of this article knows squat. It’s pathetic. Isis was HORUS’S mother and husband of Osiris. She was never known as Isis Meri.
Anyway, Isis was NEVER called Isis-Meri. Mariam is derived from Latin and means “Star of the sea” or "wished-for child; rebellion; sea of bitterness".
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index … 620AAr4LEv
Isis was not a virgin. She conceived Horus when Osiris was killed by Seth and she revived him long enough to have sex with him before he went to the underworld.
"Isis managed to recover her husband's (Osiris) body; however Seth was very stealthy and stole away with it. After cutting up the body of the Egyptian god of the underworld, Seth hid the pieces throughout the Egyptian desert. The connection between Isis and Osiris was so strong; the Egyptian goddess proceeded to spend a number of years searching for the mutilated body parts of her husband. She finally managed to find all of the pieces, save one and is believed to have used her magical powers to restore her husband's body. Although there are different versions to this part of the story, it seems Isis became pregnant, presumably by Osiris and gave birth to a son, Horus. Osiris died once again and descended to fully assume his duties as Egyptian god of the underworld."
"When Ra reigned as king of Egypt, Thoth (Djehuty) prophesied that Ra's wife Nut would have a son who would reign as king. Ra cursed Nut and said, "Nut will give birth to no son on any day of any year, nor at night time either." Ra's curse could not be broken, but Thoth had a clever plan. He went to the moon god Khonsu and offered to play him a game of Senet. Khonsu was a great gambler, and bet some of his own moonlight. Thoth defeated Khonsu over and over, until he had won five days from Khonsu. Thoth fit those five days between the end of the old year, and the beginning of the new year, the year having 360 days. And so here were five days that were not part of any year. Nut gave birth to five children on those five days, Osiris on the first day, Harmachis on the second day, Set on the third, Isis on the fourth, and Nephthys on the fifth.
When Osiris was born, a man of Thebes named Pamyles heard a voice telling him to spread the word that Osiris the good and great king, and savior of mankind, had been born. And so Pamyles spread the word, and Nut entrusted the baby Osiris to Pamyles, to raise and educate, with the help of Thoth. The five children grew up, and Osiris married Isis, and Set married Nephthys."
Check your sources next time.
I notice you always assume the Jesus story accurate and make exacting comparisons against that tale - but have you ever looked for general similarities instead?
For example, is it really critical how a being got to heaven? Whether being "X" was taken up in a chariot or simply floated up in clouds, the general similarity is that they both were magically taken to heaven. Does it matter that one is born from a magical virgin, while another is born from a magical rock, while one had shepherds told of his birth and the other had a single shepherd observe the birth? The similarities are evident in the general sense of magical conceptions and sheepherding.
Slight-to-grand variations are to be expected from oral legends, and that is exactly how myths and legends are transformed when stories are shared among many varying cultures.
The concern should not be that it was not specifically Mithra but Mithras who did x,y,z, but that both stories were invented and the stories about them are generally in keeping with other legends - like Jewish legends.
John Kennedy was assassinated in a car and Lincoln in a theatre. Both presidents were killed by an assassin's bullet on a Friday (This holds only a one is seven chance). Both shot in the head.
Both assassins were killed before their trials (Booth was killed when captured. Oswald was killed days after his arrest).
Both men were succeeded by men with the surname of Johnson (Considering the popularity of the surname Johnson among white males, it would be no more of a coincidence by comparing two Muslim men who share the name Mohammed.) Lincoln's successor, Andrew Johnson, was born in 1808 while Kennedy's successor, Lyndon Johnson was born in 1908.
Lincoln was elected to congress in 1846, Kennedy 1946.
Abraham was elected to congress in 1860, Kennedy 1960
Both wives lost children during their stay in the White House.
Lincolns secretary warned him not to go to the theatre, Kennedy's secretary warned him not to go to Dallas.
This just proves that neither one them existed! If they had lived 2000 years ago, you would have argued that they were just mythical figures whose legends evolved from other legends because of the startling similarities, I might add.
You miss the point. This individual was claiming blatant plagiarism; that Jesus was just a copy-cat. He made false claims and I refuted that.
Contrary to popular belief he was an actual person. Roman documents and such dictate his legal case during his death so he was a physical person. just a crazy man who believed he was the son of god.
There actually are no Roman documents verifying the existence of a Jesus, Joshua, or Yeshua. If there were, there would be no grounds for debating him. These are rumors that were spouted in order to try and garner support for the Church, however their existence is an actual myth. No such documents have ever been seen or written. I believed they existed for a long time as well, and I even brought them up in arguments quite frequently. I have been proven wrong however.
As for the original question of whether or not God can die, that depends. Does a concept ever truly die? There are those who still today worship the old Egyptian Gods, the Norse Gods, and even the Greek Gods. As long as someone worships them, then they still exist. It is somewhat shocking that the practices survived the wrath of the Church, but they did. More than likely the concept will never die, since it will never die, it'll always exist, but it might perhaps become less popular as is the nature of ALL religions.
Before anyone starts jumping up and down and stamping their feet about how their God is real, please remember that without using the bible and without telling me that I have to experience it personally, you have no way in which to prove it. I answered the question and harassing me about it might make you feel better, but it does not and will not change anything.
This is an hilarious forum!!!! Y'all are killin' me! Stop, stop....no more!!! Three blind mice....hmmmm. The blind leading the blind. Very humorous, God. You really should tell 'em what's going on. Seriously. They're starting to make me laugh way too hard!
Imo, the concept of God won't die. The nature of that concept will change as society changes.
No, never, although a lot of media would like to make people think so.
If I say I am not a christian, why do you believe me to be a christian? "My" God doesn't care if you repent, for you know not of what you should or even if you should. Half the world is religious....the other half is chinese.
So, unless you are an expert in the field of physics, quantum mechanics, etc. then you must take someone else's word for it....unless you have already mathematically checked their work. Have you?
Would you mind repeating that? Repeating that? If one is to understand God, one must assume that science has already found him and mislabeled him. Human fallibility.
Quantum is a bunk! Can't you use your own reasoning?
by Disappearinghead 5 years ago
During my donkey's years in the Church, I heard Christians refer to the many Jewish names of God such as:EL ELYON - The Most High GodELOE YISRAEL - God of IsraelEL GIBBOR - The Mighty GodEL OLAM - The everlasting GodEL ROI - The God who seesEL SHADDAI - Bountiful supplier full breasted OneEL...
by deergha 5 years ago
Do you want to die at all?What will be your choice after death, hell or heaven?
by Dorsi Diaz 7 years ago
I know this is probably a morbid question but I was wondering what happens if I die? What happens to my hubs and the revenue from them? Can I will the income to one of my sons?Just wondering.....trust me to think of weird stuff like this..lol..(and actually that should read "when I...
by Kiz 9 years ago
and then what? Every religion seems to have it's own spin on the afterlife. Speaking solely from the doctrines and teachings of your particular flavor of faith, what is going to happen to you (or someone from your denomination) when you die?I'll give my answer after a few others have...
by Mahaveer Sanglikar 5 years ago
Believers believe that God knows everything. Then why many believers pray to God loudly, shouting and many times on microphone?
by Oztinato 22 months ago
Why do many atheists accept Bhuddism?Many online atheists openly despise religion but have a warm soft spot for Bhuddism which is also a religion with temples, chants, prayers and reincarnation etc.Why is that?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|