axt113 said:
Kasz216 said:
axt113 said:
Kasz216 said:
1) Actually, I would disagree... most pagan religion's main focus of belief was in fact "My god could beat up your god." It didn't take much conversion. You won? Most of those people adopted your religion. Judiasm was the first of the "New Religions" whose belief was built more on... well belief.
2) Judaism is not ethnically tied to anything. Jewish people are Arabs. Also, at the time it surivived the Assyrians, the Torah wasn't even completeted! It's actually events we first learned IN the Torah, and was later historicaly proven. Which is another point towards the Abrhamic religions by the way. They appear to be historically accurate. Few people know this, but the house of Paul... one of Jesus' disciples is something you can visit in Israel.
As for Christianity... well you couldn't be more wrong. Hell, you brought out my point for me, but actually ignored the salient point of it. Roman Emperorers converted to Christianity... when it was very unpopular. (Though it was well more popular then Scientology.) Christianity conquered and empire that was trying to wipe it out... without using force.
If you think it would of been wiped out you should look up the Kakure Kirishitan.
|
So you're arguing one group of imaginary friend believers vs. another?
|
I feel like those points couldn't of flown higher over your head if I'd attached them to bottle rockets.
I'm not arugeing ANYTHING. I am pointing out that Judiasm was the start of "New Era" religions. Ones that transcended exactly "one god vs another."
That's exactly how religion existed back then. I beat you in a war, therefore my Sun god is stronger then your Earth God... therefore your people converted to my religion.
A large amount of oldschool pagan religions were therefore disqualfied due to their defeat as set out by the tenants of their former believers.
Therefore religions that can be disproven.
|
Not really, conversion in that way only argues the history of people who believed in these beings, not whether those beings actually exist or not, so you aren't really disproving anything by that, all you're saying is one group of religious people were able to beat another and force them to convert. The burden of proof still lies with all the believers to prove any of their gods exist.
Also Hindusim has a wide variety of gods (depening on your branch they are either all different aspects of one, or multiple beings), and isn't really about one god vs another either, and predates Judaism, so your idea about it being the rise of new religions is also false.
|
1) No... it actually does argue whether they existed or not... as that was EXACTLY the burden of proof required by it's now dead followers. Now, if you killed every follower of Ashur, you in fact WOULD have disproven Ashur as a god because his own followers believed that such a thing would be impossible. If you killed every Hindu alive, or every Christian alive it would prove nothing, because such a think isn't considered impossible. It's always important to know what the burden of proof is in an arguement your making.
The burden of proof always lies with the person making the assertive declaration. If you declare "All religions are bogus." You have assumed the burden of proof about religion and must prove all religions are bogus. To do so, you generally need to know how to do that.
2) Hinduism, have you been reading this thread or did you pick one religion in general? Did you not notice I brought up hinduism earlier?
Hinduism is irrelevent because it had zero to no impact on western religions and Pagan religions.
Hinduism is in fact another religion you can't disprove. As well as Chinese Ancestor Worship. Largely irrelevent when considering the burden of proof required to prove or disporve paganism... and just further adding to the point that trying to convince others that all religions are lies is a silly thing to do.
Espeically considering there are documented proofs of various religions. People and things that we first learned about in religious texts that many took as fable, and later found to be reality.
Heck, there are so many historical events that are true in the Bible and the Talmud, Biblical Archaelogy is it's own field.
