Is there a parallel?

[Athetotheist]

In the 19th century, a movement started among Native Americans which was believed by some to be a way to bring back their former way of life. One of its names was the Ghost Dance, and its participants hoped that performing it widely enough would bring about the disappearance of their white oppressors, the return of the buffalo herds and the restoration of peace and prosperity.

Fast forward to modern times, when "Dominion Theology" has become a significant movement. There are various approaches to it, but one facet is:

Dominion Theology defines the church’s hope to be the establishment of an earthly kingdom instead of the second coming of Christ. Under this view, Christ cannot come back until the church first establishes the millennial kingdom. This kingdom is not simply the rule of God in the hearts of people, but it is to be political, social, and visible. The great commission is redefined: instead of the primary goal being personal evangelism, the church’s mission is to gain control of the world, institution by institution and nation by nation.

https://www.apostolic.edu/is-dominion-t ... criptural/

Is Dominion Theology a fundamentalist Christian version of the Ghost Dance?

[1213]

...If there was a single person the myth was built on, he is long dead now....

Sorry, I don't believe you. But, since you make the claim, is there some way to prove he is not living in heaven?

[1213]

A perfect scam.

Why do you think it is a scam? What would the first disciples benefit from it? And what would a person loose, it he believes what Jesus told?

...not to mention based on a book more full of holes than fishnet tights carries no weight, ...

Do you really expect people to take your opinions as the truth?

[TRANSPONDER]

A perfect scam.

Why do you think it is a scam? What would the first disciples benefit from it? And what would a person loose, it he believes what Jesus told?

...not to mention based on a book more full of holes than fishnet tights carries no weight, ...

Do you really expect people to take your opinions as the truth?

It would really help if you understood the argument before you start arguing against it. The scam is the Christian c laim being put about now. I don't say that the first disciples were trying to scam anyone.

And I trust that anyone following the discussions will agree for instance that the Bible is wrong in saying the daylight was made before the sun was, even if they forgot your various attempts to make stuff up to try to make it work, that the prophecy of Tyre failed despite your efforts to find a Tyre outside the present city, deny the old city remains are under the present one and even that rebuilt Tyre wasn't really tyre at all.

why should anyone credit your arguments by now, even before we get to your efforts to try to make the resurrections fit instead of contradicting, even trying to make the Two marys apologetic work, by leaving out the contradictions (and denying that you did do0 and then shuffling the events to try to make them work, which they still don't.

Not to mention the attempt to have circle of the earth as the pacific ring. Why should anyone but a Bible - licking denialist swallow your arguments?

And there are far more holes like the Nativity contradiction, which a Theist here sorta accepted while laughably excusing it as 'not affecting doctrine' (no names to f save the face whose sig-name is known) the nonsense of trying to blame the Jews for the Roman execution, and the constant contradiction of the "Q" material, which Mark doesn't even have, and that's before we get onto the contradictions between John and the Synoptics, which even Christian Authorities have to try to wish away by talking of 'Judean material and Galilee material as though that explained something or anything.

Scam? The Christian apologetic a Authorities have been scamming their followers for decades.

Why should anyone believe you? Why should they not at least credit me with a case?

[1213]

...prophecy of Tyre failed despite your efforts to find a Tyre outside the present city, deny the old city remains are under the present one and even that rebuilt Tyre wasn't really tyre at all...

How can you say Tyre was rebuilt, if the ruins are still there?

Why should anyone believe you?

People don't have to believe me, I hope only that people understand my point.

[TRANSPONDER]

...prophecy of Tyre failed despite your efforts to find a Tyre outside the present city, deny the old city remains are under the present one and even that rebuilt Tyre wasn't really tyre at all...

How can you say Tyre was rebuilt, if the ruins are still there?

Why should anyone believe you?

People don't have to believe me, I hope only that people understand my point.

We have done this before. I have explained this. founbdations of old Tyre and iundeed both Island and mainland Tyre are under the present city. It was rubuilt in top, in Babylonian Times, Greek times, Roman times, Byzantine times and Islamic times. The ruins outside the present city are a later Necropolis built outside the city, Roman stuff built outside the city and Seashore structures on the foreshore of the city. Bible apologist lie when they pretend that Tyre was never rebuilt.

People should understand youyr post, and mine, which is that you don't know the evidence, repeat apologetics lies, make up stuff of your own, and seem to forget your own arguments, let alone mine. Why should anyone credit your ponts rather than mine?

[TRANSPONDER]

...prophecy of Tyre failed despite your efforts to find a Tyre outside the present city, deny the old city remains are under the present one and even that rebuilt Tyre wasn't really tyre at all...

How can you say Tyre was rebuilt, if the ruins are still there?

Why should anyone believe you?

People don't have to believe me, I hope only that people understand my point.

We have done this before. I have explained this. founbdations of old Tyre and iundeed both Island and mainland Tyre are under the present city. It was rubuilt in top, in Babylonian Times, Greek times, Roman times, Byzantine times and Islamic times. The ruins outside the present city are a later Necropolis built outside the city, Roman stuff built outside the city and Seashore structures on the foreshore of the city. Bible apologist lie when they pretend that Tyre was never rebuilt.

People should understand youyr post, and mine, which is that you don't know the evidence, repeat apologetics lies, make up stuff of your own, and seem to forget your own arguments, let alone mine. Why should anyone credit your ponts rather than mine?

[Tcg]

...If there was a single person the myth was built on, he is long dead now....

Sorry, I don't believe you.

Well, of course you don't. It would spoil the function of the myth if you did.

But, since you make the claim, is there some way to prove he is not living in heaven?

Heaven? Why do you bring up heaven. I didn't even mention it or its function in providing false comfort in the Jesus mythology.


Tcg

[1213]

...
Heaven? Why do you bring up heaven. ...

Because by what is said in the Bible, Jesus is living in heaven. Did I understood you wrongly, you didn't mean Jesus is dead? If you say Jesus is dead, I would like to know how do you know that.

[1213]

... It was rubuilt in top, ...

So, if for example your car would broke up and you would buy a new one to replace the old one, would you say you rebuilt the old car? Apparently.

Interesting thing is also that the name of the new city that is allegedly on top of the ancient Tyre is actually Sur, not Tyre. City called Tyre doesn't really exist, only ruins of it.

[TRANSPONDER]

... It was rubuilt in top, ...

So, if for example your car would broke up and you would buy a new one to replace the old one, would you say you rebuilt the old car? Apparently.

Interesting thing is also that the name of the new city that is allegedly on top of the ancient Tyre is actually Sur, not Tyre. City called Tyre doesn't really exist, only ruins of it.

This is being tricky. If your house is bombed and you rebuild it on the foundations, if s it your house, or not? If there is a prophecy to say you will never rebuild your house, or indeed that you will never again have a car, does the prophecy fail if you get a new one, or even restore the old one on the chassis?

Sure, the name changed. But up to Roman times, it was Tyre. The prophecy had already failed before the name was changed. In any case it is still the same city, rebuilt many times, whatever it is called.

Is this the Interpretation that the apologists claim is Understanding the Bible? To tinker with words and meanings to try to make the Bible say what you want rather than what it says?

This is the best video I have seen in a long while, to illustrate the craftiness of Bible - apologetics.