By Carla Barhill

Pastor Gregory Boyd isn’t afraid to voice his convictions, even when he knows it will make him unpopular. You might not agree with him, but you feel compelled to hear him out. Take, for example, his latest book, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church (Zondervan). In it, he lays out a vision for life in the kingdom of God that is not only compelling, but quite controversial.

The book is based on a set of sermons Boyd presented to his 5,000-member congregation at Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, in the fall of 2004. In the months leading up to that year’s presidential election, Boyd became increasingly uncomfortable with the pressure he felt to use the pulpit and his pastoral position to steer his congregation in the “right” (i.e., Republican) direction. “It wasn’t overt pressure,” says Boyd, “but more of a constant urging to get out a specific message. I’d get mailings from different groups, hear it on Christian radio, get the nudge from colleagues and parishioners. I came to the conclusion that I needed to clearly articulate something I’d been thinking about for years: How the kingdom of God is radically different from the kingdom of the world.”

So Boyd began a sermon series called “The Cross and the Sword.” In it, he encouraged his parishioners to look beyond labels like “Democrat” or “Republican” or even “American” and instead consider what it means to be a follower of Jesus in today’s world. Over the course of four weeks, Boyd suggested a radically different way of thinking about issues like political power, war, military service, and government. Boyd’s message was that we are to be people of a kingdom where power looks like servanthood, not force, where peace triumphs over might.

On paper, most of us would agree with Boyd’s belief that we are to be people of peace. But this view is hard to hold on to when we try to translate it into action. In this age of terrorism, war, and daily violence, it feels necessary to fight back. In a country where we face increased crime, debates about abortion, and the issues surrounding homosexuality, it feels right to stand up against those who promote a lazy moral code.

In The Myth of a Christian Nation, however, Boyd asks us to consider the radical life of Christ and the kingdom He ushered in through His life, death, and resurrection. “The kingdom of God looks and acts like Jesus Christ,” he explains. “It looks and acts like Calvary. It looks and acts like God’s eternal, triune love. It consists of people graciously embracing others and sacrificing themselves in service to others, whether they be friends or ‘enemies.’ It consists of people trusting the power of self-sacrificial love to change people’s hearts, rather than acquiring power to control people’s behavior.”

Click here for the full article.

By Edwin Yamauchi   

One hears conflicting estimates of Jesus. Christians believe he is incomparable, without a peer, but they are often quite ignorant of the lives of other great spiritual leaders. On the other hand, some people speak of Jesus, Buddha, Socrates and others without acknowledging any differences. Walter Lippmann, for example, remarks, “There is no doubt that in one form or another, Socrates and Buddha, Jesus and St. Paul, Plotinus and Spinoza, taught that the good life is impossible without asceticism….”1 Arnold Toynbee asks: “Now who are the individuals who are the greatest benefactors of the living generation of mankind? I should say: Confucius and Lao-tse; the Buddha; the Prophets of Israel and Judah; Zoroaster, Jesus, and Muhammad; and Socrates.”2 One may cite many syncretistic movements in the United States, Japan and elsewhere, such as Baha’i, which attempt to combine the teachings of various religious leaders.

The purpose of this essay is to highlight Jesus’ life, death and teachings by comparing and contrasting them with Zoroaster, Buddha, Socrates and Muhammad. We have chosen these four because many people today, in their search for meaning, are looking to these men and the traditions they have generated. We will divide the investigation into five categories: (1) the sources available for reconstructing the lives of these teachers, (2) their birth and family, (3) their life and teachings, (4) their death and (5) their relation to deity. After the data become clear, we will be able to see where the uniqueness of Jesus lies.

From a historian’s point of view there are serious disparities in the sources available for reconstructing the lives of Zoroaster, Buddha, Socrates, Muhammad and Jesus. We need to distinguish sharply between first-hand or nearly contemporary sources and later apocryphal and legendary materials.

Zoroaster (628-551 B.C.) We have what appear to be the genuine sayings of Zoroaster in the Gathas of the Avesta. The mass of Zoroastrian texts, however, are in late Pahlavi recensions (ninth century A.D.). Contemporary Old Persian cuneiform inscriptions betray at best only allusions to early Zoroastrianism. Some Greek and Arabic authors also allude to Zoroaster. The Persian national epic, the Shah Namah by Firdausi (c. A.D. 1000), includes traditions of the prophet.

Buddha (563-483 B.C.) Buddha’s teachings, after many centuries of being passed on orally, were written down for the first time in the first century B.C. in Ceylon. The earliest written texts which have been preserved are in Pali, an Indo-Aryan dialect which may be the dialect Buddha himself used. The Pali canon of the Hinayana school (the southern branch of Buddhism, also called the Theravada school) is known as the Tipitaka (Sanskrit Tripitaka), meaning “Three Baskets.” Portions of this collection, such as the Samyutta Nikaya, the Majjhima Nikaya and the Anguttara Nikaya, may have come into existence two centuries after Buddha’s death, but other portions originated much later.

The Sanskrit canon of the Mahayana school, which spread northeastward to Tibet, China, Korea and Japan, dates, at the earliest, to the first and second centuries A.D. According to Christmas Humphreys, “the later Sutras of the Mahayana School, though put into Buddha’s mouth, are clearly the work of minds which lived from five to fifteen hundred years after his passing.”3

In the later sources one notes a conspicuous exaggeration of the supernatural elements in Buddha’s life. But even the earliest traditions, separated as they are by a century or two from Buddha’s time, are not free from amplification. As M. Winternitz observes, “Even what are generally considered to be our oldest documents, the texts of the Pali Tipitaka, speak of Buddha often enough as a superhuman being, and tell us more of the legendary man than of the historical Buddha.”4

Socrates (469-399 B.C.) We are fortunate in having the accounts of two of Socrates’ own disciples, Plato and Xenophon, as well as notices collected by Diogenes Laertius (third century A.D.). We cannot accept these accounts uncritically, of course, because it is difficult to know how much of Plato’s dialogues is really Socratic and how much Platonic. Another problem is that Xenophon’s Memorabilia and other writings were composed to refute the Sophists’ attacks against Socrates.

Muhammad (570-632 A.D.) In the Qur’an (Koran) we have the authentic sayings of Muhammad, which were at first written down on skins, palm leaves, pottery and even the shoulder blades of sheep. Shortly after the prophet’s death the caliph Uthman (644-55) collected these sayings in a canonical edition. In the Hadith we have numerous oral traditions about the words and actions of Muhammad, traditions involving even such details as his regularly brushing his teeth. Some two centuries after the prophet’s death Al-Bukhari sifted through some 600,000 traditions to obtain 7,000 Hadith which he thought were genuine. The first life of Muhammad, based on the Qur’an and the Hadith, is the ninth-century Sirat ar-Rasul by Ibn Hisham.

Jesus (5 B.C.-30 A.D.) Our main sources of information about the life of Jesus are the canonical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. There is some dispute over the identity of the authors, but it is generally held that Matthew, a converted tax-collector, and John, a fisherman, were two of Jesus’ apostles. Mark was an eyewitness as Jesus and the apostles met in his home, and later he learned more about Jesus from Peter, whom, according to Irenaeus, he served as an interpreter. Luke, a physician who accompanied Paul, made use of eyewitness accounts for his Gospel. Mark, the earliest Gospel, may have been written as early as A.D. 50; Luke was probably written before A.D. 64; and Matthew shortly after A.D. 70. Although it has been customary to date John’s Gospel approximately A.D. 90, some scholars have recently favored a date in the 70’s or 80’s. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, but the Gospels are in Greek.

Click here for the full article and active footnotes.

By Steve Cable 

Over 2,000,000 people from 139 countries have participated with Oprah Winfrey and Eckhart Tolle in a live Web-based seminar covering each chapter of Tolle’s recent book entitled, A New Earth Awakening to Your Life’s Purpose{1}. Why is this book so popular? Will it lead you deeper in your walk with Christ? Or, is it counterfeit spirituality promoting a false view of God? In this article, we will address these questions as we embark on an exploration of Tolle’s “new earth.”

Many church goers have expressed confusion over whether A New Earth is compatible with Christianity. The answer is no. It is not consistent with or compatible with Biblical Christianity.

Let’s begin our exploration of Tolle’s new earth with an overview of its central messages.

The underlying premise is that all material things (from planets to pebbles to flowers to animals) result from a universal, immaterial life force expressing itself in material form. Humans are a part of that expression. However, we have evolved to the point where we have the potential to become Aware of our oneness with the universal life force. The purpose of all mankind is to become aware that their Being is an expression of the One Life Force.

However, the vast majority of people are unconscious and unaware of the source of their being. Every human being has an illusory self image or ego which is completely conditioned by the past, always wanting and never satisfied. We also have an individual and collective accumulation of old emotional pain Tolle calls the “pain-body.” Our ego and our pain-body are actively trying to keep us away from true awareness. When we identify ourselves with our ego, our thoughts about the past and future, our wants and our hurts, we cannot experience our true Beingness.

In Tolle’s view, this lack of awareness of our true essence and false identification with our egos has the world and the human race on the brink of extinction. Fortunately, the universal life force is manipulating this crisis to create an opportunity for many people to move from an unconscious state to consciousness. In order to become conscious, we must recognize that we are not our thoughts and/or egos. We must learn to accept and be present in the Now, because the past and the future exist only as thoughts. When most people are operating from their true essence rather than their egos, we will have drastic social and physical upheavals on this earth resulting in a whole new world order; that is “a new earth.”

If you are thinking this sounds a lot more like Eastern mysticism than a deeper walk with Christ, you are on the right track. So why is this message so popular even among many regular church attendees?

Click here for the full article.

A common objection to Christianity is that it is merely a spin-off from Zoroastrianism, an ancient religion that arose in Persia (modern day Iran) around 1,000 B.C. The following article by James Patrick Holding discusses that possibility.    

Of all of the Christ-myth, pagan-copycat sources I refute, only Acharya S. deigns to include and make much of Zoroaster on her list. She puts together about a dozen similarities after her usual fashion:

1. Zoroaster was born of a virgin and “immaculate conception by a ray of divine reason.”
2. He was baptized in a river.
3. In his youth he astounded wise men with his wisdom.
4. He was tempted in the wilderness by the devil.
5. He began his ministry at age 30.
6. Zoroaster baptized with water, fire, and “holy wind.”
7. He cast out demons and restored the sight to a blind man.
8. He taught about heaven and hell, and revealed mysteries, including resurrection, judgment, salvation and the apocalypse.
9. He had a sacred cup or grail.
10. He was slain.
11. His religion had a eucharist.
12. He was the “Word made flesh.”
13. Zoroaster’s followers expect a “second coming” in the virgin-born Saoshyant or Savior, who is to come in 2341 CE and begin his ministry at age 30, ushering in a golden age.

I have chosen the title “close but no cigar” for this essay because of all the figures chosen by mythicists so far that I have looked at, old Zoro comes in closest to fitting their bill. Some of the things listed above are actually true and confirmed by scholarly literature — and a couple of them come from sources that Zoroastrian scholars suggest go back to a source predating Christianity. But that’s the mythicists getting 10 out of 100 on a test where before they got zeroes, or claiming a “100% increase” in a salary that went from one dollar a year to two dollars. Some of these I find no confirmation at all for; others come from sources that are way, way too late — even as late as the 10th century!

Our main source for details on Zoro is the Avesta, a collection of sacred texts which was put in writing between 346-360 AD [Herz.ZW, 774] and of which we have manuscript copies only as early as the 13th century [Wat.Z, 56 — and note to conspiracy theorists: blame Alexander the Great and the Muslims for the destruction of Zoroastrian literature]. Some of the material probably comes from a time before the Christian era, but most of this is reckoned to be hymns and some basic information [Rose.IZ, 17] that was part of the oral tradition. The rest seems likely to have been added later, and for good reason, as Rose notes [ibid., 27]:

The incorporation of certain motifs into the Zoroastrian tradition in the ninth century CE could indicate the conscious attempt of the priesthood to exalt their prophet in the eyes of the faithful who may have been tempted to turn to other religions.

In other words, if we see a “Jesus-like” story in these texts, especially this late, we have a right to suspect borrowing — but in exactly the opposite way that Acharya supposes!

I usually start these by saying a little about the subjects themselves. A key issue seems to be, “When did Zoroaster actually live?” Interestingly enough there has even been a few “Zoroaster-mythers” who said (as Bultmann said of Jesus!) “nothing can be said” of the historical Zoroaster [Rose.IZ, 15]. J. M. Robertson, who also stumped for a mythical Jesus and a mythical Buddha, took up the Zoroaster-myth (to which a Zoroastrian scholar responded, “I have myself indeed divined and published the argument by which Mr. Robertson’s successors fifty years hence will irrefutably prove him a myth”) [Wat.Z, 11]. One Zoroastrian scholar did go along with the idea eventually, but died before he could justify his position. At any rate, most of the sources I consulted prefer a date around 600 B.C., though one scholar has suggested a date as early as 1700 BC [Yam.PB, 414].

Does Persia have anything to do with Jerusalem? Zoro’s faith had an idea that sounds like, and probably is, bodily resurrection, though it is most clear only in AD-dated Z texts. Did the Jews “steal” this idea while under the thumb of the Persians? There is no direct evidence either way; the Persians may have got the ideas from the Jews, and from Ezekiel or Daniel. We’ll see some other general ideas they have in common as well. But in terms of borrowing, no evidence exists — one way or the other, and a determination depends on the interpretations and datings of Zoroastrian texts. Zoroastrian scholars offer no consensus on the subject [Yam.PB, 461]: Yamauchi cites one Z scholar who believes that the Jews borrowed, another that says there is no way to tell who borrowed, and yet another who says that the borrowing was the other way. There is also a great difference in approach: The Jews buried their dead, while the Zoros exposed their dead.

Others argue that the Jewish idea of Satan is borrowed from Zoroastrianism. But Satan appears in Job, a very early book, and is nothing like the evil Zoro god Ahriman, who is a dualistic equal to Ohrmazd the good god, rather than a subordinate. Finally, it is significant that while the OT used plenty of Persian loanwords for governmental matters, they did not use any for religion [Yam.PB, 463]. The most we find is, I am told, the name of a Persian demon in the Book of Tobit!

And so, right to the list, shall we go?

Click here for the full article.

One of the common objections to Christianity is that it excludes from its canon many writings about Jesus, including the gnostic gospels. The following article by Lewis Loftin is not written from the traditional Christian perspective, but I think it does a good job explaining the basics of gnosticism for those of us who are interested in the topic.      

In AD 1209, the entire population of the Albigens was slaughtered at the order of Pope Innocent III. The Albigens, in the south of France, was then the most populous, the most technically, socially, and economically advanced part of Europe. Its population was largely Gnostics and Arian Christians, and were a sanctuary for Jews who were persecuted almost everywhere else in Europe. All of these groups had a high percentage of literacy and read the Bible, which was prohibited by the Vatican. Innocent III was seeking to put a stop to the “Gnostic heresy”, but found it to be entrenched throughout Europe, so he followed the “Cathar Crusade” with the creation of the Inquisition, resulting in countless millions of people being slowly and brutally tortured to death over the next 500 years for even the mere suspicion of being witches. Innocent also reinstated a prohibition against the owning or reading of Bibles by anyone other than clergy, under penalty of death.

The above was an introduction to an essay I read years ago, but it is sad historical fact. What is it about the Gnostics, Arians, and Jews that produces such rage and fear within official Christendom? Gnosticism is often defined as a “cult” of “secret knowledge” or to quote, “These gospels emphasize knowledge that initiates have and others do not.” This is a Christian definition and an attempt to separate itself from its origins. Many Gnostic groups shared with Christians a rejection of Laws of Moses and salvation by works; a belief that other beings created the material world; the shared belief of a divine mediator between God and man; and finally the belief that nothing “worldly” is of any importance. Only faith in or knowledge of this divine mediator (1 Tim 2:5), would lead one to salvation and eternal life.

Click here for the full article.

Review by Kyle Demming

In “The Universe Next Door”, James Sire articulates and discusses all of the major worldviews held by persons today. Since worldviews are important to every individual, this book is relevant and useful for almost everybody. Each worldview is explained quickly and concisely, which means that this book is by no means a comprehensive look at the issue. However, this is a strength rather than a weakness- the short chapters are easy to grasp and Sire relays complicated ideas in an easy-to-understand manner.

Sire definitely approaches the issue from a Christian perspective. Some may see this as a major flaw, but I think it is appropriate for Sire to openly announce his biases rather than try to hide them. In any case, I feel Sire is correct in that theism is the only consistent and complete worldview. His discussion of Christian theism is absolutely great. Sire does point out that there are many “inner” issues or problems within Christianity - but still contends that Christianity provides the outer framework of a consistent worldview.

“The Universe Next Door” is a recommended read for everyone.