ConCen
Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - Printable Version

+- ConCen (https://concen.org/oldforum)
+-- Forum: Main (https://concen.org/oldforum/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Religion, New Age & The Occult (https://concen.org/oldforum/forum-21.html)
+--- Thread: Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions (/thread-15798.html)

Pages: 1 2 3


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - MrBS - 09-07-2007

This reminds me so much of my dog.

She continually eats cat shit wherever she can find it, and the result is she eventually digests it and craps it out.

This to me is the perfect analogy of religion - and the copying/cloning/inheriting of religions.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-07-2007

Quote:This reminds me so much of my dog.

She continually eats cat shit wherever she can find it, and the result is she eventually digests it and craps it out.

This to me is the perfect analogy of religion - and the copying/cloning/inheriting of religions.

it surely is what it is made up to be by bigot ignoramuses. Religion in its original sense where ritual marked the day to put in the seeds, to harvest etc, and thankfullness for the fat of the land to whatever deity favoured makes a lot of sense. This is why in egypt horus turned the water to beer, where the wine drinkers had their deity make it into wine, because they could observe how the water was drawn on the crops to produce what was used to make the beer/wine, thus the deity (originally in India named RAIN) made water into *insert favoured life supporting beverage here*.

These same stories doesnt repeat all over the place only because of interchanging traditions, but people are people nomatter where they are, and live in pretty much the same conditions, give or take a little. They all saw the glowing life supporting orb in the heavens, they all saw the its counterpart the moon. In fact, they used to venerate the moon more because that must be one badass when it can toss the sun out of the sky huh??? All this stuff is in its pagan origin sensible and good, it made people connect with the world around them. But the religion of today that froze in time some 2000 years ago and mutated into alice in wonderland, are both dangerous and retarded at the same time. Bush, Bin Laden and pat robertson as glowing examples of this, and before any christard whould start to argue that they are not real *insert favoured religion here*. yes they are, they are an expression, an interpretation of their said religions.

In the childrens movie shrek, i cracked up laughing as the beginings of religion is laid out one night under the stars with him and donkey (and the virgin in the cave nearby...folks, thats deep!), and he tells his ancestors stories in the constellations in the sky to donkey.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - aux - 09-08-2007

Quote:I am in no way disagreeing that christianity is a continuation of astrotheology, fertility and hero worship. And im well versed in both the Bible and the Quran. Enough even, to know that they are both made up entirely.

I'm surprised you didn't add sunworship to that list. Anyways, when you say you "KNOW" the bible is "MADE UP ENTIRELY" this really shows how silly and far out of your depth you really are. I'm almost astonished at how foolish that statement is. You might as well say you know everything there is to know. Even the Minimalist's view of the bible isn't that absurd. Now you're implying that the antire field of biblical archaeology is "made up entirely." You might as well say reality isn't real. The historicity of Moses, David and Jesus have already been sufficiently proven, you can still have doubts all you wish about everything they did, but credible evidence exists to establish such people did exist outside of the bible and during the times recorded in scripture. Look up keyword "biblical archaeology."

Quote:And no im no faux "news" fan, but if you belive the Bible, when dont YOU take FAUX'es words for it as you apparently are willing to belive just about anything.

Did I say you were a fan? No, I said "you're little more than a hardcore Fox News fan." Bit of a difference there, but maybe I'm being to harsh to Fox News fans... I'm pretty sure you missed the point, seeing as how you completely misread the statement (maybe you WORK for Fox News?).



Quote:No i decided right from wrong BECAUSE OF, the evidence. That is how you tell something right from something wrong, but you belive that a thousand of years old hodgepodge scripture is true from cover to cover, so i reckon you wouldnt know this simple but well proven method.

OK, so what evidence can you point me towards? Surely you're not resting your entire argument on the simple fact that God's plan/prophecy was known and co-opted before it was fulfilled are you? That whole argument is about as ridiculous as saying the plan for a NWO isn't real because it's been talked about before in fictional books and movies for several decades now. Where's the logic in that?


Quote:just like many muslims are to theirs with explosives packed on them. Why? bcause it is the same mental illness, from the same area involving the same made up characters.

Again, you can't understand basic logic; Christians were faithful BEFORE Constantine co-opted Christianity, which contradicts the premise you hold as I understand it, that Constantine commissioned "MEN" to create the bible or NT more specifically. If you believe that, you're historically illiterate and you don't need to believe the bible to know this.

Quote:The other facts you posted are wrong too. I have never read a Dan Brown book, and i never bought into holy blood holy grail. And you are confusing knowlege with emotion, what you just did is an emotional automated response. YOu dont rebut anything i said, but calls me a nazi and ill informed. Why? do you know me or why i came to the conclusions that i did?


Facts are never wrong, that's why they are facts. Regardless of what books you have or haven't read (although it's dubious now you would even grasp the content if you did judging by the pattern of your misinterpretation of simple statements and flawed thinking), you're pushing the same tripe pushed by Brown, J. Maxwell, Icke, Zeitgeist, some Masons, Satanists, atheists, and other garden variety fools. Also, there was nothing to rebut in your post that followed mine, all you said was that my explanation "is wrong, and bad speculation and philosophy, thats why" based on your emotional response triggered by association with other arguments which you are trying to conform my argument into (just blame it all on Satan). You're confusing yourself and need to start applying some logic.

Quote:So as i said. Satan counterfitted the whole christ spectacle upfront....riiiiight?! And the reason you find these clues in the Bible is because it is made up of from these earlyer stories entirely. Only, they left out, or distorted the parts that didnt fit the new religious idea.

Like I said, you're trying to take my explanation and conform it into an oversimplified explanation you're already familiar with so as to make the cognitive dissonance you're having go byebye, rrrrrriiiiiiiiiight? Kinda like a Fox News Fan does when you try to tell them that Bush is more liberal than Clinton and all they can do is call you a democrat. YOU are the one saying Satan did it, I didn't even once mention Satan in my original post. Again, STOP CONFUSING YOURSELF. And what proof do you have for your assertions that the New Testament (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here and assuming you're not so silly as to include the Old Testament) was completely fabricated? If you're hanging everything on the theory that Constantine and his henchmen masterminded the whole thing, well you are mentally crippled, to put it nicely.

[quote]because this, as anything else you express is a matter of interpretation, and nothing interpretated is objectively true. I too can see the astor theology blatantly present, but that is just a tell tale sign if christianitys pagan origins. The rest is just your personal pet interpretation. [quote/]

And yet in the same breath you'll have me believe that YOUR unfounded, hollow, flimsy, flawed interpretation (made from a lack of consideration of materials and info I have brought up, I might add) is true? I've never seen anyone so smug in my life. And who the hell said this stuff was my 'personal pet interpretation'? There's been books written on the ideas I laid out going back over a 100 years ago! See, you really ARE ignorant on this subject. It makes perfect sense, only the most ignorant people can be so cocksure of themselves and come off as complete smug snobs to those who actually do their homework.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - aux - 09-08-2007

Quote:i wonder why you keep going on about zeitgeist, i didnt find it a very good movie, and i am highly reserved about the works of socalled scholar acharya s which most of it is based upon. And the rest of the emotional response of youres, i cannot figure out if you want a reply to or not, in the case that you want one, on what excactly?!

I used it as an example of this new movement being pushed to discredit Jesus on any possible grounds, many times self-contradicted.."He's a myth,no no okay, He was real, but he wasn't who he said he was...wait no, yeah ok, wait yeah he was who he said he was but he left 'secret doctrines' behind, oh yeah and he left an heir too, yeah that's the ticket." The Bible is full of the faithless and nonbelievers, even when Jesus was in front of them performing miracles, so you're nothing special for calling your Creator a fraud. People like you WILL suckle at the teet of the NWO & coming world leader, that's if you survive the global holocaust of course.

Quote:what evidence might that be, please guide me to some. I have in the years i have studied this not seen a single piece of objective evidence in favour of the christ fable, but a mountain of evidence against it. So dont be emotional about this, you stated in the start of your reply that you didnt like this, show me the data.

I have trouble believing that you've spent years studying this topic and not once have seen a single piece of objective evidence? Maybe you don't count secular accounts of Christ and Christians from multiple sources as holding any weight, but I sure do. If you can't realy on secular accounts of things, than how do you know ANYTHING about history you weren't there to see first hand (even then you would need to interpret what it was you saw)? You've painted yourself into a corner on this one. Rather than point you to any single book, try typing 'Historicity of Jesus' into an engine maybe on amazon and pick one of the several books out there on this subject, some are better than others of course. Are there also tons of books of "the myth of Jesus" out there? of course! but the thing with establishing facts is that all you need is one proof to kill a thousand lies.

Quote:you seem to know me, from where? I love sin? what sin? hate my creator, how do you know this?

I know your type of course. Sin, yeah, you don't know what sin is in the context I'm speaking of? You hate the only One promised to provide an escape from the bonds of death, your Creator. You bend logic to somehow excuse yourself from acknowledging him so you don't have to feel guilty for sinning, because it's easier to submit to sin and you don't have to be a strong person and say no to that smokin hot babe whose all over you like I do almost daily. In the end avoiding sin is right, not just because God said so, but because if you study the ramifications of sin, it breaks down society and breeds corruption, violence, death. The wages of sin are death, not just of the flesh, but of the spirit. Laws don't just govern the seen world, but the unseen world too.

Quote:What scripture might that be? here is just a few of the God scriptures avaible

Try starting with the only scripture backed up with fulfilled prophecies (hundreds of them), with history, archeology, science, linguistics, the Mazzaroth, etc. the written Word of God, the Bible. The list below only shows how many times man has failed to create a true Word inspired by God, serving only to highlight the accuracy and dependability of the Bible. The only doctrine that has had any amount of influence comparable to Judaic-Christian doctrine is the Quran, and that's because it was written AFTER the NT, and therefore would be easier to hijack as the nearly complete picture of God's work would have been more clearly understood (I say nearly because there are still areas of the bible which will not be fully understood until prophecy is fulfilled in the future). And Islam was fabricated by the Vatican, but that's a whole other topic, too huge for me to get into.

But again, numerous counterfeits or imitations of a truth does not make that truth cease to exist. Your logic is horrendously flawed. It's a basic military tactic, it's called signal interference or signal jamming. Machiavelli knew this trick when he and Cardinal Woolsey countered the Protestant Reformation by flooding the growing literate masses (due to Luther, others and the Gutenberg press) and scholarly world who were finally getting their hands on personal copies of the translated original Greek texts (textus receptus) instead of relying on Roman-Catholic priests to tell them what the Bible said based on Latin version of the Alexandrian texts (gnostic rewrites several 100s of years after Christ), with tons of collected ancient pagan and humanism doctrines/myths from the Medici Library in Florence ("Cradle of Western Civilization") to try to drown out the true message of the Gospel which was spreading across Europe and undermining the power of the Vatican as nations began cutting ties with the Roman Church leading to the many revolutions like the French and Russian revolutions to reinstall heads of state loyal to the Pontifex Maximus, but of course you proably know nothing about this history and thus will (continue to) be fooled by the same dark forces that ran the Inquisition.

Again this message isn't really for the person it's addressed to, but rather for those with some truth left in them.

Peace in Christ



Quote:Ásatrú
The Poetic Edda, including especially the Hávamál
The Younger Edda

[edit]
Ayyavazhi
The Akilattirattu Ammanai
The Arul Nool

[edit]
Bahá'í Faith
The Kitáb-i-Aqdas
Kitáb-i-Íqán
and many other writings including ones from other faiths

[edit]



Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-08-2007

Quote:I am in no way disagreeing that christianity is a continuation of astrotheology, fertility and hero worship. And im well versed in both the Bible and the Quran. Enough even, to know that they are both made up entirely.

I'm surprised you didn't add sunworship to that list. [/quote]

in fact i did. ASTRO theology.

Quote:Anyways, when you say you "KNOW" the bible is "MADE UP ENTIRELY" this really shows how silly and far out of your depth you really are. I'm almost astonished at how foolish that statement is. You might as well say you know everything there is to know.

are we getting to something substantial soon, or is ad hominem good enough for you?


Quote:Even the Minimalist's view of the bible isn't that absurd. Now you're implying that the antire field of biblical archaeology is "made up entirely."

thats called a strawman this. The reality of biblical "archaeology" is that all to often it is based on wishfull thinking and interpretation. Remember when these bible scholars found noahs ark? what a scam!

Quote:You might as well say reality isn't real. The historicity of Moses, David and Jesus have already been sufficiently proven

show me the data. show me the sources for this claim, or where to look for it.

Quote: you can still have doubts all you wish about everything they did, but credible evidence exists to establish such people did exist outside of the bible and during the times recorded in scripture. Look up keyword "biblical archaeology."

try and use the keyword "mickey mouse". you will get millions of hit, so does this not in the same way prove that mickey mouse is real. This is the fallacy of appeal to common practice.

Quote:Did I say you were a fan? No, I said "you're little more than a hardcore Fox News fan." Bit of a difference there, but maybe I'm being to harsh to Fox News fans... I'm pretty sure you missed the point, seeing as how you completely misread the statement (maybe you WORK for Fox News?).

to say "youre little different than "x"" is saying "you are like x". You are a little more than a fucking retard.

Quote:OK, so what evidence can you point me towards?

http://www.christianism.com would be a good place to start. work your way from there id say.

Quote:Surely you're not resting your entire argument on the simple fact that God's plan/prophecy was known and co-opted before it was fulfilled are you? That whole argument is about as ridiculous as saying the plan for a NWO isn't real because it's been talked about before in fictional books and movies for several decades now. Where's the logic in that?

as opposed to Gods plan was counterfitted by the devil 100's of times before it actually "came to be" (supposedly). Yeah i can see how that makes so much more sense.

Quote:Again, you can't understand basic logic; Christians were faithful BEFORE Constantine co-opted Christianity, which contradicts the premise you hold as I understand it, that Constantine commissioned "MEN" to create the bible or NT more specifically. If you believe that, you're historically illiterate and you don't need to believe the bible to know this.

I cant understand basic logic? you are really on the roll with objectivity here. Sure christians where faithfull before. faithfull pagans. CHristiandom was a cration of several older treaditions avaible to pick from. So yes, they where "christians" in the sense that they practiced something similar to what BECAME christianity, this is a historical fact and if you dont like it. thats your problem entirely.

Quote:Facts are never wrong, that's why they are facts.

so why do you say it as a fact that i read dan brown etc??

Quote:Regardless of what books you have or haven't read (although it's dubious now you would even grasp the content if you did judging by the pattern of your misinterpretation of simple statements and flawed thinking)

incredible, you have so far provided NO info what so ever, but a lot of ad hominem and here we go again.

Quote:you're pushing the same tripe pushed by Brown, J. Maxwell, Icke, Zeitgeist, some Masons, Satanists, atheists, and other garden variety fools.

i.e anyone who dont belive the fairytales that you belive in are fools. right?

Quote: Also, there was nothing to rebut in your post that followed mine, all you said was that my explanation "is wrong, and bad speculation and philosophy, thats why" based on your emotional response triggered by association with other arguments which you are trying to conform my argument into (just blame it all on Satan). You're confusing yourself and need to start applying some logic.

then show me the way christian, be the good example of your man god. Dont allow me to be this confused educate me and draw me towards truth with good.

Quote:Like I said, you're trying to take my explanation and conform it into an oversimplified explanation you're already familiar with so as to make the cognitive dissonance you're having go byebye, rrrrrriiiiiiiiiight?

if it is over simplified, why is that the case? so far you have only proven me correctly, but in the way you religious people always do. Add a lot of useless information and words en mass to it, to make it sound very intellectually demanding, when in fact it boils down to the same thing. The devil counterfitted Gods plan in advance, thus all the saviour archetypes before Jesus, prove me wrong.

Quote:Kinda like a Fox News Fan does when you try to tell them that Bush is more liberal than Clinton and all they can do is call you a democrat. YOU are the one saying Satan did it, I didn't even once mention Satan in my original post. Again, STOP CONFUSING YOURSELF. And what proof do you have for your assertions that the New Testament (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here and assuming you're not so silly as to include the Old Testament) was completely fabricated? If you're hanging everything on the theory that Constantine and his henchmen masterminded the whole thing, well you are mentally crippled, to put it nicely.

im mentally crippled? do you have more in there that needs to get out before you can debate an, and as an adult?
you dont have to mention satan, because i have read the appologetic stories over and over and thats what it boils down to. Never mind all the flowery words, what does it actually say.


Quote:And yet in the same breath you'll have me believe that YOUR unfounded, hollow, flimsy, flawed interpretation (made from a lack of consideration of materials and info I have brought up, I might add) is true?

unfounded, hollow, flimsy, flawed ??? how old are you, 8?

Quote:I've never seen anyone so smug in my life.

thats because youre not looking in the right place, look here
Quote:http://www.hickorymanor.biz/French-Curved-Mirror-7133F-.gif

Quote:And who the hell said this stuff was my 'personal pet interpretation'? There's been books written on the ideas I laid out going back over a 100 years ago! See, you really ARE ignorant on this subject. It makes perfect sense, only the most ignorant people can be so cocksure of themselves and come off as complete smug snobs to those who actually do their homework.

do their homework?!, with people who write what they allready wanted to hear, or expected to. How many critics of these stories did you concider while studying, be honest!


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-08-2007

Quote:I'm surprised you didn't add sunworship to that list.

in fact i did. ASTRO theology. so much for you doing your "homework", when you didnt know that those two are the same thing. The worship of celestial bodies.

Quote:Anyways, when you say you "KNOW" the bible is "MADE UP ENTIRELY" this really shows how silly and far out of your depth you really are. I'm almost astonished at how foolish that statement is. You might as well say you know everything there is to know.

are we getting to something substantial soon, or is ad hominem good enough for you?


Quote:Even the Minimalist's view of the bible isn't that absurd. Now you're implying that the antire field of biblical archaeology is "made up entirely."

thats called a strawman this. The reality of biblical "archaeology" is that all too often it is based on wishfull thinking and interpretation. Remember when these bible "scholars" found noahs ark? what a scam!

Quote:You might as well say reality isn't real. The historicity of Moses, David and Jesus have already been sufficiently proven

show me the data. show me the sources for this claim, or where to look for it. because great works like

Lewy, Hildegard, "Origin and Significance of the Magen Dawid: A Comparative Study in the Ancient Religions of Jerusalem and Mecca," Archiv Orientalni 18 (1950): 330-65.

the incredible works of Ove von Spaeth on Moses. His life long study was concluded only a couple of years ago, so this is not mainstream yet, however you can read a little about it here.
http://www.moses-egypt.net/book-series/moses_survey_en.asp

tell me that they are fictional, but bare some resemblence to royalty at the time.

Quote: you can still have doubts all you wish about everything they did, but credible evidence exists to establish such people did exist outside of the bible and during the times recorded in scripture. Look up keyword "biblical archaeology."

try and use the keyword "mickey mouse". you will get millions of hit, so does this not in the same way prove that mickey mouse is real. This is the fallacy of appeal to common practice.

Quote:Did I say you were a fan? No, I said "you're little more than a hardcore Fox News fan." Bit of a difference there, but maybe I'm being to harsh to Fox News fans... I'm pretty sure you missed the point, seeing as how you completely misread the statement (maybe you WORK for Fox News?).

to say "youre little different than "x"" is saying "you are like x". You are a little more than a fucking retard.

Quote:OK, so what evidence can you point me towards?

http://www.christianism.com would be a good place to start. work your way from there.

Quote:Surely you're not resting your entire argument on the simple fact that God's plan/prophecy was known and co-opted before it was fulfilled are you? That whole argument is about as ridiculous as saying the plan for a NWO isn't real because it's been talked about before in fictional books and movies for several decades now. Where's the logic in that?

as opposed to Gods plan was counterfitted by the devil 100's of times before it actually "came to be" (supposedly). Yeah i can see how that makes so much more sense.

Quote:Again, you can't understand basic logic; Christians were faithful BEFORE Constantine co-opted Christianity, which contradicts the premise you hold as I understand it, that Constantine commissioned "MEN" to create the bible or NT more specifically. If you believe that, you're historically illiterate and you don't need to believe the bible to know this.

I cant understand basic logic? you are really on the roll with objectivity here. Sure christians where faithfull before. faithfull pagans. CHristiandom was a cration of several older treaditions avaible to pick from. So yes, they where "christians" in the sense that they practiced something similar to what BECAME christianity, this is a historical fact and if you dont like it. thats your problem entirely.

Quote:Facts are never wrong, that's why they are facts.

so why do you say it as a fact that i read dan brown etc??

Quote:Regardless of what books you have or haven't read (although it's dubious now you would even grasp the content if you did judging by the pattern of your misinterpretation of simple statements and flawed thinking)

incredible, you have so far provided NO info what so ever, but a lot of ad hominem and here we go again.

Quote:you're pushing the same tripe pushed by Brown, J. Maxwell, Icke, Zeitgeist, some Masons, Satanists, atheists, and other garden variety fools.

i.e anyone who dont belive the fairytales that you belive in are fools. right?

Quote: Also, there was nothing to rebut in your post that followed mine, all you said was that my explanation "is wrong, and bad speculation and philosophy, thats why" based on your emotional response triggered by association with other arguments which you are trying to conform my argument into (just blame it all on Satan). You're confusing yourself and need to start applying some logic.

then show me the way christian, be the good example of your man god. Dont allow me to be this confused educate me and draw me towards truth with good.

Quote:Like I said, you're trying to take my explanation and conform it into an oversimplified explanation you're already familiar with so as to make the cognitive dissonance you're having go byebye, rrrrrriiiiiiiiiight?

if it is over simplified, why is that the case? so far you have only proven me correctly, but in the way you religious people always do. Add a lot of useless information and words en mass to it, to make it sound very intellectually demanding, when in fact it boils down to the same thing. The devil counterfitted Gods plan in advance, thus all the saviour archetypes before Jesus, prove me wrong.

Quote:Kinda like a Fox News Fan does when you try to tell them that Bush is more liberal than Clinton and all they can do is call you a democrat. YOU are the one saying Satan did it, I didn't even once mention Satan in my original post. Again, STOP CONFUSING YOURSELF. And what proof do you have for your assertions that the New Testament (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here and assuming you're not so silly as to include the Old Testament) was completely fabricated? If you're hanging everything on the theory that Constantine and his henchmen masterminded the whole thing, well you are mentally crippled, to put it nicely.

im mentally crippled? do you have more in there that needs to get out before you can debate an, and as an adult?
you dont have to mention satan, because i have read the appologetic stories over and over and thats what it boils down to. Never mind all the flowery words, what does it actually say.


Quote:And yet in the same breath you'll have me believe that YOUR unfounded, hollow, flimsy, flawed interpretation (made from a lack of consideration of materials and info I have brought up, I might add) is true?

unfounded, hollow, flimsy, flawed ??? how old are you, 8?

Quote:I've never seen anyone so smug in my life.

thats because youre not looking in the right place, look here
Quote:http://www.hickorymanor.biz/French-Curved-Mirror-7133F-.gif

Quote:And who the hell said this stuff was my 'personal pet interpretation'? There's been books written on the ideas I laid out going back over a 100 years ago! See, you really ARE ignorant on this subject. It makes perfect sense, only the most ignorant people can be so cocksure of themselves and come off as complete smug snobs to those who actually do their homework.

do their homework?!, with people who write what they allready wanted to hear, or expected to. How many critics of these stories did you concider while studying, be honest!


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-08-2007

Quote:I used it as an example of this new movement being pushed to discredit Jesus on any possible grounds, many times self-contradicted.."He's a myth,no no okay, He was real, but he wasn't who he said he was...wait no, yeah ok, wait yeah he was who he said he was but he left 'secret doctrines' behind, oh yeah and he left an heir too, yeah that's the ticket." The Bible is full of the faithless and nonbelievers, even when Jesus was in front of them performing miracles, so you're nothing special for calling your Creator a fraud.

you are confusing an old book full of wrong information, lies, old legends poorly retold with the creator, i think you are the one who have problems here to be honest.

Quote:I have trouble believing that you've spent years studying this topic and not once have seen a single piece of objective evidence?

really? i find it no more odd than Bush being unable to speak truely when confronted with his wrong doings and conspiring freinds. The same thing when i ask a christian about the reality of christ or a muslim about mohammad. There are so many emotions, hopes, dreams and feelings tied up to this whole thing that honesty cannot thrive there at all.

Quote:Maybe you don't count secular accounts of Christ and Christians from multiple sources as holding any weight, but I sure do.

what sources might those be?

Quote: If you can't realy on secular accounts of things, than how do you know ANYTHING about history you weren't there to see first hand (even then you would need to interpret what it was you saw)? You've painted yourself into a corner on this one.

no far from it, you still need to asnwer the question right above.

Quote:Rather than point you to any single book, try typing 'Historicity of Jesus' into an engine maybe on amazon and pick one of the several books out there on this subject, some are better than others of course. Are there also tons of books of "the myth of Jesus" out there? of course! but the thing with establishing facts is that all you need is one proof to kill a thousand lies.

and so far i havent seen that one proof, none, zero, nada, ingenting, nothing!


Quote:I know your type of course. Sin, yeah, you don't know what sin is in the context I'm speaking of? You hate the only One promised to provide an escape from the bonds of death, your Creator.

you are confusing an old book full of wrong information, lies, old legends poorly retold with the creator, i think you are the one who are confused here to be honest.

Quote: You bend logic to somehow excuse yourself from acknowledging him so you don't have to feel guilty for sinning, because it's easier to submit to sin and you don't have to be a strong person and say no to that smokin hot babe whose all over you like I do almost daily.

lol yeah right. you really dont know me!

Quote: In the end avoiding sin is right, not just because God said so, but because if you study the ramifications of sin, it breaks down society and breeds corruption, violence, death. The wages of sin are death, not just of the flesh, but of the spirit. Laws don't just govern the seen world, but the unseen world too.

i agree, so where do i fit into all this, are you saying that im a drunkard whore?



Quote:Try starting with the only scripture backed up with fulfilled prophecies (hundreds of them)

nostradamus? oh thats right you dont acknowledge his "prophecies" because they are based on fancyfull modern translation right? It is the same thing with the prophecies of any religious book. You can try and tell a beliver of any such book that they are seeing in the text what they wish to see, till the cows come home and it doesnt make an iota of difference to them. Because to a follower of nostradamus, his "prophecies" are as real as the biblical ones are to you. that however is not evidence of anything, but the fat that religious people tend to see in their books what they wants.

Quote:with history, archeology, science, linguistics, the Mazzaroth, etc. the written Word of God, the Bible. The list below only shows how many times man has failed to create a true Word inspired by God, serving only to highlight the accuracy and dependability of the Bible. The only doctrine that has had any amount of influence comparable to Judaic-Christian doctrine is the Quran, and that's because it was written AFTER the NT, and therefore would be easier to hijack as the nearly complete picture of God's work would have been more clearly understood (I say nearly because there are still areas of the bible which will not be fully understood until prophecy is fulfilled in the future).

ok if thats how you feel =/

Quote: And Islam was fabricated by the Vatican, but that's a whole other topic, too huge for me to get into.

i tooks this on for size, the claim i mean. And i found it to be something propagated by protestant conspiracy fringe nuts, 100% based on wishfull interpretation and a supposed former jesuit priest. If everything you have, is backed up in the same way this claim is, you really have nothing. Im not defending Islam here mind you, but i found this particular claim interresting and found it to be a conspiracy lie properbly made to demonise the vatican and islam in the same breath.

Quote:But again, numerous counterfeits or imitations of a truth does not make that truth cease to exist. Your logic is horrendously flawed.

no yours are, now, your turn to say it. When you say counterfits, what are we talking about exactly?

Quote:Again this message isn't really for the person it's addressed to, but rather for those with some truth left in them.

no relgious mind would know truth if it came and bit them in the ass for attention. The bible is like all other religious books, mens take on things theyr didnt quite undestand but stood victem to. lilke nature.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-08-2007

btw. speaking of lack of logic. You keep insisting that out of something that you openly admit was full of err, came something that was universally true to all.

Please explain what kind of logic i have to use to reach such a conclusion when experimentation next to always shows that out of something errornious, comes something similar. Out of mutated cells doesnt come healthy ones. If the foundation of the house im building is utter shite, i can keep on erecting houses on that foundation but i will never get it right, because the foundation itself is the problem. But not in the world of the Bible apparently, so please educate me, what kind of logic that has not yet been defined by science in any way, do i have to use, to completely overlook the obvious to come to the conclution that the bible is not a piece of shit litterature that should be found on the shelfes next to the writings of manson.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - aux - 09-11-2007

Quote:in fact i did. ASTRO theology. so much for you doing your "homework", when you didnt know that those two are the same thing. The worship of celestial bodies.

No, it's not quite the same thing, not all heavenly/celestial bodies are stars or our sun. Don't take my word, look it up. The bible also specifically states NOT to worship the sun, moon, or hosts of heaven, which alone disproves the idea that the bible condones this or is synonymous with 'astrotheology.' This should not be confused with Christ being referred to as the "Sun of Righteousness" or self-described "Morning Star" (i.e. the Star of Bethlehem, or Balaam's Star Prophecy, not to be confused with "son of the Morning" which is someone completely different) as opposed to a Sun of gas and fire (actually I lean more to an electric sun, but that's not relevant to the discussion), which again supports the fulfillment of the Mazzaroth while making distinction from the ignorant theories of Maxwell and others.

Quote:are we getting to something substantial soon, or is ad hominem good enough for you?

Yes, that is just completely foolish. No exageration necessary. It would be ad hominem if it wasn't true or relevant. The whole argument, technically, is over based on this statement alone, as much as you would like to downplay it.


Quote:me: Even the Minimalist's view of the bible isn't that absurd. Now you're implying that the antire field of biblical archaeology is "made up entirely."

you: thats called a strawman this. The reality of biblical "archaeology" is that all too often it is based on wishfull thinking and interpretation. Remember when these bible "scholars" found noahs ark? what a scam!

That's not a strawman, it would be if I made your argument for you. Your argument is that there are no historical, non-biblical sources validating any biblical events. It's an extremely radical stance. On the other hand, you just made a strawman argument with your Ark example and earlier with the 'blame everything on Satan' argument you tried to foist on me. Nice try.

Quote:show me the data. show me the sources for this claim, or where to look for it. because great works like

Lewy, Hildegard, "Origin and Significance of the Magen Dawid: A Comparative Study in the Ancient Religions of Jerusalem and Mecca," Archiv Orientalni 18 (1950): 330-65.

the incredible works of Ove von Spaeth on Moses. His life long study was concluded only a couple of years ago, so this is not mainstream yet, however you can read a little about it here.
http://www.moses-egypt.net/book-series/moses_survey_en.asp

tell me that they are fictional, but bare some resemblence to royalty at the time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tel Dan Stele confirms the "House of David" and other biblical related subjects:
http://www.nelc.ucla.edu/Faculty/Schniedew...l_Dan_Stela.pdf

Good paper because it even breaks down the fallaceous arguments of the naysayers who will deny anything that confirms the bible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moabite Stone confirms events told in Old Testament in detail
http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-386727/Moabite-Stone
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Egyptian archaeological corroboration of historical Israel:
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/merneptah-stele-faq.htm

"The Merneptah Stele is significant to biblical archaeologists because it is the earliest extra-biblical reference to the nation of Israel yet to be discovered. The mention of Israel is very short; it simply says, “Israel is laid waste, its seed is not.” Nevertheless, despite its brevity, the reference is very telling. It indicates that at the time the inscription was engraved, the nation of Israel was significant enough to be included by name among the other major city-states which were defeated by Merneptah in the late 13th century B.C. This implies that Israel was a major player in the region during the late 13th century, serving to corroborate to a degree the biblical narrative. "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shishak's Military Campaign in Israel Confirmed
http://www.jewishhistory.com/jh.php?id=Egy...litary_campaign

"At the Karnak temple of the god Amun in Thebes, however, Shishak (Shoshenq I) left a vast triumphal relief–possibly unfinished–to celebrate his military campaign that brought to Egypt loot from Solomon's Temple. The Amun temple relief lists many towns in Palestine and gives both more and less information about this Egyptian military campaign than do the Biblical accounts. Damage to several sections of the hieroglyphic list regrettably robs us of the mention of a number of place-names, particularly in Judah, while, on the other hand, the list includes many places in Israel, showing that Shishak also brought Jeroboam, king of Israel, to heel, a point that did not interest the Jerusalem-based Biblical annalists."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronicles of Nebuchadnezzar, details of Jerusalem's sacking and temple's destruction. Here's a snippet
which confirms biblical accounting of people, places and times:

http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/explore/...th_part_of.aspx

British Museum Excerpt

Cuneiform tablet with part of the Babylonian Chronicle (605-594 BC)

Nebuchadnezzar II's campaigns in the west

This tablet is one of a series that summarizes the principal events of each year from 747 BC to at least 280 BC. Each entry is separated by a horizontal line and begins with a reference to the year of reign of the king in question.

Following the defeat of the Assyrians (as described in the Chronicle for 616-609 BC), the Egyptians became the greatest threat to the Babylonians. [...] Over the next few years he kept his control over Syria and extended it into Palestine. In 601 BC he marched to Egypt, but withdrew on meeting the Egyptian army. After re-equipping his army, Nebuchadnezzar marched to Syria in 599 BC. He marched westwards again, in December 598 BC, as Jehoiakim, the king of Judah, had ceased to pay tribute. Nebuchadnezzar's army besieged Jerusalem and captured it on 15/16th March 597 BC. The new king of Judah, Jehoiachin, was captured and carried off to Babylon. A series of expeditions to Syria brings this Chronicle to an end in 594 BC. "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I could easily bombard this board with extrabiblical evidences for Christ, King Herod and Pontius Pilate
but most of us have already heard of most of them (Zeitgeist even lists some sources, however dismisses them because they were not written by contemporaries even though Josephus had the corroborating words of 2 witnesses. If that's the standard, almost everything we know about history should be dismissed because there is even less evidence for many historical figures we would never consider to be a myth.), so rather I would point out a nicely researched and balanced survey of the materials on Jesus as an historical figure in a book, "Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence" at http://tinyurl.com/28jux3 where the diversity of secular accounts are each weighed and dismissed or accepted as bearing valid evidence, acceptable in a court of law even today. Note however that the overwhelming majority of historians do not question Jesus as an historical figure; to a secular mind at least, this should help overcome some doubts.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

How about the famous expeditions of historian Sir William Ramsey, who originally set out to disprove the accounts of Luke in Acts and Gospel of Luke? Here's a good summary on the subject:

http://www.bibleevidences.com/archeology.htm

Bible critics have often been embarrassed by discoveries that collaborated Bible accounts they had previously deemed to be myth, such as the existence of the Hittites, King David, and Pontius Pilate, just to name a few. The noted Jewish archeologist Nelson Glueck summed it up very well:

It may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a single biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible1.

When compared against secular accounts of history, the Bible always demonstrates amazing superiority. The noted biblical scholar R.D. Wilson, who was fluent in 45 ancient languages and dialects, meticulously analyzed 29 kings from 10 different nations, each of which had corroborating archeological artifacts. Each king was mentioned in the Bible as well as documented by secular historians, thus offering a means of comparison. Wilson showed that the names as recorded in the Bible matched the artifacts perfectly, down to the last jot and tittle! The Bible was also completely accurate in its chronological order of the kings. On the other hand, Wilson showed that the secular accounts were often inaccurate and unreliable. Famous historians such as the Librarian of Alexandria, Ptolemy, and Herodotus failed to document the names correctly, almost always misspelling their names. In many cases the names were barely recognizable when compared to its respective artifact or monument, and sometimes required other evidence to extrapolate the reference2.

I believe one of the more overwhelming testimonies regarding the depth of archeological evidence for the New Testament is in the account of the famous historian and archeologist Sir William Ramsay. Ramsay was very skeptical of the accuracy of the New Testament, and he ventured to Asia minor over a century ago to refute its historicity. He especially took interest in Luke's accounts in the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts, which contained numerous geographical and historic references. Dig after dig the evidence without fail supported Luke's accounts. Governors mentioned by Luke that many historians never believe existed were confirmed by the evidence excavated by Ramsay's archeological team. Without a single error, Luke was accurate in naming 32 countries, 54 cities, and 9 islands. Ramsay became so overwhelmed with the evidence he eventually converted to Christianity. Ramsay finally had this to say:

I began with a mind unfavorable to it...but more recently I found myself brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth3.

Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians4.

The classical historian A.N. Sherwin-White collaborates Ramsay's work regarding the Book of Acts:

Any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted5.

Discoveries ranging from evidence for the Tower of Babel, to Exodus, to the Walls of Jericho, all the way to the tombs of contemporaries of St. Paul, have greatly enhanced the believability of the Bible. Though this vast archeological evidence does not prove God wrote the Bible, it surely must compel the honest skeptic to at least acknowledge its historical veracity. For the believer its yet another reassuring testimony to the reliability of the Bible. In the words of the University of Yale archeologist Millar Burrows:

...Archeological work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of the scriptural record. More than one archeologist has found respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in Palestine6.
---------------------------------------------------------
From http://www.bible.ca/eo/ca/ca_02.htm

II. THE EVIDENCE FOR A HISTORICAL JESUS

A. AMONG "PAGAN" SOURCES...
1. THALLUS (a Samaritan historian, ca. 52 A.D.)
a. Wrote attempting to give a natural explanation for the
darkness which occurred at the crucifixion of Jesus
b. Note carefully:
1) He did not deny the existence of Jesus
2) But only tried to explain away the strange circumstances
surrounding His death
2. LETTER OF MARA-SERAPION (written to his son, ca. 73 A.D.)
a. He tells of the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras, and of Jesus
b. "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise
king?...Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in
the teaching which he had given."
3. CORNELIUS TACITUS (Roman historian, ca. 112 A.D.)
a. Writes of Jesus in his ANNALS
b. "Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by
Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of
Tiberias."
4. PLINY THE YOUNGER
a. Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, ca. 112 A.D.
b. Wrote to the emperor Trajan about Christians and their
devotion to Christ
5. SEUTONIUS (Court official and annalist under Hadrian, 120 A.D.)
a. "As the Jews were making constant disturbance at the
instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."
b. Luke makes reference to this same expulsion in Ac 18:1-2

B. AMONG "JEWISH" SOURCES...
1. THE TALMUD
a. Consists of two separate books dealing with Jewish law,
written during the period from 100 A.D. to 500 A.D.
b. Speaks frequently of Jesus of Nazareth...
1) In unfriendly terms, of course
2) But never disputing his status as a historical figure
2. FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS
a. A Jewish general turned Roman historian, born 37 A.D.
b. Makes several references to Jesus in his History Of The Jews
c. E.g., "...and brought before it the brother of Jesus, the
so-called Christ, whose name was James."
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I could go on with this but why beat a dead horse?

Quote:try and use the keyword "mickey mouse". you will get millions of hit, so does this not in the same way prove that mickey mouse is real. This is the fallacy of appeal to common practice.

Is this supposed to be an attempt at indignant sarcasm? I mentioned searching for evidence of something's existence from a valid scientific field while you're bringing up known fictional characters? It's simply breath taking at how you just dumb everything down to a pitiful mockery which actually makes you look bad. I guess it's easier than actually looking at the evidence. So now you're basically saying anything can be falsified simply because things that we know are fake have tons of info about them. This is so stupid I'm at a loss for words. That might literally be the stupidest thing I've ever heard, ever! BTW, I did a search for mickeymouse, and couldn't find a single person saying that mickey mouse was a real person, so even on your own test you failed to prove anything.

Quote:to say "youre little different than "x"" is saying "you are like x". You are a little more than a fucking retard.

No, for you're information, I don't like retards (that's the level of response I received from you and now you're calling ME retarded??? This is too rich.)


Quote:http://www.christianism.com would be a good place to start. work your way from there.

Yes, you already posted that site earlier and as long as I've been on that site, I haven't seen anything I'm not familiar with already for the last 4-5 years now. I couldn't believe that they are actualyl trying to use guilt by association as in the nazi/hitler pages. Christ as Sun God is already played out and so cliche by now it's hilarious seeing people like you think you've discovered the Holy Grail or something when you discuss it.

Quote:as opposed to Gods plan was counterfitted by the devil 100's of times before it actually "came to be" (supposedly). Yeah i can see how that makes so much more sense.

Well when you phrase it like that, yeah it does sound kinda silly, but that's just it, YOU'RE the one using that line, not me. This is a typical pattern for people in denial of reality, you pervert something into something else you can handle so as to minimize critical thinking (another strawman attempt which you hypocritically charge me with doing). You still have not made a single valid criticism of my original post on this thread, which only leads me to believe you have none, but hey at least you got to attack me and obfuscate the issue a few times. Congrats.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - aux - 09-11-2007

Quote:I cant understand basic logic? you are really on the roll with objectivity here. Sure christians where faithfull before. faithfull pagans. CHristiandom was a cration of several older treaditions avaible to pick from. So yes, they where "christians" in the sense that they practiced something similar to what BECAME christianity, this is a historical fact and if you dont like it. thats your problem entirely. [/quotes]

Well, I can agree that some people took the Christian doctrine (as per Textus Receptus) and merged it with their favorite cult of the day, but those were fringe groups and quickly died off, minus the most successful cult, the Roman Catholic Church, once they were able to more carefully fomulate a clever imitation after the fact. However, just to muddy the waters, such heretical doctrines were reintroduced by the Roman Church several centuries later as I described before and again recently with the new age movement (which you unwittingly soak up) which is taking off like never before because of the internet and people's historical illiteracy (thanks to the dumbing down of education and rise of propaganda). As truth becomes widely accessible, false teachings will explode on the scene too, it happened during the time of the Gutenberg press and it's happening again in the age of the internet. This is the hand of the ones behind the "Novus Ordo Seclorum", a phrase taken from Virgil's 'magnus ab integro seclorum nascitur ordo' or "the great series of ages begins anew." Who was Virgil? A Roman poet and author who wrote "Aeneid," which became the Roman Empire's national epic; he was considered a prophet by the Romans, died aroun 20BC. Other phrases he coined, like "Annuit Coeptis," also grace the reverse side of the dollar bill.

This failure to endure sound doctrine and turn unto fables with itching ears, and the falling away (before the return) of course is foretold in the bible. This was all fordained, the NWO is behind it and you're playing the part perfectly. Good drone.

[quote]so why do you say it as a fact that i read dan brown etc??

Because Dan Brown's name has now become a meme and was used as such. It's like when people say to 'google' something, you know they mean search on the net, or how people used to call all vacuums as Hoovers. Get it?

Quote:incredible, you have so far provided NO info what so ever, but a lot of ad hominem and here we go again.

It's not ad hominem if it's true. There is a distinct pattern emerging of you obfuscating things I said and bringing up thing I didn't say and arguing against phantoms of your imagination. Believe me I wish you weren't doing it.

Quote:i.e anyone who dont belive the fairytales that you belive in are fools. right?

Nope. I'm laying all the cards on the table and you have yet to trump me with anything hard. Actually I've barely scratched the surface, but so far you have nothing but fables and hysterical graspings of the imagination so this will be over shortly.

Quote: then show me the way christian, be the good example of your man god. Dont allow me to be this confused educate me and draw me towards truth with good.

No need to be patronizing. And I'm nowhere near Christ. Not even Job. I'm more like one of the thieves next to Christ on the cross or worse. I'm doing everything I can though to provide people with the eyes ready for the truth to see the path God showed me. I can't un-confuse you, but I've already given you some massive leads on where to look and some background, but I guess sometimes people can't accept such powerful truths set right out in the open (in this case up in the sky) or under their noses (the bible) they have to make it some huge exciting mystery..like cults do with all their secret proceedings and doctrines etc (Freemasonry).. but when you think about it, wouldn't a God who passionately wants to keep you do exactly that?

Quote:if it is over simplified, why is that the case? so far you have only proven me correctly, but in the way you religious people always do. Add a lot of useless information and words en mass to it, to make it sound very intellectually demanding, when in fact it boils down to the same thing. The devil counterfitted Gods plan in advance, thus all the saviour archetypes before Jesus, prove me wrong.

I don't blame every sin or evil on Satan, you seem to think I do though. I stick with the biblical doctrines, and that's not one of them. Frankly, I thought I laid out the case quite concisely, almost too.

You actually have a tougher time trying to explain how so many cultures, so diverse and spread over time and space and language, could all have such a similar cult mythos. I've already given an explanation on this, it goes back to Enoch through Noah (Noah's flood is also retold all over the ancient world just as the saviour story was, with slight deviations from the account given to the nation of Israel) and then spread via the confusion of tongues at the Tower of Babel with some deviation from the original. BTW, Masons (I think it was Pike) claim their hand signals go all the way back to the Tower of Babel as a form of communication that arose when the language was split; not sure I believe that tho. Also, it's interesting that the EU Parliment is supposed to be the unfinished Tower of Babel.

Many experts of Philology like Max Muller came to conclude that indeed there was likely once a common language from which all languages sprung from:

Max F. Muller (1823-1900) was one of the world’s foremost comparative philologists, i.e., one who studies ancient languages and observes their similarities and differences. He taught at Oxford University. In his book, Science of Language, the celebrated professor wrote:

“We have examined all possible forms which language can assume, and we now ask, can we reconcile with these three distinct forms, the radical, the terminational, the inflectional, the admission of one common origin of human speech? I answer decidedly, Yes” (quoted by Free, pp. 46-47).

[...]

In his respected two-volume work on Genesis, Dutch scholar G. Ch. Aalders has this comment:


“A famous Assyriologist made the amazing discovery that there is a clear relationship between the languages of some of the native people in Central and South America and some of the Islands, on the one hand, and the ancient Sumerian [the oldest known language] and Egyptian languages, on the other. This scholar, who formerly had considered the account in Genesis 11:1-9 to be no more than a myth, came to the conclusion that the biblical narrative is more credible than had been supposed” (p. 254).

Dr. Harold Stigers has an interesting summary of this matter.


“Though there are countless languages and dialects [approximately 3,000 currently known], yet ultimate derivation from a parent language is revealed through the continuing studies being made across the boundaries of the major language families. Common features of syntax and vocabulary, which are similar enough, yet different enough not to be labeled borrowings, indicate that one must posit a common ancestor” (p. 130).

Interestingly, secular journalists recently discussed the work of certain linguistic scientists, who, using computers to compare languages, are speculating that there may indeed be a mother tongue, which they are calling “proto-World.” One writer went so far as to say:


“Maybe the Bible is right, and there really was a Tower of Babel. Or at least, maybe there really was once a single human language, before we were all cursed with a confusion of tongues” (Dyer).

http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/r...gend_or_history
-------------------------------------------------------------------

IAO (Darpa) actually has a program which seeks using advanced software and hardware to essential bridge the language barrier.

"Human Language Technology: TIDES, EARS, Babylon"

http://www.arpa.mil/DARPATech2002/presenta...eches/WAYNE.pdf

These are the same people that created the 'net'
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, evidence of the Tower base on the plain of Shinar as described in scripture:

Tower of Babel-Ancient Babylon Ruins Inscription

Modern day Tower of Babel ruins (on the outskirts of ancient Babylon-current day Iraq) are currently 150 feet above the plain with a circumference of 2300 feet. "The Greeks used the word Borsippa, which means Tongue-tower." 1

Inscription of King Nebuchadnezzar on Tower of Babel (Borsippa) ruins reads...

http://www.bibleprobe.com/babel.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:im mentally crippled? do you have more in there that needs to get out before you can debate an, and as an adult?
you dont have to mention satan, because i have read the appologetic stories over and over and thats what it boils down to. Never mind all the flowery words, what does it actually say.

I don't blame every evil deed and sin on Satan and neither does the Bible. You should give yourself more credit and try reading the Bible (all of it) before you hang your opinion of the Bible on what apologetics have to say. In fact one of the most neglected areas of the bible is actually the Mazzaroth, and yet it's completely grounded in the Bible, for instance the book of Revelations makes great use of signs in the star systems and star names as recorded from ancient sources.


Quote:unfounded, hollow, flimsy, flawed ??? how old are you, 8?


Even an 8 year old can school an old fool.


Quote:http://www.hickorymanor.biz/French-Curved-Mirror-7133F-.gif

Of course even the old fool must have some hope left for him.


Quote:do their homework?!, with people who write what they allready wanted to hear, or expected to. How many critics of these stories did you concider while studying, be honest!

So first I'm damned when you thought the ideas I laid out where my own, then when you find they're not, I'm damned anyways. See that, that's why I know people like you are just about hopeless, because you'll fight both sides against the middle just to stay in denial. It's sad.

And once again you got the situation completely wrong. I grew up in a home that never went to church (I still don't) and never read the bible or emphasized it. I was atheist, agnostic, then by late teens-early 20s I was gnostic reading crap like Robert Anton Wilson, Crowley, Jung, Israel Regardie, Hoffman's LSD book, Baghavad Gita, Ouspenski, philosophies, occult histories, converging technologies, man's future, thousands of articles then 9/11 happened and I woke up when I saw the IAO logo (all seeing eye in pyramid radiating the earth) on FOX NEWS with some dude freaking out (2002) searched it, found ConspiracyArchive.com (which published 2 essays by myself there in 2005) and other places, got into information, watched lots of C-SPAN and they interviewed Mike Rivero (whatreallyhappened.com) which linked to alex, leading me to bohemian club/franklin coverup,etc and learned about the move for global gov't/police state and that the groups planning it were into the crap I had been reading about; found places like this, watched docs that began to shift my thinking about the bible, and been studying ever since, both sides still today, and only the bible has been telling it like it is and is to come from all sorts of angles. BTW, I'm the reason alex took down the original message board back in 2004 when I made a devestaing post linking alex through family to the oil biz and masonry (even Rothschild mentioned alex's oil ties a couple times in that recent interview, to which alex couldn't respond to or deny, creating a false dialectic: who you gonna trust, alex or rothschild?) and the next day he announced on the radio he had to shut down the board because it had been 'infiltrated' but then later changing the story to because it had decended into a 'pickup bar' which is completely absurd if anyone here was ever on there. So yeah, I been around and gone through all the ideas and theories in this 'movement' including the hype pushed in 'the god who wasn't there' and the gnostic gospels and this recent wave of attacks on Christ and more of it than I care to remember. I can't believe people fall for all the frauds out there, but then I remember how far gone people are when I visit places like this every now and again.

Here's a bizarre notion, hows about trying to give Yahweh the benefit of the doubt for once and see what happens? I mean he IS God afterall, maybe he really can preserve his Word?

Last thing, comparing Nostradamus with the precision of so many biblical prophecies is contemptable. For just one example, King Cyrus was prophesied before his birth, by name with a brief biography of his life as a conqueror given 150 years before his birth in the book of Isaiah, so that when Daniel presented it to him when he conquered Babylon in the manner that the bible spelled out, he knew it was him (obviously) and let the Jews go back to Israel and rebuild the temple. That's a matter of secular history. Alexander the Great also recognised himself in biblical prophecy.

http://bible-prophecy.net/articles/a2pws.htm

Something tells me I'm wasting my time..


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-12-2007

Quote:No, it's not quite the same thing, not all heavenly/celestial bodies are stars or our sun. Don't take my word, look it up.

I have done that

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary -

Astrotheology

\As`tro*the*ol"o*gy\, n. [Astro- + theology.] Theology founded on observation or knowledge of the celestial bodies. --Derham.

So i was right in my claim.

Quote:The bible also specifically states NOT to worship the sun, moon, or hosts of heaven, which alone disproves the idea that the bible condones this or is synonymous with 'astrotheology.'

no because several parts of it are filled with the opposite, so you just pick and chose what you want to be more true, which is the case with all religious writings.

Quote:This should not be confused with Christ being referred to as the "Sun of Righteousness" or self-described "Morning Star" (i.e. the Star of Bethlehem, or Balaam's Star Prophecy, not to be confused with "son of the Morning" which is someone completely different) as opposed to a Sun of gas and fire (actually I lean more to an electric sun, but that's not relevant to the discussion), which again supports the fulfillment of the Mazzaroth while making distinction from the ignorant theories of Maxwell and others.

what maxwell and others say is that this shows a continuation from earlyer traditions, who used the same terms for the same thing. This is just more evidence against the Bible and the religions of christianity and judaism.

Quote:Yes, that is just completely foolish. No exageration necessary. It would be ad hominem if it wasn't true or relevant.

which it wasnt, but merely an expression of you disagreeing with my point of view, thus i must be a retard, right? THe bible is all made up and i wish you the best of luck trying to prove otherwise, in 1000 years that things has lived on faith alone. Untill real scholars (not maxwell) took a good look at it, and found it to be sourced from so many different scriptures and languages that its not even funny.

Quote:The whole argument, technically, is over based on this statement alone, as much as you would like to downplay it.

im not trying to downplay it at all. ill say it out loud again THE BIBLE IS MADE UP! there you have it.


Quote: me: Even the Minimalist's view of the bible isn't that absurd. Now you're implying that the antire field of biblical archaeology is "made up entirely."

you: thats called a strawman this. The reality of biblical "archaeology" is that all too often it is based on wishfull thinking and interpretation. Remember when these bible "scholars" found noahs ark? what a scam!

Quote:That's not a strawman, it would be if I made your argument for you.

yeah like you did right here "Now you're implying that the antire field of biblical archaeology is "made up entirely." But you are right, thats what i think, only i dont imply it, i say it out loud.

Quote:Your argument is that there are no historical, non-biblical sources validating any biblical events.

that is another strawman. THere are things to be found in the bible that record to some extend, historical events. In fact, the Bible is the same kind of work of the likes of the holy blood holy grail writers. They take something supposed to be true, and continue to make the story from what they have or know. It is the same thing with the bible, they just ran along with influences, ideas and local stories, so obviously in this hodgepodge you will be able to find snippets. but snippets doesnt cut it for truth telling now does it?

what you fail to understand is that a whole writing can be made up, even if it contains things that are not. But if the overall sumj of things are untrue, or made up, the whole things is made up, or catagorised as fiction.

holy blood holy grail being one such example.

Quote:It's an extremely radical stance. On the other hand, you just made a strawman argument with your Ark example and earlier with the 'blame everything on Satan' argument you tried to foist on me. Nice try.

yes because it worked. You bring up the "biblical aercheology", and i run with it and telly ou that i know full well of this "science" and then i go on to bring you the example of the fraudulent find of noahs ark. Now strawman here.

Quote:Tel Dan Stele confirms the "House of David" and other biblical related subjects:
http://www.nelc.ucla.edu/Faculty/Schniedew...l_Dan_Stela.pdf

Good paper because it even breaks down the fallaceous arguments of the naysayers who will deny anything that confirms the bible.

nice try, however real scholars are not in agreement over the phrase "house of david" On this subject, Paul Davies writes:

But let’s leave this wishful thinking and return to the critical six letters, BYTDWD, to see what they really might mean. Admittedly there are two verbal elements here, of which the first is beth, house. But the probability is that the second element completes a place-name, such as Beth Lehem (House of Bread) or Bethlehem (one word), as it is commonly written in Latin letters. It seems intrinsically more likely that a place-name composed with beth would be written as one word, rather than a phrase meaning “House of David,” referring to the dynasty of David. Such a place name could be Beth-dod (the w serving as rudimentary vowel, a so-called mater lectionis; the same last three letters are consistently used to spell the last syllable of the Philistine city of Ashdod) or Bethdaud (with a slightly different vowel pronunciation). All these place-names are quite reasonable suggestions...There are other possibilities...For example, in a contemporaneous inscription, the famous Mesha stele or Moabite stone,c the phrase ’R’L DWDH (‏אראל דודה‎) appears. The second word remains somewhat of a puzzle. Some scholars, though a minority, translate it “David” and regard it as the name of the founder of the ruling dynasty of Judah...But the final heh makes this meaning unlikely. The noun dawidum is also found in a cuneiform text from Mari (18th century B.C.E.), offering another possible clue, though the meaning of this term remains unclear. In the Bible DWD can mean “beloved” or “uncle,” and in one place (1 Samuel 2:14), it means “kettle.” So a number of ways of understanding DWD present themselves, most of them more plausible than translating “David.”

Quote:Moabite Stone confirms events told in Old Testament in detail
http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-386727/Moabite-Stone

There are significant differences. In the Bible it is Ahab, Omri's son, who conquers Moab, and the rebellion is against Ahab's son Jehoram. Further, in the Bible, it is not Chemosh who gives victory to Mesha but Jahweh who gives victory to Jehoram. Israel withdraws, according to the Book of Kings, only because they are disconcerted when they see Mesha sacrifice his son.

Thus if anything this confims my stand that the Bible is but a continuing tradition, and that it didnt even get its facts streight when written down. The same is evidence in the transition from the Bible to the Quran. They knew about the stories and some of them, but obviously couldnt remember them excactly as they had been told. So they rewrote the stories, and the same thing is the case with the Bible, just from older traditions, so you have still not put forth an iota of evidence for the bible.

Quote:Egyptian archaeological corroboration of historical Israel:
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/merneptah-stele-faq.htm

As the stela mentions just one line about Israel, it is difficult for scholars to draw a substantial amount of information about what "Israel" means in this stela. The stela does make clear that Israel, at this stage, refers to a people since a hieroglyphic determinative for "country" is absent regarding Israel.

Especially since hebrew and egyptian are nothing alike. So the phallacy here is to assume that "isreal" refers to our modern understanding of the same word. But christian scholars can accept such a bend of logic if it just "confirms" that which they want confirmed, i have seen this over and over, and not only with christians. Did you know the atomic bomb is found in the verdas? or that the moon landing was forseen in the Quran? apparently they are because that is what their followers keeps telling me and claim to have evidence for.

I simply cannot be bothered to answer every single link you pass when they are this biased. ALL of them bar none a subject to controversy. Things that are subject to controversy are rarely evidence of anything, but fuelling peoples oppinions. But i will take a few out that ihave spend time with , so i know them to be false.


Quote:Now I could easily bombard this board with extrabiblical evidences for Christ, King Herod and Pontius Pilate
but most of us have already heard of most of them (Zeitgeist even lists some sources, however dismisses them because they were not written by contemporaries even though Josephus had the corroborating words of 2 witnesses. If that's the standard, almost everything we know about history should be dismissed because there is even less evidence for many historical figures we would never consider to be a myth

yeah like mohammad. however, josephus wronte about several Jesus'es and atleast TWO later insertions by the church has been found in his works disqualifying it entirely.

Quote: Note however that the overwhelming majority of historians do not question Jesus as an historical figure; to a secular mind at least, this should help overcome some doubts.

there is one hell of a differnece believing that "A jesus" did excist, to "THE jesus" that you are talking about. But you are trying to connect the two, through people who are not here to defend their own position. A lot of historians belive in A jesus excisted and they BELIVE he might have been a rebel, other a healer, other belive both, others that he was the leaders of the essenes or a continuation of the prophet. Dont try and make it sound as if there is some sort of general agreement on a historical Jesus. There are not.

.That people acknowledge a yashua is not very difficult as it is a very common name in the area and was at the time. Its like having a prophet with the name john smith in england.

Quote:How about the famous expeditions of historian Sir William Ramsey, who originally set out to disprove the accounts of Luke in Acts and Gospel of Luke? Here's a good summary on the subject:

http://www.bibleevidences.com/archeology.htm

I actually read on with this, untill i hit this mark:

Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians4.is that something universally acknowledged. no it isnt, the above link is "cult material", flawed and wishfull.

Quote:II. THE EVIDENCE FOR A HISTORICAL JESUS

A. AMONG "PAGAN" SOURCES...
1. THALLUS (a Samaritan historian, ca. 52 A.D.)
a. Wrote attempting to give a natural explanation for the
darkness which occurred at the crucifixion of Jesus
b. Note carefully:
1) He did not deny the existence of Jesus
2) But only tried to explain away the strange circumstances
surrounding His death


No other author who mentions Thallus before Syncellus makes any mention of Thallus' supposed reference to the darkness. Some would expect Christians to make a great deal of such a reference on the part of a well-known chronographer and historian if it supported Christian belief. Africanus may here be in error or Thallus may have only put forth the idea that the darkness that Christians claimed occurred at the death of Jesus was a normal eclipse of the Sun, perhaps referring to the eclipse of the Sun that occurred in AD

Thallus, in a work now lost but referred to by Africanus in the third century, is alleged to have said that Jesus' death was accompanied by an earthquake and an unusual darkness that he, Thallus, according to Africanus, wrongly attributed to an eclipse of the sun. However . . . it is unclear when Thallus wrote his history or how reliable Africanus’s account of Thallus is. Some scholars believe that Thallus wrote as late as the second century and consequently could have obtained his ideas from Christian opinion of his time



Quote: 2. LETTER OF MARA-SERAPION (written to his son, ca. 73 A.D.)
a. He tells of the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras, and of Jesus
b. "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise
king?...Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in
the teaching which he had given."

i thought it was the romans who did it, or so does the NT say. Even if it is an authentic letter, Barker argues that it most likely refers to someone else, since the Jews had, in fact, killed other religions leaders, including the Essene Teacher of Righteousness. With no name given, this is not evidence, and even with a name given this came in so late that it bears no authority on the matter

Quote:3. CORNELIUS TACITUS (Roman historian, ca. 112 A.D.)
a. Writes of Jesus in his ANNALS
b. "Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by
Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of
Tiberias."

Tacitus failed to identify Jesus by name, but merely referred to a person put to death who went by the title of Christ.

Tacitus was an opponent of Christianity and therefore would have been inclined to repeat the Christian view of the day that Christianity was of recent vintage, given that the Roman government countenanced only ancient cults. (Wells, pp. 16-17)


Quote: 4. PLINY THE YOUNGER
a. Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, ca. 112 A.D.
b. Wrote to the emperor Trajan about Christians and their
devotion to Christ

and this proves what? that christians excists and are devout to their made up diety? i know that allready.

Quote:5. SEUTONIUS (Court official and annalist under Hadrian, 120 A.D.)
a. "As the Jews were making constant disturbance at the
instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."
b. Luke makes reference to this same expulsion in Ac 18:1-2

in which of his writings is this present? "Lives of Famous Whores"? , "Peri blasphemion"?

Quote:B. AMONG "JEWISH" SOURCES...
1. THE TALMUD
a. Consists of two separate books dealing with Jewish law,
written during the period from 100 A.D. to 500 A.D.
b. Speaks frequently of Jesus of Nazareth...
1) In unfriendly terms, of course
2) But never disputing his status as a historical figure

ofcourse it was important to the jews that he was a mere man, everyone said he was A GOD. So they downtone him to become a false prophet. Isnt that strange that an opposing religious gang would do that? However, these writings are if anything, not evidence of anything. You cant take one religious hodgepodge to defend another.

Quote:2. FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS
a. A Jewish general turned Roman historian, born 37 A.D.
b. Makes several references to Jesus in his History Of The Jews
c. E.g., "...and brought before it the brother of Jesus, the
so-called Christ, whose name was James."

he makes them to no less than 13 actually, and we know for a fact today that "c" is a later addition by the church. Unlucky for the church another manuscript surfaced that did NOT contain any single jesus, so everyone but the christians knew, that the church had falsified material to seel their crap.

Quote:I could go on with this but why beat a dead horse?

yes why do that. It is proven here beyond doubt that your whole case at best rest on speculative and wishfull interpretations of avaible data, leaving out data, and outright falsifications. This horse has been dead for 2000 years, and today it is as dead as ever.


Quote:Is this supposed to be an attempt at indignant sarcasm? I mentioned searching for evidence of something's existence from a valid scientific field while you're bringing up known fictional characters?

so are you, the jesus god. and so far i have yet to see this valid scientific field you are reffering to because bible aerchelogy obviously isnt it.

Quote:It's simply breath taking at how you just dumb everything down to a pitiful mockery which actually makes you look bad. I guess it's easier than actually looking at the evidence.

yes you would know wouldnt you. im learning from a master here.

Quote:So now you're basically saying anything can be falsified simply because things that we know are fake have tons of info about them.

no i did not say that go back and read it as many times over as you need. So here we have another strawman. you make a claim on my behalf and go out on a tangent answering your own premise.


Quote:No, for you're information, I don't like retards (that's the level of response I received from you and now you're calling ME retarded??? This is too rich.)

no that is not what i said, i said you are little more than a fucking retard, and according to you there is a difference between saying you are a fucking retard and you are "little more than" a fucking retard.

evidence:
Did I say you were a fan? No, I said "you're little more than a hardcore Fox News fan.

Quote:Yes, you already posted that site earlier and as long as I've been on that site, I haven't seen anything I'm not familiar with already for the last 4-5 years now.

That site is massive, so i know youre flat out lying. You skimmed a couple of pages on it, and left it.

Quote:I couldn't believe that they are actualyl trying to use guilt by association as in the nazi/hitler pages.

So are you saying that there where no concordances made between the roman church and the nazis? is that what youre saying?

Quote:Well when you phrase it like that, yeah it does sound kinda silly, but that's just it, YOU'RE the one using that line, not me.

but you admit that it IS CORRECT! so i was altso right about all you had to offer in this regard was to add loads of flowery words to it, to cover up how assenine it really is.

So first you tried to lie your way out of it, by saying that it was something i made up. Knowing that i HAVE done my homework atleast to some extend, now youre playing along, but thinks im simplifying it. You sir are RELIGIOUS! get well soon


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-12-2007

Quote:Well, I can agree that some people took the Christian doctrine (as per Textus Receptus) and merged it with their favorite cult of the day, but those were fringe groups and quickly died off, minus the most successful cult, the Roman Catholic Church, once they were able to more carefully fomulate a clever imitation after the fact. However, just to muddy the waters, such heretical doctrines were reintroduced by the Roman Church several centuries later as I described before and again recently with the new age movement (which you unwittingly soak up) which is taking off like never before because of the internet and people's historical illiteracy (thanks to the dumbing down of education and rise of propaganda). As truth becomes widely accessible, false teachings will explode on the scene too, it happened during the time of the Gutenberg press and it's happening again in the age of the internet. This is the hand of the ones behind the "Novus Ordo Seclorum", a phrase taken from Virgil's 'magnus ab integro seclorum nascitur ordo' or "the great series of ages begins anew." Who was Virgil? A Roman poet and author who wrote "Aeneid," which became the Roman Empire's national epic; he was considered a prophet by the Romans, died aroun 20BC. Other phrases he coined, like "Annuit Coeptis," also grace the reverse side of the dollar bill.

This failure to endure sound doctrine and turn unto fables with itching ears, and the falling away (before the return) of course is foretold in the bible. This was all fordained, the NWO is behind it and you're playing the part perfectly. Good drone.

You got it turned upside down. Christianity grew out of all these cults, and the church introduced a common doctrine that worked for them untill the advent of the printing press. Thats when protestantism as we percieve it today really took of. 98% of modern christianity came streight out of the catholic church. but again youre the one who belives that good houses can be built on poor foundations, not me, so it makes sense you would turn it upside down and try and twist the facts and go on to personal insults again to prove how right that you are.

Quote:Because Dan Brown's name has now become a meme and was used as such. It's like when people say to 'google' something, you know they mean search on the net, or how people used to call all vacuums as Hoovers. Get it?

so how am i to understand dan brown as a meme? what did you mean with saying what you said?

Quote:It's not ad hominem if it's true.

which it is, so its ad hominem. why the need for it, if you are so right?

Quote:There is a distinct pattern emerging of you obfuscating things I said and bringing up thing I didn't say and arguing against phantoms of your imagination. Believe me I wish you weren't doing it.

youre confused, that is what youre doing.

Quote:Nope. I'm laying all the cards on the table and you have yet to trump me with anything hard. Actually I've barely scratched the surface, but so far you have nothing but fables and hysterical graspings of the imagination so this will be over shortly.

indded it will. im still looking forward for you to post REAL evidence of your god book and god man.

Quote:No need to be patronizing. And I'm nowhere near Christ. Not even Job. I'm more like one of the thieves next to Christ on the cross or worse. I'm doing everything I can though to provide people with the eyes ready for the truth to see the path God showed me.

how can you b e anywhere near truth if you cannot even practice what you preach? you are just another religious hipocrate thats all. youre all talk, but where the walk?

Quote:I can't un-confuse you, but I've already given you some massive leads on where to look and some background, but I guess sometimes people can't accept such powerful truths set right out in the open (in this case up in the sky) or under their noses (the bible) they have to make it some huge exciting mystery

yeah like god men, and god books and god lands. yes, to some the bare truth of reality is just to harsh, i feel with you, deeply. What you have given me so far is speculative at best.

Quote:I don't blame every sin or evil on Satan, you seem to think I do though.

because that is what it boils down to when you remove the flowery words and just "look at it". As well proven in my last reply (the post just above this one). You think you dont, but really, you do. Just remove all the flowery stuff from it, and thats what youre left with.

Quote:You actually have a tougher time trying to explain how so many cultures, so diverse and spread over time and space and language, could all have such a similar cult mythos.

in fact, no that is the easiset thing to do. Everyone had the sun to look at, the moon, was dependent on the land, the rain, the different times of the year. All these things where roughly the same ALL over the world. And if there is anything we have learned with the advent of the internet is. where not all that different. Our minds work alike regardless of culture. So one man realising the suns potency and effect on his life in caana, would not be too far of another mans in northern europe. Thus the likeness.

And what is funny is that when these people started to travel and met eachother, and found they had similar religious truths, they took that for evidence of the truthfullness of their own. Just like christians today try to tell us that the reason aztecs had saviour archetypes was because they instinctively knew about jesus.....uhmmok...


Quote:I've already given an explanation on this, it goes back to Enoch through Noah (Noah's flood is also retold all over the ancient world just as the saviour story was, with slight deviations from the account given to the nation of Israel) and then spread via the confusion of tongues at the Tower of Babel with some deviation from the original. BTW, Masons (I think it was Pike) claim their hand signals go all the way back to the Tower of Babel as a form of communication that arose when the language was split; not sure I believe that tho. Also, it's interesting that the EU Parliment is supposed to be the unfinished Tower of Babel.[/quotet]

this rely so much on known stories to be true that i highly doubt it. real aercheology does not suppport this view, but do support the one that i have.

[quote]Many experts of Philology like Max Muller came to conclude that indeed there was likely once a common language from which all languages sprung from:

Max F. Muller (1823-1900) was one of the world’s foremost comparative philologists, i.e., one who studies ancient languages and observes their similarities and differences. He taught at Oxford University. In his book, Science of Language, the celebrated professor wrote:

“We have examined all possible forms which language can assume, and we now ask, can we reconcile with these three distinct forms, the radical, the terminational, the inflectional, the admission of one common origin of human speech? I answer decidedly, Yes” (quoted by Free, pp. 46-47).

[...]

he was wrong, and we know that for a fact today. But some circles (i wont mention names here) insists on this by now OLD idea. So im to belive that aztecs spoke proto european? i doubt it.

then you go on to the biggest phalacy of all. You take it that the commentary to an idea (max's) proven wrong can somehow be right. But it says that the tower of babel might have been real, so it must be true right?


Quote:I don't blame every evil deed and sin on Satan and neither does the Bible. You should give yourself more credit and try reading the Bible (all of it) before you hang your opinion of the Bible on what apologetics have to say.

i have, several times over. But i know youd find that hard to belive as i dont come to the same conclusions that you do.

Quote:In fact one of the most neglected areas of the bible is actually the Mazzaroth, and yet it's completely grounded in the Bible, for instance the book of Revelations makes great use of signs in the star systems and star names as recorded from ancient sources.

astrology is worse make belief than the bible. So to defend the bible through it is in my oppinion a no go. The mazzeroth is something we made up ages ago. we didnt have tv, we had the night sky and boy did we come up with good stories. Problem being, they turned into truths (religions) and then became poison on the world.

Quote:Even an 8 year old can school an old fool.

in bad language and assenine insults, yes indeed, youre doing a great job at that.

Quote:So first I'm damned when you thought the ideas I laid out where my own, then when you find they're not, I'm damned anyways. See that, that's why I know people like you are just about hopeless, because you'll fight both sides against the middle just to stay in denial. It's sad.

you just threw another strawman here. That is not what im saying. It really does not matter where these ideas originated.

Quote:....my life story......

So in utter panic that you realised the world was anything but rational, fair, or anything we had been told it is. you resort to antying that would give you a sense of ease. that in all this there had to be a benchmark truth. I have seen that before with other people, but it is still as subjective as it comes, allow me to demonstrate (the next 2 answers)

Quote:Here's a bizarre notion, hows about trying to give Yahweh the benefit of the doubt for once and see what happens? I mean he IS God afterall, maybe he really can preserve his Word?

well obviously that word is not the bible, i have spend enough time with it, found enough flaws, not to blame it on my creator.

Quote:Last thing, comparing Nostradamus with the precision of so many biblical prophecies is contemptable. For just one example, King Cyrus was prophesied before his birth, by name with a brief biography of his life as a conqueror given 150 years before his birth in the book of Isaiah

speculation, we dont know the excact age of the stories, only in which timeframe they where put together to become the bible, with the cronological order it has today. Prophecies are found in all religious texts, is that because they are there, or because people read whatever they want out of the text. If your critrion is the above, you altso have to accept the prophecies of the Quran, thus the Quran must be gods book?. But i bet that if you read the Quranic prophecies you would find a way not to acknowledge them like you just did with nostradamus. In other words, i was right. you read out of it what you want to read out of it, and then seek confirmation in likeminded people.

Quote:Something tells me I'm wasting my time..

debating on a debate forum. yes you must be. but thats because your end goal is not one of information, but of faith. you want me to belive as you do. were not exchanging ideas or information here. there is an attempted conversion going on. as is the case with all religious people.

Btw...have you read enough of the Quran, the Verda, or any of the other religious scripture in depth, to truely make a qualified bet on any single one of them. I doubt it, there are too many of them. all with the same claims, and thus...the same flaws. Have a nice day my new 8 y.o freind.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - aux - 09-13-2007

Quote:aux: No, it's not quite the same thing, not all heavenly/celestial bodies are stars or our sun. Don't take my word, look it up.

horseonwheels: I have done that

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary -

Astrotheology

\As`tro*the*ol"o*gy\, n. [Astro- + theology.] Theology founded on observation or knowledge of the celestial bodies. --Derham.

So i was right in my claim.

Did you not read your own cited definition?? Simply saying you're right doesn't make you right! Maybe you think the definition of 'right' is something different than what the entry lists in the dictionary, too? I said astrotheology and sun worship are "not quite the same thing" which means just that! What are you arguing for? These ridiculous games are madness!!! Call that an ad hominem if you wish! I'm not even trying to be funny or mean or whatever, you've made it clear now from what you've written what kinda person we're dealing with. And I thought Starjade was off his rocker... no wonder you're a horse on wheels!! YOU ARE ACTUALLY TELLING US YOU'RE OFF YOUR ROCKER IN NAME CHOICE (instead of being a 'rocking horse') MAYBE EVEN SUBCONSCIOUSLY.. whatever the case, it's apt.

I want to step back for a moment and assess the situation (next 4 paragraphs); after going over the latest post- it's a bit disturbing, what I'm seeing. There is a distinct pattern of anti-rationalization and mockery of plain truths and logic, a confounded darkness in the presence of light of truth, which has become much more accentuated now, or at least more noticeable, yet masquerades behind a mask of sarcasm, feigned indignation and parroted psuedo-intelligent turns of phrases just enough perhaps to slip by unnoticed by most. It's diabolical but unmistakable and reminds me of the assault on truths and decency of mind as seen in such famous early works of much higher cunningness as in Goethe's Faust or Voltaire's Candide (not comparing these works' quality with the posts here (galaxies apart)), but they bear the same slithering, slimey and twisted (ill)logic or simply 'spirit' as is present in horseonwheels' communication. Ultimately, this is what Satanism is about: wantonly perverting truth, mocking holiness, destroying to make way for more destruction, reveling in deception, abandonment of goodness, and bold arrogance (smug). It's really just an effort at pure nihilism, which is self-defeating, hence, the absence of logic; Darkness being absence of Light (for the Rebel rebels against Order, without which he could not be; Chaos fully realized is naught). My mind recoils from such bottomless pits of darkness and I have to be careful not to contemplate it too deeply, as I have.

Unsurprisingly, Goethe was in the Illuminati (founded by a "former" Jesuit professor. Charles Darwin was influenced by Goethe in his theory of evolution) and Voltaire was a Freemason (and is largely credited with igniting the French Revolution (along with the Jacobins who were an illuminati front) which ultimately served the Vatican's powerbase, who also pushed evolution historically). Satanism, when ritualised in ceremonies, like the black mass, is formulated around the idea of inverting/perverting/reversing the things of God and/or logic and/or truth (like meanings of words).

I think it's plausible "Horseonwheels" is possessed by demons, not simply because of the strong aura of confusion, but because this happens to be concerning God's (the God of the Bible, Creator of all the heaven and earth and all that in them is, God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, God of Moses and King David, I AM, YHVH, Elohim, Emmanuel, Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of the Heavenly Father who is our Messiah and Lord of lords, Iesous, the Bread of Life, the Last Adam, the Redeemer, the Morning Star, the Glory of God, the Cornerstone, the Lamb of God, Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Bishop of Souls, the Alpha and Omega) holiness and the blasphemy thereof. If this were about deep sea diving, I probably wouldn't consider this idea. But I've been trying to look into this field and there are many cases like this, particularly in places like Haiti where lots of cults attempt to communicate with spirits in voodoo/magickal ceremonies and rites. Those cases bear similar hallmarks to what I'm witnessing here. Much literature from secular psychiatrists and psychologists have been written on this topic. It's pretty scarey stuff...these posts reminded me of it, particularly this last one which I've decided to let alone (as I did before a ways back when it became sufficiently clear to me what I was dealing with in 'Starjade') as I'll lose my nerve trying to continue to deal with such a case on rational terms.

There are higher (or lower) forces at work here I reckon. No honestly mislead person would go to such desperate lengths to make his person look wantonly irrational and illogical. Seems more and more people are becoming this way, the whole nation (with exceptions) if not the world is slowly going mad it seems: lying is cute and funny now, everything is a joke, nothing is sacred, hard truths are treated like toxic waste, no honor, knowledge is dismissed, form over substance, evil is stylish, etc. Failure to accept and abide by the most fundamental truths has led to this state of mass psychosis and as a result, a culture of death is upon us -- look at the fruits of the embracement of evolution, false religions/philosophy and humanism (which itself is admittedly a religion).

Now then, I'm going to break this ridiculous argument down for anyone else who bothers to look at this thread, because, again, I'm through addressing the respondant as the rest of his warblings are on par if not more severely demented than this one.

The cited definition says "theology founded on the observation of knowledge of THE CELESTIAL BODIES."

Okay lets define CELESTIAL BODIES
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noun 1. celestial body - natural objects visible in the sky"
from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/celestial+body

(My comment: "natural objects" is not limited to the sun)

Here's another definition of CELESTIAL BODIES from http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CELESTIALBODY

definition:
Noun: celestial body
1. Natural objects visible in the sky
- heavenly body
(My comment: "natural objects visible in the sky" are not limited to our sun but includes many other "natural objects visible in the sky"; "heavenly body" is not limited to our sun.)

Another definition of the singular form, CELESTIAL BODY, from http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=celestial%20body

definition:
S: (n) celestial body, heavenly body (natural objects visible in the sky)

(My comment: "celestial body" is not limited to our sun; "heavenly body" is not limited to our sun.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"THE CELESTIAL BODIES" IS NOT the same thing or limited to our SUN.

"Theology founded on observation of knowledge of the celestial bodies" is NOT the same thing as sun worship. Celestial bodies include moons, planets, even comets, asteroids and meteors! Astrotheology does NOT equal sun worship and sun worship does NOT equal Astrotheology; likewise Astronomy is not limited to studying our sun.


Let's examine the word "ASTRO-"THEOLOGY

Astro is from the greek word for "luminary"
-------------------------------------------------------

άστρο/astro = luminary

from

http://www.kypros.org/cgi-bin/lexicon

(My comment: a luminary body can be any star or body reflecting light such as the moon; luminary bodies are not limited to our sun)
-------------------------------------------------------

another definition of "Astro" from

http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?...ch&va=astro

Main Entry: astr-
Variant(s): or astro-
Function: combining form
Etymology: Latin astr-, astro-, from Greek, from astron -- more at STAR
: star : heavens : outer space : astronomical <astrophysics>
-------------------------------------------------------

Astro-theology, as I said before, is not the same thing as sun worship and is not synonymous with Biblical doctrine, rather it is opposed to it on many different levels.

Astro-anything is not limited to the sun. Astro-nauts do not travel to the sun and Astro-nomy is not limited to the study of the sun just as Astro-theology is not limited to theological concerns with the sun.

I believe even an 8 year old would not try to argue against this plain and simple idea.

Continuing. 'Worship' and 'theology' are very different words as well:

Main Entry: the·ol·o·gy
Pronunciation: thE-'ä-l&-jE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -gies
Etymology: Middle English theologie, from Anglo-French, from Latin theologia, from Greek, from the- + -logia -logy
1 : the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world
2 a : a theological theory or system <Thomist theology> <a theology of atonement> b : a distinctive body of theological opinion <Catholic theology>
3 : a usually 4-year course of specialized religious training in a Roman Catholic major seminary

from http://www.webster.com/dictionary/theology

(My comment: The only relation theology may have with worship is that theology studies HOW people worship amongst any other things involved in religion and respecting a diety. You could break down the word 'Theology' itself to see more deeply that it is not a form of worship.)
------------------------------------------------------------

Here's another definition of "Theology":

theology
noun [C or U]
the study of religion and religious belief, or a set of beliefs about a particular religion

from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp...1&dict=CALD
------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of 'worship'

worship (RELIGION)
verb -pp- or US ALSO -p-
1 [T] to have or show a strong feeling of respect and admiration for God or a god

2 [I] to go to a religious ceremony

worship
noun [U]
when you worship God or a god, often through praying or singing

from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp...0&dict=CALD

(My comment: Theology is nowhere indicated in these entries for worship as they are quite different words)
-----------------------------------------------------------

Another definition for 'worship':

Main Entry: 1wor·ship
Pronunciation: 'w&r-sh&p also 'wor-
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English worshipe worthiness, respect, reverence paid to a divine being, from Old English weorthscipe worthiness, respect, from weorth worthy, worth + -scipe -ship
1 chiefly British : a person of importance -- used as a title for various officials (as magistrates and some mayors)
2 : reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence
3 : a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual
4 : extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem <worship of the dollar>

Main Entry: 2worship
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -shipped also -shiped; -ship·ping also -ship·ing
transitive verb
1 : to honor or reverence as a divine being or supernatural power
2 : to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion <a celebrity worshipped by her fans>
intransitive verb : to perform or take part in worship or an act of worship

from: http://www.webster.com/dictionary/worship

(My comment: there are no entries for worship being described anything like theology)
-------------------------------------------------------------

As we see, sun worship and astrotheology are only very distantly related to each other and are by no meanings or definitions the same thing. Simply insisting they are will never change this fact.

Furthermore, I will not and should not in good mind debate someone who is so disingenuous and spitefully contrary on the most prima facea matters or at best, so poor in understanding of simple words and logic (as has been repeatedly shown).

If someone else has any questions (even out of the ones I didn't bother replying to knowing full well it was determined in advance not to concede to anything I produced contrary to the faithfully held beliefs, rendering such an excercise a mockery of an honest debate) or would like to venture a rebuttal to my original post, please by all means post them here and even though I don't have internet access at home or visit the forum everyday, I will try to provide a speedy response. I do understand however, that Horseonwheels is far from alone in his mindset on this issue, so any attempt at tortured logic or obfuscation may not neccesarily be addressed. Time is a luxury I don't have.

"For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you."
1 Corinthians 11:19

Peace in Christ


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-14-2007

Quote:Did you not read your own cited definition?? Simply saying you're right doesn't make you right! Maybe you think the definition of 'right' is something different than what the entry lists in the dictionary, too? I said astrotheology and sun worship are "not quite the same thing" which means just that!

astro theology, the worship of celestial bodies. Celestial bodies are defined as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_object

you will find that the sun is a star, thus is fully encompassed in astro theology as a term. thank you have a nice day. and thank you for showing everybody what religion really is, the need to make something more advanced that it really is. Woshipping the sun is worshippinh a celestial body, in this case a single STAR (astor), as opposed to a group of them.



Quote:What are you arguing for?

no the question is, what are YOU arguing for now that i show you again that im right, with full sources.

Quote:I want to step back for a moment and assess the situation (next 4 paragraphs); after going over the latest post- it's a bit disturbing, what I'm seeing. There is a distinct pattern of anti-rationalization and mockery of plain truths and logic, a confounded darkness in the presence of light of truth, which has become much more accentuated now, or at least more noticeable, yet masquerades behind a mask of sarcasm, feigned indignation and parroted psuedo-intelligent turns of phrases just enough perhaps to slip by unnoticed by most.

so now that you have assesed your own posts here, lets move on to something substantial here.

Quote:I think it's plausible "Horseonwheels" is possessed by demons

yes, our name is legion for we are many. LOL youre fucked up man. When you are cornered by your own lack of reason and logic, you pull the "the devil did it" card that i told people about all along (which you denied), and here you are confirming it flat out. thank you for that.



Quote:Okay lets define CELESTIAL BODIES
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noun 1. celestial body - natural objects visible in the sky"
from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/celestial+body

(My comment: "natural objects" is not limited to the sun)

Here's another definition of CELESTIAL BODIES from http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CELESTIALBODY

definition:
Noun: celestial body
1. Natural objects visible in the sky
- heavenly body
(My comment: "natural objects visible in the sky" are not limited to our sun but includes many other "natural objects visible in the sky"; "heavenly body" is not limited to our sun.)

Another definition of the singular form, CELESTIAL BODY, from http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=celestial%20body

definition:
S: (n) celestial body, heavenly body (natural objects visible in the sky)

(My comment: "celestial body" is not limited to our sun; "heavenly body" is not limited to our sun.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"THE CELESTIAL BODIES" IS NOT the same thing or limited to our SUN.

"Theology founded on observation of knowledge of the celestial bodies" is NOT the same thing as sun worship. Celestial bodies include moons, planets, even comets, asteroids and meteors! Astrotheology does NOT equal sun worship and sun worship does NOT equal Astrotheology; likewise Astronomy is not limited to studying our sun.


Let's examine the word "ASTRO-"THEOLOGY

Astro is from the greek word for "luminary"
-------------------------------------------------------

άστρο/astro = luminary

from

http://www.kypros.org/cgi-bin/lexicon

(My comment: a luminary body can be any star or body reflecting light such as the moon; luminary bodies are not limited to our sun)
-------------------------------------------------------

another definition of "Astro" from

http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?...ch&va=astro

Main Entry: astr-
Variant(s): or astro-
Function: combining form
Etymology: Latin astr-, astro-, from Greek, from astron -- more at STAR
: star : heavens : outer space : astronomical <astrophysics>
-------------------------------------------------------

Astro-theology, as I said before, is not the same thing as sun worship and is not synonymous with Biblical doctrine, rather it is opposed to it on many different levels.

Astro-anything is not limited to the sun. Astro-nauts do not travel to the sun and Astro-nomy is not limited to the study of the sun just as Astro-theology is not limited to theological concerns with the sun.

I believe even an 8 year old would not try to argue against this plain and simple idea.

Continuing. 'Worship' and 'theology' are very different words as well:

Main Entry: the·ol·o·gy
Pronunciation: thE-'ä-l&-jE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -gies
Etymology: Middle English theologie, from Anglo-French, from Latin theologia, from Greek, from the- + -logia -logy
1 : the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world
2 a : a theological theory or system <Thomist theology> <a theology of atonement> b : a distinctive body of theological opinion <Catholic theology>
3 : a usually 4-year course of specialized religious training in a Roman Catholic major seminary

from http://www.webster.com/dictionary/theology

(My comment: The only relation theology may have with worship is that theology studies HOW people worship amongst any other things involved in religion and respecting a diety. You could break down the word 'Theology' itself to see more deeply that it is not a form of worship.)
------------------------------------------------------------

Here's another definition of "Theology":

theology
noun [C or U]
the study of religion and religious belief, or a set of beliefs about a particular religion

from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp...1&dict=CALD
------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of 'worship'

worship (RELIGION)
verb -pp- or US ALSO -p-
1 [T] to have or show a strong feeling of respect and admiration for God or a god

2 [I] to go to a religious ceremony

worship
noun [U]
when you worship God or a god, often through praying or singing

from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp...0&dict=CALD

(My comment: Theology is nowhere indicated in these entries for worship as they are quite different words)
-----------------------------------------------------------

Another definition for 'worship':

Main Entry: 1wor·ship
Pronunciation: 'w&r-sh&p also 'wor-
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English worshipe worthiness, respect, reverence paid to a divine being, from Old English weorthscipe worthiness, respect, from weorth worthy, worth + -scipe -ship
1 chiefly British : a person of importance -- used as a title for various officials (as magistrates and some mayors)
2 : reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence
3 : a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual
4 : extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem <worship of the dollar>

Main Entry: 2worship
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -shipped also -shiped; -ship·ping also -ship·ing
transitive verb
1 : to honor or reverence as a divine being or supernatural power
2 : to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion <a celebrity worshipped by her fans>
intransitive verb : to perform or take part in worship or an act of worship

from: http://www.webster.com/dictionary/worship

(My comment: there are no entries for worship being described anything like theology)
-------------------------------------------------------------

see, all this just to prove me right. and im the one who are distorting things. Just answer this. Is the sun a star or is it not? Is it worshipped?

again a brilliant example of how the religious mind tries to confuse facts. Off all the things i wrote, this was the only one you dared to touch, how weak is that? A disagreement on the definition of star worship should include the star called "sun" or not.

Quote:As we see, sun worship and astrotheology are only very distantly related to each other and are by no meanings or definitions the same thing. Simply insisting they are will never change this fact.

star worshippers worship stars, but sun worshippers worship a star. yes it is painfully clear this.

Quote:Furthermore, I will not and should not in good mind debate someone who is so disingenuous and spitefully contrary on the most prima facea matters or at best, so poor in understanding of simple words and logic (as has been repeatedly shown).

ehh no mate, this whole post of yours fell flat on its arse from the first letter because i am still right, all you did was try to obscure reason and logic. a star is a star is a star...unless youre christian.

Quote:If someone else has any questions (even out of the ones I didn't bother replying to knowing full well it was determined in advance not to concede to anything I produced contrary to the faithfully held beliefs, rendering such an excercise a mockery of an honest debate) or would like to venture a rebuttal to my original post, please by all means post them here and even though I don't have internet access at home or visit the forum everyday, I will try to provide a speedy response. I do understand however, that Horseonwheels is far from alone in his mindset on this issue, so any attempt at tortured logic or obfuscation may not neccesarily be addressed. Time is a luxury I don't have.

along with reason and the ability to use logic apparently. as well as the fact as this is one big rat out of all the unpleasant questions i asked in my former post. Like how a historians description of christians proves Jesus in the same way that observing christian christmas proves santa claus. This post of yours is the ultimate cop out.


Much if not all of Christianity is stolen from predating religions - horseonwheels - 09-14-2007

And as for my name, now that aux paranoid brain came up with another wrong idea. Here is the reason for me name

[Image: Giugiaro_Mustang_01.jpg]

a horse on wheels..... MUSTANG! But then again, aux properbly not going to belive it, as it doesnt involve demons, bigotry , zealousness or any of the other things he seems to be turned on by.