Total posts: 8,861
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
The serpent is the penis....Biblical pornography.And the juicy fruit!.....Yum Yum.
You don't know how close you are there vic. 10/10
Intercourse in ancient times was called "knowing" i.e And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, .Genesis 4
Now if I am wrong about this and Adam didn't "know" Eve then we are looking at someone else, earn't we? Could it be the serpent lord that did the "knowing"? well the rest of that verse says quite clearly : 4 I have gotten a man from the Lord.
and it was of the tree of know-ledge that she was seduced
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
Then who anointed Jesus king? It is a simple enough question.God anointed Jesus of Nazareth - Acts 10:38We seem to be going in circles.
Acts 10:38 King James Version (KJV)
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
Nope nothing there about "god" anointing Jesus of Galilee or Bethlehem or that non existent place Nazareth King of the Jews. It simply say Jesus was anointed with the power to do good.
Is it any wonder these subject become circular.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
So you don't know. It would be nice if you Christians would just for once, admit that you simply do not know , when you do not know.You demand answers and when I provide all the knowledge that can be known about something
You really area confused person aren't you. Telling me what you know and "providing all the knowledge" that you believe know is not answering questions. It is simply you giving me responses and replies but not answers that go nowhere in answering with sound, logical and certainly not a factual evidence. You simply present what it is you believe you know as fact.
you say that I refuse to acknowledge the limits of what can be known.
Where have I said that. You simply cannot tell me where "heaven is" or what a person does when he/she gets there. So you just make shite up. You have had thousands of years to come up with logical and provable evidence to support what it is you believe and claim " you know"; and you still cannot answer what should be for you by now, simple basic questions.
but when we tell you all that we've been told you get upset?
Quite the opposite. I find your non replies hilarious at times. Told by who???
I have to admit that doesn't sound to exciting. But how do you know this?Around the throne were twenty-four thrones; and upon the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white garments, and golden crowns on their heads... the twenty-four elders will fall down before Him who sits on the throne, and will worship Him who lives forever and ever, - Revelation 4:4&10
So is all you are saying is that the bible told you - and you simply believe what the bible says? That is a yes or no question.
Once again, the extent of what we've been told.
By the bible?
Created:
-->
@Athias
"Some 22 percent of the world’s population is Muslim today, and 85 percent of all Muslims are Sunnis, while 13 percent are Shias". 15.6 billion Muslims. That is a lot of people that can be influenced with a simple the nod of the head and a wave of the hand. Even if one says only a "tiny minority" follows the Islamic ideology ` religiously'.Your numbers are incorrect. How can there be any data informing an amount of 15.6 billion Muslims,
I took two different quotes. I didn't make that clear. I apologies. But the overall population of Muslims in the world is said to be
1.9 billion Muslims
There are approximately 1.9 billion Muslims in the world, making Islam the second-largest religion in the world behind Christianity. The Islam population is mainly split between 1.5 billion Sunni Muslims and 240-340 million Shia Muslims with some others belonging to smaller denominations.
Muslim Population By Country 2020 - World Population Reviewhttps://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1DSGK_en-gbGB437GB453&sxsrf=ALeKk00ovWacwcFfEobGJDdR5v9Xv5StWw%3A1589993923585&ei=w2HFXqKoI4aT1fAP-_26sAg&q=how+many+muslims+in+the+world+2019&oq=how+many+muslims+in+the+world+2019&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQDDICCAAyBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeOgQIABBHOgQIIxAnUKt9WKmFAWCSlAFoAHABeACAAYoBiAHgA5IBAzAuNJgBAKABAaoBB2d3cy13aXo&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjilYr49MLpAhWGSRUIHfu-DoYQ4dUDCAw
And said to be the fastest growing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
I had two thoughts in my head and conflated the two while typing
Yes you're good at that aren't you? conflating. Lets see how long it is before you start conflating from this point on.
Who anointed Jesus King of the Jews?Well it says God did.
What says? Lets us see your evidence of god anointing Jesus king of the Jews. let us see verses where it says god anointed Jesus king of the Jews.
God is defacto king after all. Pilate acknowledged it.
And there it is . Your good at conflating aren't you? And no, what Pilate did was acknowledge that Jesus was king of the Jews. He didn't, as you have suggested, acknowledge "god" as Jesus' defacto king and he didn't acknowledge that Jesus' god had anointed him king of the Jews and he didn't acknowledge Jesus' god either. You see Pilate and Rome had their own living god Caesar!
And have you ever considered that in the Hellenised Roman province of Palestine of Jesus' time that the anointing by the woman of the Gospels is reminiscent of the love poetry connected with the rites of the "Sacred Marriage" celebrating the union of the local god and goddess? And has it even come to your consideration that the meaning of the anointing AT BETHANY! was the same "Sacred Marriage" of the sacrificed king?No, because it specifically says what was done:“She has done what she could; she has anointed My body beforehand for the burial."
You must have missed the - of the "sacrificed king" - part.
Now tell me, was Jesus king of the Jews?Obviously as he was a king in the line of David.
Then who anointed Jesus king? It is a simple enough question.
. His kingdom was "not of this world."
Indeed he made that plain as day to Pilate didn't he? But he was still king of the very much earthly Jews. So who anointed him King?
Catholics celebrate the feast of Christ the King every year.
Catholic celebrate many things they don't even understand. You certainly don't.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
And where is "there" that is "not here" , located?Beyond creation (here), in the presence of God "there".
So you don't know. It would be nice if you Christians would just for once, admit that you simply do not know , when you do not know.
Ok, that is what it is. But I also asked - what does one do when one gets to "there" that is "not here" ?Why are you finding this question so difficult?It is because you are not actually interested. You ask disingenuous questions. I gave you the exact words of the Bible:
So, you also do not know what it is people do when and if they manage to get to this heavenly place. You just spout crap that you have had drummed into you since childhood. Isn't it about time you " put away your childish things"?
How can one express an existence that will be unlike any that can be experienced here.
So you don't know. After 2,000 years you don't know the answer to either of those questions above.
In heaven you will have the beatific vision - which is seeing God's face and you will spend eternity loving, worshiping and contemplating God.
I have to admit that doesn't sound to exciting. But how do you know this?
It is a state of perfect happiness because this is the reason for which you were created.
I haven't asked you about the "state" of those that manage to get to this heavenly place that you know absolutely nothing about or where it is even located. I asked what do one do to occupy one's self "for all eternity"
Created:
-->
@Athias
The pope is the most "powerful"--or to be more apt, "influential"--"living thing in the history of the universe."
The subject is not concerned with "influence" though is it? It is about P_O_W_E_R. Stop moving the goalposts and the trying to build an argument about what you say instead of what the OP ACTUALLY and clearly states.
You mentioned a religious figure head as being the "most powerful". I would consider the leader of the whole Muslim faith to be much more powerful. This is A leader who has in the past, and still does, head what is considered to be the biggest threat to Western culture and society. You really need to choose your words when speaking about powerful and influential religious leaders. "Some 22 percent of the world’s population is Muslim today, and 85 percent of all Muslims are Sunnis, while 13 percent are Shias". 15.6 billion Muslims. That is a lot of people that can be influenced with a simple the nod of the head and a wave of the hand. Even if one says only a "tiny minority" follows the Islamic ideology ` religiously'.
Have you forgotten "the power" shown and the "influence" displayed by the Ayatollah over a simple novel. He stirred the Islamic world and Muslims around the world into a frenzy and most of the ignorant Muslims of the east couldn't even read never mind read English. Over a book!!! Now that is power!
This is not to mention that one of these ideologies teaches, love, peace and tolerance towards everyone while the other teaches war , violence and intolerance towards anyone not Muslim.
Created:
-->
@DeusVult
I don't know what solution the clergy is supposed to have.
They could try dipping into there own very deep pockets just for once instead of begging the "poor" to donate their last mite to their astronomy programs . Is it not enough that the "poor" keep them fed and adorned in fine clothes and free housing?
Beware of the Scribes Mark 12:38-40
38 Then He said to them in His teaching, “Beware of the scribes, who desire to go around in long robes, love greetings in the marketplaces, 39 the best seats in the synagogues, and the best places at feasts, 40 who devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayers. These will receive greater condemnation.”
Woe to the Scribes and Pharisees. Matthew 23
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
[A] No. It makes her more than 'just' priest and certainly higher ranking than just a disciple. It makes her an high ranking member of the priesthood; maybe an Archbishop in the Jesus movement. Maybe this is why Peter the misogynist hated her and thought her not to be " worthy of life". Men or women do not, and never have become Kings or Queens UNLESS they have been anointed & concentrated by a high ranking member of the Church with the vested power to do so. Jesus is recorded as having undergone three stages or degrees of anointing. It was only after these three degrees of anointing consecration rituals, that Jesus made his `triumphant` entry into Jerusalem as king of the JEWS.Who anointed him king ?Not at all. It wasn't even Mary Magdalene. If I remember correctly it was the Mary the sister of Bethanhy.
????? Bethany was a place you clown, not a person.
John 12:1-8 King James Version (KJV)
12 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany where Lazarus was, [..............]Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
Mark 14:3-9 King James Version (KJV)
And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head.
Matthew 26:6-13 King James Version (KJV)
Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, 7 There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.
“And you know that God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. Then Jesus went around doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.” - Acts 10:38
????? Who anointed Jesus King of the Jews?
We are all called to love Jesus and anoint him with our lives.Stop it. Show me one single biblical verse where it says that? You are making things up on the hoof, AGAIN! not to mention it being irrelevant to the topic.It is logical and in keeping with his other teachings. If "anointing" him with a mere physical object is remembered, how much more will God remember those who love him and "anoint" him by the actions in their lives.
Absolute bullsjit! So you cannot show me a single verse stating - " we are called to anoint Jesus with our lives"- ? . SO STOP LYING!!!! And it is not Logical. It is you doing what all Christians do, that is, presenting your thoughts and opinions as fact. IT IS NOT FACT and there is no logic to it.
The Bible is to be read as something that happened in the past, is happening in the present and will happen in the future.
Very interesting. Particularly "the past". Did it ever occur to you that Mary Magdalene might just be " the bride" of "Song of Solomon"?
This was an action of anointing Jesus for his death.
Now you are getting somewhere.
And have you ever considered that in the Hellenised Roman province of Palestine of Jesus' time that the anointing by the woman of the Gospels is reminiscent of the love poetry connected with the rites of the "Sacred Marriage" celebrating the union of the local god and goddess? And has it even come to your consideration that the meaning of the anointing AT BETHANY! was the same "Sacred Marriage" of the sacrificed king?
Now tell me, was Jesus king of the Jews?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
Where is heaven.?There, not here.
And where is "there" that is "not here" , located?
What is heaven and what does anyone who manages to get there do once they are there?Heaven is being in the presence of God. Eye has not seen and ear has not heard.
Ok, that is what it is. But I also asked - what does one do when one gets to "there" that is "not here" ?
Why are you finding this question so difficult?
Created:
Posted in:
@ the absolute coward that is MELCHARAZ
Since you blocked me from defending against accusation made against me by you on my own threads; you have interfered in 3-4 of my threads now and posted a few times on each.
This is now considered by me as stalking and harassment, by an absolute coward!
I guess the truth doesnt matter to you.
If you are going to play interloper while having me on block at least try answering the question .
Biblically he is refrenced as son of the morning.
Well I just referenced again and BIBLICALLY it states this>>>
Revelation 22: 16 kjv . "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star".
Isaiah 14:12 Niv
12 How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!
So either the scriptures are at fault, or you are. which is it? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< did you miss this?
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
What will happen to all these Catholic schools?
I am sure that these schools will do just fine.
$10 billion to $15 billion
Bankers' best guesses about the Vatican's wealth put it at $10 billion to $15 billion. Of this wealth, Italian stockholdings alone run to $1.6 billion, 15% of the value of listed shares on the Italian market. The Vatican has big investments in banking, insurance, chemicals, steel, construction, real estate.
I am not sure what that amounts to in "widows mites" but I am sure that the Catholic institution as collected quite a few billion billion mites over the years.
Luke 21:1-4 New King James Version (NKJV)
The Widow’s Two Mites
21 And He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury, 2 and He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites. 3 So He said, “Truly I say to you that this poor widow has put in more than all [ of those rich fkrs] ; 4 for all these out of their abundance have put in offerings for God, but she out of her poverty put in all the livelihood that she had.”
The Vatican also spend $$$$$$ billions a year on astronomy equipment; telescopes and observatories etc.
One has to wonder what these Priests are up to peering into god's living room.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
Are there some that go to heaven?
Where is heaven.? What is heaven and what does anyone who manages to get there do once they are there?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
@Dr.Franklin
I cant help but notice this refers to Venus, Am I right or crazy?@Melcharaz Venus does have some relationship to lucifer in astrological approach
Yes I noticed that too. Venus is know as the "Morning Star" or Star of the Morning or Bright Morning Star or THE Bright Morning Star" in some religious and Astronomy fields .
So to say "More correctly, lucifer does have a relationship to Venus" means to say that the "Morning Star" or "Star of the Morning" is Lucifer. Which Jesus admits to being. Revelation 22:16
So Jesus as the serpent/AKA Lucifer tempted Eve. Made her and all mankind sinners and then came to earth again to die for our sins.?????
I think there is a lot more to be explored here when we consider that Jesus as Lucifer the serpent appeared to a woman before the man. We do have to wonder now what knowledge he actually imparted to her in the absence of the man Adam. After all, didn't Jesus again first appear to a woman before the men at his tomb entrusting only her with secret instructions to pass on to the men of his movement? I think the link is unavoidable.
Created:
Posted in:
@ the absolute coward that is MELCHARAZ
Its star of the morning, not moring star.
Semantics. Behave yourself. You just cannot keep away can you? Yet have me on block HAhahahahhahahhahahhahahha, I LUV IT!
Biblically he is refrenced as son of the morning.
Well I just referenced again and BIBLICALLY it states this>>>
Revelation 22: 16 kjv . I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Isaiah 14:12 Niv
12 How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!
So either the scriptures are at fault, or you are. which is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
The internet is the new 7-11 tabloid
It makes no difference. My point was - AS YOU WELL KNOW - that there will always be a counter argument. I happen to agree with what is written in those links by those authors. You don' and won't accept that, and I don't care. I don't care that you dismiss any of those links. It simply proved my point that the MYTH of dying and rising god-men predate your god-man by hundreds if not thousands of years. And you STILL haven't shown me a single piece of evidence that proves your god-man is the only one to have "risen from the dead" or was 'immaculately conceived and born of "virgin" . You simply cannot accept that these Myths are not new or exclusive to your boy Jesus.
If I had mentioned authors and their books saying the same it would have made no difference to you. But I shall remember that when YOU ever use links from the WWW as some kind of evidence or proof for one claim or another.
Sometimes these fishers of a gullible audience write books and claim to be scholars.
Then is all you have to do is debunk them and their claims don't you. But before you do that of course, you have to prove your own fkn claims first!!!
Can I suggest that you start by proving the immaculate conception Jesus, and we'll take it from their.
There (almost unbelievably....emphasis on almost) is actually a self proclaimed scholar who wrote a book and actually claimed Jesus promoted self-mutilation when saying And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off.
So? I don't care. Why should that bother me...... at all?
I believe individuals have a right to believe what they want.
Me too. And I also believe I have a right to challenge what it is that you believe IN! You just don't like me doing that.
Please, by all means, believe what thou wilt!
I do, and also, I will disbelieve what I " wilt " until I don't.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
She had something of a high status in the Jesus movement. She was a "woman of substance" in the position to be the one to anoint Jesus' head and feet with extremely expensive expensive oils . Where did she get the authority to perform such a ritual?And didn't Jesus say :‘Wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.’ (Mark 14:9)This was not the - supposed - customary washing of the feet or head of a visiting friend or stranger . These were more likely the stages of the anointing of a king. She had to have some kind of status and authority to do this. Not to mention that Mary appears in all four gospels as one of Jesus's closest companions during his ministry in Galilee and Jerusalem.That in no way makes her a priest.
[A] No. It makes her more than 'just' priest and certainly higher ranking than just a disciple. It makes her an high ranking member of the priesthood; maybe an Archbishop in the Jesus movement. Maybe this is why Peter the misogynist hated her and thought her not to be " worthy of life". Men or women do not, and never have become Kings or Queens UNLESS they have been anointed & concentrated by a high ranking member of the Church with the vested power to do so. Jesus is recorded as having undergone three stages or degrees of anointing. It was only after these three degrees of anointing consecration rituals, that Jesus made his `triumphant` entry into Jerusalem as king of the JEWS.
Who anointed him king ?
We are all called to love Jesus and anoint him with our lives.
Stop it. Show me one single biblical verse where it says that? You are making things up on the hoof, AGAIN! not to mention it being irrelevant to the topic.
She was a long disciple.
[B] She was more than a disciple. . And it appears that she had the authority to anointed and consecrate a King.
It doesn't mean that she was a priest. Jesus instituted the priesthood at the last supper. He chose only men for this - Jesus made this choice.
See A & B above.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Dying in your early 30's isn't much of a living.With your limited range of thinking it's amazing you even humiliate yourself in a public forum.
I don't feel humiliated.
Martin Luther King Jr was murdered in his 30's and changed the world,
How. By showing the world how to cheat on your wife multiple times, and get caught in the process? Not to mention fathering billions of bastard children.
" Martin Luther King Jr had extramarital affairs with nearly four dozen women, fathered an illegitimate child and allegedly encouraged the rape of a parishioner by a fellow Baptist minister, according to FBI files".https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/martin-luther-king-had-45-lovers-secret-fbi-cache-reveals-qf0p2fx3b
Jesus was murdered at a young age and resurfaced the face of religion and how people relate to God.
And you have the nerve to talk about ones " limited range of thinking".
Get real, their dying age had no relevance to their influence and power.
I didn't say it did. I said "dying isn't much of a living" ESPECIALLY when one dies so young. Their influence -as misguided as your beliefs are about him - speaks for itself.
I could give you countless examples of major figures that influenced the world yet didn't make it to the age of 40.
So did Elvis Presley and left his mark in a massive way, he died at 42 , which as I have said, isn't much of a living. Your trying to scrape up an argument where there isn't one.
There's no doubt that Jesus' living and example changed the world in many ways.
I think the Christian Church did that more than your god-man Jesus, and not all for the good. And by force for the best part and all against the teaching of Jesus. If Christians hadn't wrapped Jesus in myths lifted from ancient ideas, he would have been just another piss in the wind failed messiah and forgotten about. There were many people claiming to be the Messiah in Palestine at the time. Although I will admit, Jesus THE JEW maybe did have a legitimate claim to the JEWISH throne.
He really didn't have to live beyond what he did to make that happen, even more so shows his unique influence, he lived more than people who lived to be a hundred not to mention losing the physical body is not losing ones life, only their life in this particular world. It's not how long you lived but the quality of life you live and how you impacted others with that time.
And you have the nerve to talk about ones " limited range of thinking". Oh well, you are entitled to your fantasies I suppose.
Created:
Posted in:
I have created one or two threads concerning Satan/Lucifer. In one of those threads it was seen to have been strongly suggested that Lucifer was also know as the light bringing "morning start". #2 and some biblical scholars seem to agree.https://www.history.com/topics/folklore/history-of-the-devil
It was also suggested in the link below that Lucifer was the "serpent" who tempted Eve AKA Satan and Devil and the same is referred to as "“the ancient serpent” (Revelation 12:9, 20:2)
So all of these titles appear all to be references to the same being. And this verse is believed by Christians to be a reference to Lucifer and all his titles :Isaiah 14:12 How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!
I am sure that this will be vehemently denied by Christians as referring to Satan aka Lucifer and all his other epithets.
And for one simple reason. Jesus (their god) also calls himself;
" the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” (Revelation 22:16)…
Could it really be that Lucifer is just another name for Jesus of which he had many.? We are never allowed to forget that Jesus was with god from the beginning, as was Lucifer Satan /devil serpent, where he was also known as the Word. John 1
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Up until about a century or so ago the average life expectancy of a human being was only 25 years, so Jesus didn't do too badly.
That's a matter of opinion., Vic. I thought he done pretty shite myself. His biggest ball drop was that he failed in his mission as the expected Messiah - "the one to come" . He did and said everything opposite to what was expected of a Messiah ( in the open at least). "render unto Caesar" must have sent the Galilean Zealots into a right tizz of frenzy when they heard that. Is it any wonder Judas Iscariot ( Sicarii ) a known Galilean Zealot assassin fell out with him.
Created:
-->
@DarthBalls
Instead he [Jesus] spent most of his life, showing people how to live with his actions...
Dying in your early 30's isn't much of a living. And especially in the cruel and sadistic fashion that he is believed to have died.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
First off, it's ironic that all of a sudden you're hip to broad definitions when translating the Greek language.
Irrelevant. The fact is that the ancient Greek word for "virgin" is young girl or maiden.
You can't just make a list of alleged plagiarizing, and then later ignore one's shown to be inaccurate.
I can and I have. You haven't shown anyone that they are inaccurate though have you. You have simply said they are not plagiarized and are untrue. ACCORDING TO WHO ???
For every opinion that you produce their will be a counter opinion. There are respected authors researchers and scholars who I happen to agree with. And a quick search of the www will produce hundreds of stories concerning god men born immaculately of virgins including Krishna (sounds so much like the word Christ doesn't it).
Here this took me all of two seconds>> https://gsgriffin.com/2016/12/08/other-gods-born-to-virgins-on-december-25-before-jesus-christ/
another two seconds>.
another two seconds
and what an interesting title>> Chrishna As The Prototype Of Christ
I'll have to find time to read that one.
So you see o learned one; at the click of a mouse and in seconds all your opinions can and do have counter opinions. And this is not no mention the hundreds of books written on the subject of Immaculate Conceptions and god - men born of young girls and maidens.
Like I have said , these opinions will always depend on what one has read and who one chooses to believe. I believe your god - man myth has been plagiarized from the ancients. I don't care what you believe. And you can deny this fact until the famous promised return of your god-man comes to fruition.
You believe your god - man physically "walked on water" and "made water become wine" . The bible lists so called `miracles` said to have been performed by your god-man yet you have absolutely not a shred evidence what- so- ever for these events actually happening. You have only what you have read, who you believe and of course a faith in the supernatural. You and your religious ideology is fake.
Oh and the "miracle" of turning water into wine, isn't original or exclusive to your god-man either. That little trick was performed in Egypt and Greece hundreds and thousands of years before Christians hijacked this myth also. As was the NT story of "the widows son" taken straight out of Egyptian mythology.
Get over it. You have absolutely no more evidence for the 'immaculate conception' of your god - man myth than the Hindu does for the born of a virgin Krishna. Why? Because it is MYTH! and Christians have lifted this myth and many others from the ancients and simple swaddled your god-man in them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
So then this claim of yours is wrong?Krishna: Hindu god, born of a virgin devaki around 1200BC.
Well now that just depends on who one reads and who's word it is you are willing to accept.
The point is, is that your god - man is not the first of who it is said to have be born of a "virgin". there are many. You Christians have swaddled a real human being in a myth that you have plagiarized from the ancients.
First off, in Greek virgin simply means young girl or maiden. It doesn't mean that the female is necessarily chaste or virgo intacta
In the case of Krishna his " virgin birth" birth simply means that he was born without his mother having sex. It doesn't necessarily mean that she was virgo intacta.
But it matters not. The point is, is that your boys back story and biography is a fake, it is a myth, and what's more it is a plagiarized myth, told time and time again the world over and well before your god-man came onto the scene.
You really need to study these things before trying to spring gotcha moment on people.
Must try harder.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
[A] The very act of baptism forgives sin.
Not according to the forum religious and bible expert , it isn't.
Stephen wrote: "Some say it also washes away our sins.ETHANG5 wrote: Our genius thinks baptism is for remission of sins"
And when the forum expert ethang5 was confronted with BIBLICAL evidence that he was clearly wrong, he , for reasons known only to him, simple disappeared. But not before suggesting the bible was wrong.
“And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16)
“Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. “(Acts 2:38)
“John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. And all the country of Judea and all Jerusalem were going out to him and were being baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.” (Mark 1:4-5)
“And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” (Luke 3:3)
Those verses clearly show you to be correct at [A] above.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Interpretations of the biblical tales and other similar myth based accounts have a tendency to exalt central characters and ignore the realities of the human condition.
They do. Apologist are famous for it.
Assuming that the said characters were actually based upon real people of course.
Indeed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeusVult
Yet the rule about women is something it arbitrarily made up, directly against Jesus' own post rebirth actions regarding Mary, even while the church only exists with belief in the resurrection due to said actions.Can you show me where Jesus made Mary an apostle/bishop/priest?
She had something of a high status in the Jesus movement. She was a "woman of substance" in the position to be the one to anoint Jesus' head and feet with extremely expensive expensive oils . Where did she get the authority to perform such a ritual?
And didn't Jesus say :
‘Wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.’ (Mark 14:9)
This was not the - supposed - customary washing of the feet or head of a visiting friend or stranger . These were more likely the stages of the anointing of a king. She had to have some kind of status and authority to do this. Not to mention that Mary appears in all four gospels as one of Jesus's closest companions during his ministry in Galilee and Jerusalem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Maybe if we got together a posse and rushed the forum we could drown him if we completely ignored em. But I don't know anybody desperate enough lol and it would take a lot of effort. We would need a bunch of the old gang.
Is that a veiled call to others to gang up on one single member of the DebateArt community that you can't handle on your own? It won't be the first time you have tried this deceptive tactic, will it?
You tried this devious practice on me once, didn't you. . But it only resulted in getting those you had duped into becoming your accomplices in your "posse" to be banned instead of you. You and others tried to "drown me " too didn't you? by bombarding my threads with absolute nonsense to hide your own embarrassments . You got your "posse" to do all of your dirty work of "drowning" out another member at a cost to them being banned, and yet, you weren't banned were you? . I even remember telling you to "keep putting the bullets in for those you had duped, and they will surely fire them, - on your behalf - and get themselves banned in the process".
This is what you are now, once again, attempting to do to the Brother simply for having a different opinion to you and showing you for what you are and embarrassing you in the process. The Brother has simply shown how bible ignorant you are and has embarrassed you in the process. So true to form, here you are, once again inciting others to join you in a "posse" in the process of attempting to "drown " out one mans voice.
That post #402 should certainly be flagged for the veiled incitement to others, by you to harass and bait and "drown" out a fellow member of the DebatArt community.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Just as the purposes and aims of popular religions have been forced to change to meet the demands of an evolving society.
Good response but with one exception.
Created:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Can the Catholic church admit to error (at times)?
Can Christians? Period!
Created:
Posted in:
Not only this, but these pagan religions have scant early manuscripts found before AD100 and the bulk comes from around AD300 and beyond.
This will have much to do with the early Christian church fathers/Christians -- burning, scrolls and manuscripts and books that they didn't understand and considered heretical. Thank your god for the deliverance of the Nag Hamadi scrolls (which go far back as Egypt. Didn't the Jesus family flee to Egypt?) also considered "heretical" by the Christian church,
The early church has much to answer for when it comes to who and what they deemed to be 'heretical' . The decimation of the Templars, the genocide of the Albigensians just to name two.
Socrates, was condemned to death on a religious charge. In her time Hypatia the world’s leading mathematician and astronomer, she was unlucky enough to be too clever for the early church and so Hypatia was brutally murdered by a mob of Christian fanatics.
I may start a thread on those lovely topics just to read the wild and imaginative explaining away the apologists try to invent in playing down the abhorrent behaviour of their own early church fathers.
Created:
-->
@DeusVult
And as I have previously stated. There is no factual evidence that the Jewish Elders had had their right to stone blasphemers to death revoked.We've dealt with that in the other thread where Josephus shows that the Sanhedrin had their ability to meet without approval revoked.
To meet without approval is not the same as having your right to carry out mosaic law revoked BY ROME!!! FFS . I keep telling you; this would make no difference to the point I have to keep making anyway. The gospels THEMSELVES state clearly that they did carry out the death sentence in Jesus' time AND while under Roman rule. And they attempted to stone the Christ twice, while under ROMAN RULE . And intended to stone an adulteress WHILE UNDER ROMAN RULE OR THE GOSPELS WRITERS ARE FKN LYING!!!!!
Are these stories in the gospels OR NOT???? AND are they true or not?
their ability to sentence someone to death was effectively removed.
BY WHO?? I have shown you that ROME didn't revoke their right to carry out the death sentence. BUT YOU KEEP INSISTING that ROME had removed their rights carry out the death sentence.>>>>>>>>#43
Stephen wrote: How do you know? The mosaic law was clear. Death by stoning for adultery.->@DeusVult wrote: The right for the Sanhedrin to carry out capital punishment had been removed in 6 A.D. when Rome downgraded the status of Judea from a kingdom to a Roman Province.In Jerusalem itself, where the Roman Governor himself resided, the Sanhedrin would be risking their own lives by disobeying Roman law and putting Jesus to death.
AND IN ANY CASE - If what you say above was indeed the case, then as I have already explained to you, this would make the stories from the gospels to be fabrications and outright lies.
YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!!!!
Created:
-->
@DeusVult
It only makes your interpretation a sham.
You keep missing the OBVIOUS decadence that simply proves you to be wrong.
The scriptures are at fault here NO MATTER which way one looks at the, YOU HAVE PROVEN THAT YOURSELF
By planting other shite that only you seems to believe somehow support your claim makes no difference. Even if they were true.
They said there were not allowed to put anyone to death. Yet we have the gospels saying they did and they attempted to do so on many occasions. It is not me saying this , it is the the gospel writers version of events.
AND:
" According to Talmudic law, the authority to apply capital punishment ceased with the destruction of the Second Temple.". That will be well after Jesus was tried and crucified.
The second temple was destroyed in 70 AD some 40 years after the crucifixion.
In Rabbinic Judaism.
The Sanhedrin stopped issuing capital punishment either after the Second Temple was destroyed, in 70 CE, or, alternatively, according to passages in the Talmud, in 30 CE, when the Sanhedrin were moved out of the Hall of Hewn Stones. Other sources, such as Josephus, disagree. <<<<<<<<<<<<
So the whole story, from start to finish is a sham.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Whining?
Yes, whining.
This is a debate site.
It is. But you and others here soon turn "debate" in to a whining fest and playing victim - once they run out of insults that is - when you have no responses or answers. I am just too idle to show you all the whining and playing of victim that comes from yourself, @ FAUXLAW. and - whiner in chief - Melcharaz. This is you isn't it, WHINING about my post and others on line " attacking Christ" #23 and in turn Christianity?
I have simply highlighted the similarities between your god-man and the plethora of others god-men just like him that came hundreds,if not thousands of years before. It is up for discussions. You just don't like the subject matter and the fact that I have highlighted them. So you turn to whining and playing victim while others simply turn to vulgar and vile insults.
Why is it that Christians forget that it is they that has to support and defend and explain all of the claims made in these scriptures. The atheist isn't making the claims., what the atheist/me does is question the claims made by Christians and you have either to explain them ( not to be confused with explain them AWAY) with logical fact or you simply ignore me and go away, that is your responsibility and you owe it to your faith. I don't have to explain a damn thing, at all.
Why would you accuse someone of challenging your views as whining?
Oh behave yourself. Challenge my views all day long, just leave out the victim hood. I am not attacking Christ or Christians. I don't give a shite about your beliefs or the fact that you have faith. It is what you have faith in that I am scrutinizing, highlighting and questioning.
you really need to do is argue the actual existence of God.
No. What I do is up to me. Which is that I highlight, scrutinize and question these unreliable , ambiguous biblical half stories.
the claims are wrong because similarities do not really parallel as claimed
Oh yes, they were so, so wrong and coincidental that all of these images of other dying and rising god-men - although over hundreds or thousands of years apart - just happen to be "coincidence"?
'virgin' Mary with child Jesus. https://www.google.com/search?q=mary+with+child&rlz=1C1DSGK_en-gbGB437GB453&oq=mary+with+child&aqs=chrome.0.0l8.7018j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Here is another "Christ" myth complete with halo . Semele with Dionysus
'virgin' Mary with child Jesus. https://www.google.com/search?q=mary+with+child&rlz=1C1DSGK_en-gbGB437GB453&oq=mary+with+child&aqs=chrome.0.0l8.7018j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
AND it worried many of the earlier church fathers enough that they got their wild imaginations into top gear and came up with this diabolical and absurd explanation for all of the striking similarities between these dying and rising gods-men and your own .
Tertullian called the myth and mystery of Mithras - the Devil's "diabolical mimicry " . Tertullian has it that the devil " whose business it is to pervert the truth" had the audacity to preempt the exact circumstances of the coming of Jesus and the divine sacraments over a thousand + years before the event :
" he baptises his believers and promises forgiveness of sins from the Sacred Mount and thereby initiates them into the religion of Mithras. Thus he celebrates the oblation of bread and brings in the symbol of resurrection. Let us therefore acknowledge the craftiness of the Devil that copies those of the divine" <<<<<<<< this was the utter desperation that Christians went to explain away the striking similarities that the Christian cult has with the ancient Mithras/Zoroastian a Pagan cult of Persia.#17
So we see, that the church fathers created one of the most absurd explanations. They had actually declared that the Devil had plagiarised Christianity by anticipation in order to lead people astray! Knowing that "the true son of god" was to come to earth, the Devil had copied the whole story of the life of Jesus over a thousand years advance.
Bravo Mr Satan Devil Lucifer, what a clever little creation of god you are.
Get used to it sunshine, the myth surrounding your particular dying and rising god-man is not new or is it exclusive to Christianity. No matter how much you whine about the;
"attacks on the deity of Christ that is continually circulating online". <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< whining!!!!!
Created:
-->
@DeusVult
None of it makes any difference. The point is if you are correct it makes a mockery of the gospels and their unreliable stories.
By planting other shite that only you seems to believe somehow support your claim makes difference. Even if they were true.
They said there were not allowed to put anyone to death. Yet we have the gospels saying they did and they attempted to do so on many occasions. It is not me saying this , it is the the gospel writers version of events.
AND:
" According to Talmudic law, the authority to apply capital punishment ceased with the destruction of the Second Temple.". That will be well after Jesus was tried and crucified.
The second temple was destroyed in 70 AD some 40 years after the crucifixion.
In Rabbinic Judaism.
The Sanhedrin stopped issuing capital punishment either after the Second Temple was destroyed, in 70 CE, or, alternatively, according to passages in the Talmud, in 30 CE, when the Sanhedrin were moved out of the Hall of Hewn Stones. Other sources, such as Josephus, disagree. <<<<<<<<<<<<
So the whole story, from start to finish is a sham.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I've tried this before but didn't get a good response but let's try it again.
Didn't do too well this time around either.
Pretend the Bible doesn't exist
But your problem is, is that the bible does exist and its teaching are read and taken on board, if not followed to the letter by millions of Christians. This is nothing new. The ancients used to do exactly the same thing as Christians do today: swoon and kneel and submit and pray to something that isn't there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
While Mdh2000 keeps presuming I have not made an argument
You haven't.
or have not provided evidence,
You haven't
I believe I've done both
You would. But you haven't.
You need to go back over this thread and see for yourself (or ignore) just how wrong you are concerning evidence that only you believe you have provided .
Created:
Posted in:
The Acts of John are an interesting read.
Here Jesus explains something mystical to John ;
You heard that I suffered, but I suffered not.
An unsuffering one was I, yet suffered.
One pierced was I, yet not abused.
One hanged was I, and yet not hanged. Blood flowed from me, yet did not flow.
Created:
Posted in:
I did. Meant to put it makes me feel so good and happy that that delusional dunce hates me. I am indeed proud.
stick to the subject matter,
here is another Christ myth complete with halo
The thing is that you fawning Jesus sycophants simply cannot accept that your god-man is the only dying and rising god. There have been hundreds.
Max von Sydow and Robert Powel both have as much in common with the biblical Jesus as any of those BC god-men
Or what about the great lord of them all , Will Ferrell?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Now i get why Ethang hated you so much
" lovethy neighbour," and "in the dark" , Ethang, do you mean?
1 John 2:9
I don't mind that delusional dunce hating me. It makes me feel so happy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Ironically that's exactly what I think every time I read your posts.
Then why put yourself through the pain & misery that my posts cause you?
Here you are:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
triggered stpehen
And you cannot spell either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
why?
Because you can't and need leading by the snout to everything. But I suppose that has been the story of your whole life though, hasn't it, doc?
Created:
Posted in:
@ MELACHARAZ
I honestly hate those childish emojis. But it is at times like this that I would give an eye to be able to have a head dropping hard on desk emoji.
What are yalls thoughts
It would have been perfect had you stopped at :
Whereas the "Blank"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Are there really a number of gods who have biographies shockingly similar to that of Jesus of Nazareth? Names that are commonly included in this group of so-called similar gods include Mithras, Dionysus, and Osiris, among others.This image is one version of this attack on the deity of Christ ..........
Its not an "attack" on Christ or Christians. You lot always have to play the victim at every given chance. I believe I have made myself more than clear and on hundreds of occasions now. So here it is again for the billionth time note underlined in bold>>>
Christians have taken myths from many mystery schools, myths and legends and wrapped them around a very real human being who simply wanted to free his people -JEWS - from the Roman yoke and - according to many - paid with his life. That is the REAL biography of your Christ. Jesus was a JEW not a Christian. He taught at a JEWISH temple not a Christian church. he was a JEWISH priest not a Christian Priest. He preached to JEWS not Christians. He returned from the Egyptian mystery schools to save JEWS, not Christians. He was king of the JEWS not king of the Christians. And he didn't perform a single "miracle". never,at all. And you have four anonymous gospels that cannot even agree on the facts which day your god-man was born or was crucified..
From my understanding, Jesus king and high priest of the JEWS would have been totally appalled that a whole new religious ideology had sprung up in his name.
The whole pint of this thread is that your god-man is not the first alleged dying and rising god of which there have been many. So stop your whining, and playing victim and accept it for what it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Mithra; born of a virgin,could not be more wrong
You really need to learn to read, Frankie, lad
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
I don't want to assume you didn't catch this but....Indeed. There were so many to choose from. Had Christians chosen any other mystery school myth we may have had car stickers proclaiming`Marduk Loves You`< Babylonian Or ` Tammuz Saves`<SumarianI believe Dynasty was emphasizing that these women were not virgins.
Not all of these god-men were of virgin birth
Many of them were all the same person know by different names in different mystery cultures and settings. Mithra/Persia is a good example: AKA Osiris in Egypt - Dionysus in Greece - Bacchus in Rome/Italy - Attis in Asia Minor - Adonis in Syria and so on. The myth that has been wrapped around your god man Jesus is a combination of all of these BC myths.
And you seem to be missing my point. I am not saying your god-man Jesus didn't exist and is a 'mythical' character . I am saying Christians have swaddled him in all of these myths of these earlier miracle working ancient gods born of virgins. See #16
Created:
-->
@DeusVult
The Jews had lost the unilateral right to capital punishment had been removed from the Jews in 6 AD.
ALREADY EXPLAINED here>>> #44
I have heard this a few times but never seen any factual evidence for this being the case.
And you are missing my point. If it is as Peterson's 'guide' suggests, this then casts serious doubt on the biblical stories of stoning to death of Stephen, the intended stoning of the adulteress and the two attempts made to stone Christ. In fact Peterson's `guide ' makes a mockery of Mathews gospel. Acts 7:54-60. John 8:59. John 10:25-39. John 8:1-11.
What's more, If it is as you and Peterson's 'guide' suggests, that the Pharisees Jews had their right to carry out corporal punishment removed, then they would have been committing high crimes against the state of Rome. <<<<< let that sink in a while.
And for you or Peterson to offer as evidence a verse from historian Josephus goes nowhere in proving that the Jewish Elders had had their power to carry out the punishment of death by stoning . Is all the verse tells us is that Archelaus was given the powers to sentence people to death. Nothing surprising about that.
Josephus tells us: “Now Archelaus’s part of Judea was reduced into a province, and Coponius, one of theequestrian order among the Romans, was sent as a procurator, having the power of [life and]death put into his hands by Caesar” (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book II 8:1).
It mentions nothing concerning the Jews having their right to carry out their Mosaic law of capital punishment revoked.
It is an old argument that has never ever been established as fact.
So while in remote areas, the locals may sometimes have taken justice into their own hands,In Jerusalem itself, where the Roman Governor himself resided, the Sanhedrin would be risking their own lives
But these incidents didn't happen in remote areas though, did they? They took place right under the noses of the Roman in Jerusalem.
Besides, if you are seriously suggesting this then you are telling me that either the Pharisee didn't know or Jesus didn't know or neither didn't know that this was breaking the law of Rome ( according to you & Peterson's guide). Do you not see how silly that argument actually is.
Created:
-->
@DeusVult
How do you know? The mosaic law was clear. Death by stoning for adultery.The right for the Sanhedrin to carry out capital punishment had been removed in 6 A.D. when Rome downgraded the status of Judea from a kingdom to a Roman Province.
I have heard this a few times but never seen any factual evidence for this being the case.
And you are missing my point. If it is as Peterson's 'guide' suggests, this then casts serious doubt on the biblical stories of stoning to death of Stephen, the intended stoning of the adulteress and the two attempts made to stone Christ. In fact Peterson's `guide ' makes a mockery of Mathews gospel. Acts 7:54-60. John 8:59. John 10:25-39. John 8:1-11.
What's more, If it is as you and Peterson's 'guide' suggests, that the Pharisees Jews had their right to carry out corporal punishment removed, then they would have been committing high crimes against the state of Rome. <<<<< let that sink in a while.
And for you or Peterson to offer as evidence a verse from historian Josephus goes nowhere in proving that the Jewish Elders had had their power to carry out the punishment of death by stoning . Is all the verse tells us is that Archelaus was given the powers to sentence people to death. Nothing surprising about that.
Josephus tells us: “Now Archelaus’s part of Judea was reduced into a province, and Coponius, one of theequestrian order among the Romans, was sent as a procurator, having the power of [life and]death put into his hands by Caesar” (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book II 8:1).
It mentions nothing concerning the Jews having their right to carry out their Mosaic law of capital punishment revoked.
It is an old argument that has never ever been established as fact.
One can postulate for eternity but sentence would have been the same for him.It is more than postulation."Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act." - John 8:4How did they catch her in the very act? They were obviously waiting for this to happen.
Opinion. It could - as I have already mentioned - just have all been a set up for Jesus to show his worldly wisdom /compassion.
The fact that they didn't also bring the man shows that they were not there for the purpose of upholding the law but catching Jesus in a trap he could not escape.
No. It proves nothing. One could speculate that the man had got away, he could have bribed the Pharisee. He could have even been a member of the Sanhedrin so the Elders turned a blind eye. This is not to mention that this was a "man's world' where women were near as second class citizens and the man, being a man was simply let go. You see, we can all speculate and postulate. All the above are possible but WE DON'T KNOW!
If he said don't stone her, he would be breaking Mosaic Law.
Correct. maybe that is why he chose his words. Maybe.
If he said stone her, he would be breaking Roman Law
We don't know that. And why are you still ignoring those examples of stoning and attempted stoning I gave you above twice now. Besides, if you are seriously suggesting this then you are telling me that either the Pharisee didn't know or Jesus didn't know or neither didn't know that this was breaking the law of Rome ( according to you & Peterson's guide). Do you not see how silly that argument actually is.
We don't know she was a prostitute, the scriptures do not say.Now one of the Pharisees was requesting Him to dine with him, and He entered the Pharisee’s house and reclined at the table. And there was a woman in the city who was a sinner; and when she learned that He was reclining at the table in the Pharisee’s house, she brought an alabaster vial of perfume, and standing behind Him at His feet, weeping, she began to wet His feet with her tears, and kept wiping them with the hair of her head, and kissing His feet and anointing them with the perfume. Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet He would know who and what sort of person this woman is who is touching Him, that she is a sinner.” - Luke 7:36-39
What is that supposed to prove.
The woman with the alabaster jar is believed by many scholars to have been the Magdalene. She also in another gospel anointed his head too. The woman in John's Gospel is is Mary the sister of Martha and Lazarus. In Mark and Matthew she is unnamed. For one to be "living a sinful life" could mean anything in those times, especially to a Pharisee priest.
Or a actress playing the part of an adulteress so Jesus can display his worldly wisdom?Now that is one serious actress! Someone willing to get stoned to death in order to play a part. We just don't have people these days who take the craft so seriously.
Who knows. Your opinion means no more than mine as do your guesses, assumptions. theories and postulations.
Not if she was a real adulteress, she wouldn't have. The mosaic law states clearly that she AND HE should be put to death.As previously noted, the Jews were an occupied people and the Romans had removed the right of the Sanhedrin unilaterally meet and carry out a death sentence.
And as I have previously stated. There is no factual evidence that the Jewish Elders had had their right to stone blasphemers to death revoked.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ronjs
Most, if not all of these have been refuted, for those who are open minded enough to search.
What do you mean, refuted? I think it is accepted that these dying and rising gods were all myths, as was the born of virgin son of god Jesus also a myth, except to those who believed them to be true, which in the case of the god man Jesus, happen to be Christians.
Created: