Killer on the Road ™
- Sep 6, 2005
- AFL Club
- Other Teams
- In every girl's wet dream ℠
I would prefer you to answer why you choose to ignore what God says about himself and the world he has created and has sovereignty over.thank-you! perhaps you can explain to The Speaker as you have far greater intelligence, and understanding of complex philosophical abd theological jargon/history than i, someone more able to cite material etc that would be on par with Speakers.
Yes, but humanity is also characterised by a higher form of self-conscious awareness.....We have both an animal nature (Biology) but also a God's eye vision of existence & our own mortal natures.....We are fundamentally different from all other animals.... as Aristotle noted, we are stuck betwixt the animals & the Gods.not just human, all life is borne to the sane mechanism.
the bible is heavily redacted and abridged and misappropriated. further, the hundreds of years of theology have only embellished and corrupted whatever existed in its primal form.I would prefer you to answer why you choose to ignore what God says about himself and the world he has created and has sovereignty over.
There is surprisingly little written about The Devil from a scholarly perspective. The Devil is a Christian invention with long ancient roots, all the way back to Mesopotamia, by way of Egypt, Ancient Greece, and the Germanic cults of northern Europe. Jewish apocrypha helped in the development of the idea of The Devil, but where Judaism abandoned these ideas, they remained among the Jews who formed the earliest Christian congregations in the ancient Mediterranean.
Incorrect. The Old Testament is the same substance as the Jewish Bible, and was the already accepted as the canonical word of God by the time of Jesus. The scriptures that he quoted from, and that his disciples knew, are the same as what we have today. The New Testament writings are the oldest extant sources available from the period of Jesus and his disciples, and are the most well attested writings of the era by an enormous margin. All are written by first generation Christians, and the text we have today is the same as what they wrote.the bible is heavily redacted and abridged and misappropriated. further, the hundreds of years of theology have only embellished and corrupted whatever existed in its primal form.
Flat out wrong. Christians are written about in non-Christian sources long before Constantine was around, and we know from both them and from other Christian writers that they were preaching and teaching the exact same message that we read about in the New Testament, beginning with Jesus.also, christianity itself came from Constantine, who had heard of the gnostic religion and they took their books, ideas and subverted them, flipped them around.
What makes you say that?god has never spoken, and never thru the bible or theology. otherwise mohammed and david icke and any other crackpot who claims such.
As Paul writes in his letter to the Romans, "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.all religions, including ancoent belief systems, the Aboriginals, the Native Americans, the tale of Gilgamesh, etc, they are all merely operas using humanized characters to understand the universe, mankind, and the thoughts in their heads.
God has revealed himself, and it is the self-evident truths where it is revealed....exactly HOW the mechanism works, dualism.
see, the primary self-evident truth is Intelligent Design. unquestionable. i know the dumb Athiests do, but they're dumb. It is man who created and embellished beyond that primary self-evident truth, thru philosophy and theology. Why were we created? etc.
Fallacious logic. Unlike the creation of the world, which is a one-time event to set something into being, your claim here is related to a constant, which cannot be treated in the same way. It is not certain that just because something is so currently, that it has always also been so, or that it will always continue to be so. Nor, in a world that we both agree is evidently created, would it make sense for God to cease acting towards a purpose after having begun something with creation.but the secondary self-evident truth is that existence IS a duality in permanent accord. as i cited examples above, life/death, pain/pleasure, etc. no one can deny that unless theyre dumb. its patently obvious.
its all the hot air of Intelligentsia over the centuries complicating, embellishing, and deliberately misappropriating.
Tripe. The Gnostics were already in decline before Constantine and the New Testament was already widely understood to be as it is today before Constantine. Those two things are not coincidental - when people became aware of what Jesus actually taught, the Greek philosophy of the Gnostics was shown to be the deception that it is.constantine ripped off the gnostic religion, stole their boks, torched their books, slay all the gnostics, burned and destroyed their places of worship/gathering. he saw it as a fantastic belief system that could unite the people and herd them, easier to control, but it needed tweaking and thats where the NT stems from. romans ripping off gnostics and twisting things.
And as I said in that thread, that is also wrong.like is said in the OP of the Jesus thread, jesus character (virgin birth, crucifixion, raised from dead) is the same story told in religions that predate the era by hundreds/thousands of years, the same story passed down, taken from one culture and given a new name etc
No, sorry, the virgin birth as recorded in the Bible is widely regarded by scholars at every end of the Biblical spectrum to be unique to the Christian gospels, with no parallels in any other sources of any other texts at any point in history prior to Jesus. Similarly, there are today very few scholars who dispute the existence of a Jesus in Roman times, and even a Jesus that was crucified. Furthermore, the idea that dying-and-rising gods were common place in mythical/pagan texts has also been roundly criticised and mostly discredited, as the examples pointed to do not follow the same pattern as Jesus - either they don't die, or they don't rise, or they weren't gods to begin with, and so on.
The Immaculate conception is a nonsense, concocted by Jerome, or one of the other Early Christian fathers, who had serious body-hatred issues.....The Madonna/ Whore complex writ-large right there, for all to see.....One of the true pathologies that inheres in the Christian mythos.Let me remind you why:
The study of Jesus in comparative mythology is the examination of the narratives of the life of Jesus in the Christian gospels, traditions and theology, as they relate to Christianity and other religions. Although virtually all New Testament scholars and historians of the ancient Near East agree that Jesus existed as a historical figure,[nb 1][nb 2][nb 3][nb 4][nb 5] most secular historians also agree that the gospels contain large quantities of ahistorical legendary details mixed in with historical information about Jesus's life. The Synoptic Gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke are heavily shaped by Jewish tradition, with the Gospel of Matthew deliberately portraying Jesus as a "new Moses". Although it is highly unlikely that the authors of the Synoptic Gospels directly based any of their stories on pagan mythology, it is possible that they may have subtly shaped their accounts of Jesus's healing miracles to resemble familiar Greek stories about miracles associated with Asclepius, the god of healing and medicine. The birth narratives of Matthew and Luke are usually seen by secular historians as legends designed to fulfill Jewish expectations about the Messiah.
The Gospel of John bears indirect influences from Platonism, via earlier Jewish deuterocanonical texts, and may also have been influenced in less obvious ways by the cult of Dionysus, the Greek god of wine, though this possibility is still disputed. Later Christian traditions about Jesus were probably influenced by Greco-Roman religion and mythology. Much of Jesus's traditional iconography is apparently derived from Mediterranean deities such as Hermes, Asclepius, Serapis, and Zeus and his traditional birthdate on 25 December, which was not declared as such until the fifth century, was at one point named a holiday in honor of the Roman sun god Sol Invictus. At around the same time Christianity was expanding in the second and third centuries, the Mithraic Cult was also flourishing. Though the relationship between the two religions is still under dispute, Christian apologists at the time noted similarities between them, which some scholars have taken as evidence of borrowing, but which are more likely a result of shared cultural environment. More general comparisons have also been made between the stories about Jesus's birth and resurrection and stories of other divine or heroic figures from across the Mediterranean world, including supposed "dying-and-rising gods" such as Tammuz, Adonis, Attis, and Osiris, while the concept of "dying-and-rising gods" has received criticism.
The Immaculate Conception refers to the Roman Catholic belief that Mary was free of original sin because she bore Jesus, a view not supported by the Bible.The Immaculate conception is a nonsense, concocted by Jerome, or one of the other Early Christian fathers, who had serious body-hatred issues.....The Madonna/ Whore complex writ-large right there, for all to see.....One of the true pathologies that inheres in the Christian mythos.
If you actually read the article you link to here, you'd realise that it contradicts what you're saying.