Is Jesus the Antichrist?

[tomasito]

Woe unto the inhabitants of the earth. For the great dragon that was cast out of heaven has been sent with fury; for he knows his time is short.This is the ancient serpent, the devil. He is a murderer and a liar and there is no truth found in him. He is the father of lies.

I see the spirit of anti-christ at work in these dicussions that label Jesus as evil.

"No man comes to the father but by me" declares Jesus. Jesus is the way ,truth and life.

He will one day judge you not as a humble person he was. But as a king whose bright presence will destroy evil.
Lo, and They will see the son of God coming down in a cloud of glory. They will moan and look at whom they pierced.

The reason why the fight is against christianity is because its the only way(salvation through the blood of Jesus.)

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by tomasito
Woe unto the inhabitants of the earth. For the great dragon that was cast out of heaven has been sent with fury; for he knows his time is short.This is the ancient serpent, the devil. He is a murderer and a liar and there is no truth found in him. He is the father of lies.

Yep, Jesus must realize by now that we've got his number, and I'll bet he's madder than a wet hen!

 

[okinrus]

Does Nehusta <i>really</i> believe that Jesus is Satan or is he doing this as some ploy to upset christians?

 

[LostInThought7]

Originally posted by tomasito
The reason why the fight is against christianity is because its the only way(salvation through the blood of Jesus.)

Yes, that, and the fact that modern Christianity spreads the doctrine that humans are worthless, pitiful creatures that don't deserve to live (Isaiah 64:6), and only do because of the great mercy of an all-powerful being (Numbers 14:9) who's existance can't even be proven (Logic). And, according to your average Christian, God is the perfect example of morality, yet is allowed to destroy human civilizations at will because they do not worship him as much as he wants them to (Gen 6:17, Gen 19:24, ah screw it, too many to count), and he demands continual animal sacrifice. Hmmmm. And they think it is okay for God to do such things. They even praise him and willingly become his slaves. Because God gave us life, he can take it away if he wants. Which goes back to: we are pathetic beings who don't deserve dignity and freewill.

God was once an idea of goodness and truth, but after so many generations, humans changed him into a jealous, wrathful diety. The meaning behind the rituals were lost over time (animal sacrifice changed from: don't become too attached to your material possesions to: spend a few coins at the temple, the priest'll kill a dove or two, my sins are forgiven) and Jesus tried to restore them.

So I take back my previous statement. He might not have been a liar. Jesus may have actually believed himself to be the saviour of a fallen religion.

Maybe Jesus isn't the evil one, he is the good one, come to change all of the evil, false dogma of an evil, false god back into what it should have been.

This theory works with almost all agruments already posted. "Why put your family aside..." truth and goodness is more important than blood relations. Do you disagree, Nehushta? "No man comes to the father except through me" No one can see the true God unless they accept and practice the messege of Jesus' Love. "The sabbath was made for man, not..." again, mindless rituals have taken the place of love.

 

[Jenyar]

LostinThought, if you are really on the side of truth then at least don't misrepresent Christianity.

Humans are worthless, pitiful creatures that don't deserve life? Excuse me, but please read Isaiah 64 completely:

8 Yet, O LORD , you are our Father.
We are the clay, you are the potter;
we are all the work of your hand.

We were created more than deserving life - as the crown of God's creation, created in His image. The only problem is your image of who God is. Existentialists would rather have us believe that we are no more than glorified primordial rock, and all that we are is only what we imagine ourselves to be. And humanists would have us believe we are all that we ever need, that suffering and pain is only temporary obstacles in the way of becoming what we should be. Where is the intrinsic humanity in that?

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by okinrus
Does Nehusta <i>really</i> believe that Jesus is Satan or is he doing this as some ploy to upset christians?

Do you really believe I'm a he, or this just a ploy to upset me? Why would I choose the name of a great, great, etc. grandmother of Jesus as my handle if I am male? Or do you not know who Nehushta was?

First of all, I have serious doubts that Jesus ever lived as a human man. I favor the Christ-as-myth theories more than any other. I pretty much see all of the canonical bible stories as variations on the various fallen god myths, which are nothing more than astrological, solar and planetary myths that have been perverted by priests with an agenda.

It is my belief that the Christ myth grew from the Gnostic myths in which the birth of Christ represented the descent of spirit into matter (which was also seen as the cause of evil, by the way); the death of Christ represented ego death (the Luciferian descent into Orcus); and the resurrection represented spiritual rebirth. The Literalists perverted these myths for their own purposes, just as the ancient priests perverted the earlier astrological myths.

You see, while Christians tremble in fear before the Great and Powerful Oz, I am busy looking for the man behind the curtain. And since I believe that everyone who comes here is searching for the same thing, whether they realize it or not, I will expose him wherever I find him.

My advice to you is, if you can't handle the Truth, don't risk exposure to it by frequenting religious debate forums.

 

[okinrus]

Do you really believe I'm a he, or this just a ploy to upset me? Why would I choose the name of a great, great, etc. grandmother of Jesus as my handle if I am male? Or do you not know who Nehushta was?

You've already told us what Nehushta was. I hardly expect some snake on a pole to have a gender but if you want to pretend that your female that's fine.

It is my belief that the Christ myth grew from the Gnostic myths in which the birth of Christ represented the descent of spirit into matter (which was also seen as the cause of evil, by the way); the death of Christ represented ego death (the Luciferian descent into Orcus); and the resurrection represented spiritual rebirth. The Literalists perverted these myths for their own purposes, just as the ancient priests perverted the earlier astrological myths.

Most of the gnostic material, except the gospel of Thomas, came after the canonical writings and the writings of the new testament.

You keep accusing me but your arguing something that you don't believe in? Why don't you argue that Christ does not exist and then we can show that Christ exists you can show Christ is Satan?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by okinrus
You've already told us what Nehushta was. I hardly expect some snake on a pole to have a gender but if you want to pretend that your female that's fine.
----------
M*W: Interesting alliteration, okinrus, "snake on a pole...". Let's look back at the Garden of Eden when the allegorical serpent coiled around the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil tempting Eve. (Eve, the mother of all living was taken from the English word "evil.") LOL Okay, back to our image of the serpent around tree. The Hebrew words for "serpent," "Eve," and "YHWH" all appear to be the same "hah-wah."

Your "snake on a pole" was depicted in a painting called "The Crucified Serpent," by Nicolas Flamel.

The serpent spiraling caduceus of Hermes symbolized wisdom and healing. It also was the emblem of othe Sumerian god Enki, Lord of the Sacred Eye. Your "snake on a pole" is them emblem of the Greek Father of Medicine, Asklepios of Thessaly and was accepted by Hippocrates and the American Medical Association.

The descriptions "brazen serpent" and "pole" are used in Bible scripture.

Then there were the storys of Moses turning his staff into a serpent. This allegory is repeated throughout the Bible and has also been associated with the Ark of the Covenant.

Another interesting association I want to add here is "spare the rod and spoil the child." If one "spares the rod," they fail to teach their children so they shall have wisdom. This has nothing to do with whipping them!

Your "snake on a pole" also means "feminine spirit," "sophia," wisdom," so please feel free to call Nehusta and me a "snake" anytime you want!


Most of the gnostic material, except the gospel of Thomas, came after the canonical writings and the writings of the new testament.

You keep accusing me but your arguing something that you don't believe in? Why don't you argue that Christ does not exist and then we can show that Christ exists you can show Christ is Satan?

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by okinrus
You've already told us what Nehushta was. I hardly expect some snake on a pole to have a gender but if you want to pretend that your female that's fine.

Apparently you weren't paying attention - the snake on the pole was Nehushtan. Nehushta was the mother of Jehoiachin, (a.k.a., Coniah, Jeconiah or Jechonias). You do know who that was, don't you?

Most of the gnostic material, except the gospel of Thomas, came after the canonical writings and the writings of the new testament.

If you're more comfortable believing that the Literalist interpretation came before the Gnostic philosophy it was interpreting, then that's okay by me (just in case you were seeking my permission ). But if you really want to know more about this subject, I'd like to recommend you start by reading "The Jesus Mysteries: Was the 'Original Jesus' a Pagan God?," by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy.

You keep accusing me but your arguing something that you don't believe in? Why don't you argue that Christ does not exist and then we can show that Christ exists you can show Christ is Satan?

What do you mean I'm arguing something I don't believe in? Just because I don't believe that Jesus really existed as a human man on this earth doesn't mean I don't believe that there is any truth behind the original myth. After all, a myth is simply a means of representing a truth. Just because the Literalists perverted these myths all to hell and back doesn't mean the original myths had no validity, does it?

 

[okinrus]

<i><b>
Apparently you weren't paying attention - the snake on the pole was Nehushtan. Nehushta was the mother of Jehoiachin, (a.k.a., Coniah, Jeconiah or Jechonias). You do know who that was, don't you?</b></i>
No, I thought your name was was the serpent god. But Nehushtan is sometimes spelled differently I think. There is someone with the handle "SnakeLord" on these forums.

If you're more comfortable believing that the Literalist interpretation came before the Gnostic philosophy it was interpreting, then that's okay by me (just in case you were seeking my permission ).

Why would I ask you permission?

But if you really want to know more about this subject, I'd like to recommend you start by reading "The Jesus Mysteries: Was the 'Original Jesus' a Pagan God?," by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy.

I don't find the evidence compelling though I have not read the book. It's more likely that the cult of Mithra borrowed from christians than vice-versa.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by okinrus
No, I thought your name was was the serpent god. But Nehushtan is sometimes spelled differently I think.

The name Nehushtan only appears once in the bible (see 2 Kings 18:4), as does the name Nehushta (see 2 Kings 24:8). I know of no other spelling for either one.

There is someone with the handle "SnakeLord" on these forums.

Ah yes, I found "SnakeLord" on the 9th page of the "S" members list. Apparently he is from London, while I am an American citizen, born and bred in California. His interests are listed as "Aliens, Cigarettes, Alchohol", in that order. I don't really have an overwhelming interest in any of those things (although I will admit that I once vacationed in the general vicinity of Area 51, and X-Files is the only television show I've watched with anything approaching regularity during the past 10 years). SnakeLord is a former freelance writer, while I am an Electrical Engineer. No, I am not SnakeLord.

Why would I ask you permission?

Uh, that was a joke.

I don't find the evidence compelling though I have not read the book.

How can you find the evidence compelling or otherwise when you refuse to even examine it?

It's more likely that the cult of Mithra borrowed from christians than vice-versa.

I'm not sure why you brought up the cult of Mithra, but since you did, it seems unlikely that Mithraism borrowed from Christianity when Mithraism had been around for about 500 years before the alleged birth of Christ.

 

[LostInThought7]

Originally posted by Jenyar
LostinThought, if you are really on the side of truth then at least don't misrepresent Christianity.

I present it as I know it...

Humans are worthless, pitiful creatures that don't deserve life? Excuse me, but please read Isaiah 64 completely:

8 Yet, O LORD , you are our Father.
We are the clay, you are the potter;
we are all the work of your hand.

Yes. I'm not seeing how this counters my image of God at all. O Lord, you are our Father. We are created and shaped by you. This just shows that God is THE BEING that is in control. I don't see how this shows us that the clay is important at all, unless it is important because God is shaping it, but that doesn't give glory to the clay, just the potter.

We were created more than deserving life - as the crown of God's creation, created in His image. The only problem is your image of who God is.

So, we are good in God's eyes. We are the best of his creation, the closest thing to God in all of nature. Yet: a man lives in the mountains in the middle of nowhere. He never hears of the laws set down by Moses (or God, whatever) and though he is a good man, is damned to hell for all eternity because he is too evil. Since he doesn't shed blood for the forgiveness of his sin, since he has never kept any of the agreements that he never made (OT covenants), he is not worthy to get into the kingdom of heaven. And not getting into heaven isn't punishment enough: he is cast into a lake of fire to burn forever. And of course, he has never heard of Jesus either, so there is no way that he can call upon Jesus to save him. It seems to me that the biblical God doesn't think too highly of the nature of humans...

I may have made a mistake in my interpretation of the Bible, I only ask that you point it out to me.

 

[okinrus]

I'm not sure why you brought up the cult of Mithra, but since you did, it seems unlikely that Mithraism borrowed from Christianity when Mithraism had been around for about 500 years before the alleged birth of Christ.

Borrowing from just about every other culture. Can you prove that Mithraism began worshiping Mithra's blood like the Eucharist? I don't think so. Christians such as Justin Martyr were well aware of what Mithraism was doing.

I am not SnakeLord.

I know your not him. What I'm saying is that naming yourself some type of a snake is common. Naming yourself the grandmother of Jesus is <i>not</i> common.

The name Nehushtan only appears once in the bible (see 2 Kings 18:4), as does the name Nehushta (see 2 Kings 24:8). I know of no other spelling for either one.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Nehushta+serpent&btnG=Google+Search
I'm not the only one who spelled Nehushtan in english as Nehushta.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by okinrus
Borrowing from just about every other culture.

Actually, it is Christianity that has borrowed from just about every other culture.

Can you prove that Mithraism began worshiping Mithra's blood like the Eucharist? I don't think so. Christians such as Justin Martyr were well aware of what Mithraism was doing.

Mithraism was the official religion of Rome in Justin's time. Like Christians, they also celebrated a ritual meal in which worshippers ate the flesh of a sacrificed bull and drank its blood. When no bull was available, bread or fish were used as substitutes for the meat, and wine took the place of the blood. Mithran initiates believed that, by eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the bull, they would be born again and would have eternal life. Apparently their rituals were similar enough to the Christian Eucharist that Justin Martyr had to do some fancy footwork to prove a distinction between the two:

From "The Eucharist: Body and Blood of Christ:"

During the days of Roman persecution, to clearly distinguish the Eucharist from the cultic rite of Mithra and to dispel Roman charges of cannibalism, St. Justin Martyr (d. 165) wrote in his First Apology, "We do not consume the Eucharistic bread and wine as if it were ordinary food and drink, for we have been taught that as Jesus Christ our Savior became a man of flesh and blood by the power of the Word of God, so also the food that our flesh and blood assimilate of its nourishment becomes the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus by the power of His own words contained in the prayer of thanksgiving."

 

[Jenyar]

originally posted by LostinThought7
So, we are good in God's eyes. We are the best of his creation, the closest thing to God in all of nature. Yet: a man lives in the mountains in the middle of nowhere. He never hears of the laws set down by Moses (or God, whatever) and though he is a good man, is damned to hell for all eternity because he is too evil. Since he doesn't shed blood for the forgiveness of his sin, since he has never kept any of the agreements that he never made (OT covenants), he is not worthy to get into the kingdom of heaven. And not getting into heaven isn't punishment enough: he is cast into a lake of fire to burn forever. And of course, he has never heard of Jesus either, so there is no way that he can call upon Jesus to save him. It seems to me that the biblical God doesn't think too highly of the nature of humans...

I may have made a mistake in my interpretation of the Bible, I only ask that you point it out to me.

Gladly. A man who lives in the mountains in the middle of nowhere is not your concern unless you care about him. He will learn about right and wrong from nature, and will be judged by his heart. You don't know whether he is evil or not, only God does - and you can be sure He will judge fairly. Noah and Abraham also didn't know the laws of Moses, or anything else, yet they had faith in God. So rather worry about yourself, who has the benefit of knowledge and still can't believe. Jesus died for all mankind, including those who don't know him. Those who trust God for their lives will be justified through Christ even without realizing it.

 

[Jenyar]

Originally posted by Nehushta
Actually, it is Christianity that has borrowed from just about every other culture.

I challenge you to prove any dependence.

Mithraism was the official religion of Rome in Justin's time. Like Christians, they also celebrated a ritual meal in which worshippers ate the flesh of a sacrificed bull and drank its blood. When no bull was available, bread or fish were used as substitutes for the meat, and wine took the place of the blood. Mithran initiates believed that, by eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the bull, they would be born again and would have eternal life. Apparently their rituals were similar enough to the Christian Eucharist that Justin Martyr had to do some fancy footwork to prove a distinction between the two:

That just proves that people could understand the principles without realizing its significance. Religious festivals, practices, days and rituals are all just shadows of meaning. The question is whether they really had any meaning to stand on. It isn't hard to think how meals could be seen as a ritual of sustenance - but sustenance by whom? Jews (and Christians) were forbidden to drink the blood of an animal, because life came from God and was sacred. The Mithra cult could drink all the blood they wanted without gaining eternal life.

Also read Doesn't the religion of Mithra prove that Christianity is false?

 

[MacM]

MW,

I haven't had time to read al the material from the links but the quick glance tells me I might enjoy some reading.

I have some questions for tose following this thread.

1 - Have you ever wondered why we are given Jeuse at his miraculus birth and agains as Jesus the Savior but nothing of his childhood?

2 - How many of you have read, seen or ever heard of "The Lost Books of the Bible?"

I have a copy. It is marked "Not for sale or public dissemination" and appears to be a book for theologins.

If it is a bonafide collection of Biblical stories, it becomes clear why it was edited out of the bible.

Jesus was a smart mouth kid that back talked his teachers and even killed several playmates and one teacher because the teacher attempted to discipline him for back talking.

 

[Jenyar]

That's just a conspiracy theory. No books of the Bible were lost, some were just not included because they were stories made up to try and "fill in the gaps", such as the one you mention. Nobody would have recorded the life of a child who wasn't in the public eye until his thirties.

For more information about these reputedly "lost books", see:
http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm
and Do the lost books of the Bible prove that the Bible has been altered?

If you believe some of these books carry authority as accounts of Jesus' life, then you should state which books and why.

 

[everneo]

Originally posted by MacM
Jesus was a smart mouth kid that back talked his teachers and even killed several playmates and one teacher because the teacher attempted to discipline him for back talking.

This from your personal copy that you cannot share.?!

I too have a personal copy that i cannot share that says he just pinched those playmates and one teacher that tried to kill him.

 

[okinrus]

Supposively the story goes that the young boy was killed by accident somehow and Jesus was blamed. But then Jesus raised the boy into the life and escaped punishment. So Jesus did not really kill anyone.