My unanswered questions about Christ

Jesus, unlike Patton, did not say "I will return". Jesus' return is supposed to mark the end of days - something that shouldn't be taken literally here on Earth. Besides, who cares about the end of time when you will die before it even happens assuming Jesus meant something so literal?
 
Why? said:
Jesus, unlike Patton, did not say "I will return". Jesus' return is supposed to mark the end of days - something that shouldn't be taken literally here on Earth. Besides, who cares about the end of time when you will die before it even happens assuming Jesus meant something so literal?
Click to expand...
-End of the days ~ End of the Age of Piscies
-Thats a good question in perverted way, why do Christians believe that there will be apocalypse, indeed, hmmmm... Fear ~ Control ?
 
The apocalypse comes from the very very dubious book of Revelations written by John of Patmos. John was drugged out his mind when he wrote this nonsense.
 
The Catholic Church added it in the early days for reasons I am not aware. However, the Church has distanced itself from Revelations and does not teach that it is to be taken literally. Reading Revelations makes it clear to most people that the stories are symbolic and cryptic, e.g. "the prostitute" refers to Rome. To take Revelations literally is to fundamentally overlook the symbolism the author obviously intended.
 
How does the validity of Revelations differ from other "gospels" in the bible ?
How one can know which gospels has a validity and which ones dont ?
 
The Letters from the Apostles would seem to have the most validity, assuming that the Apostle actually wrote them. Unfortunately, the Letters are rather short and not narratives, exactly what you would expect from a letter. The four Gospels contradict themselves in places and also contain some dubious claims - which is to be expected from authors who were not Apostles and writing decades after the events. However, the Gospels contain the most detail, and therefore, naturally become the most relied upon. Unfortunately, the simple fact of the matter is Jesus apparently did not write anything down. We are left with later second hand interpretations of what he said mixed in with fictious stories devised to be attractive to certain groups targeted for conversion. The writings of Christianity are in sad shape, but that's all we've got.
 
Why? said:
The Letters from the Apostles would seem to have the most validity, assuming that the Apostle actually wrote them. Unfortunately, the Letters are rather short and not narratives, exactly what you would expect from a letter. The four Gospels contradict themselves in places and also contain some dubious claims - which is to be expected from authors who were not Apostles and writing decades after the events. However, the Gospels contain the most detail, and therefore, naturally become the most relied upon. Unfortunately, the simple fact of the matter is Jesus apparently did not write anything down. We are left with later second hand interpretations of what he said mixed in with fictious stories devised to be attractive to certain groups targeted for conversion. The writings of Christianity are in sad shape, but that's all we got.
Click to expand...
-So its deep faith required when believing man-god Jesus.
-Oh the irony, if one come to conclusion that Jesus ~ The Annointed One ~ The Christ is The Sun, he wouldnt only believe it but feel and see it every day, no faith required :D
 
You cannot believe that Jesus is the son of God without deep faith. There are no miracles being worked by Jesus on this Earth anymore - at least not by a corporeal being named Jesus who is 2000 years old. However, it doesn't take any faith whatsoever to believe that Jesus was a real person. The Church exists, it's documents from early Christianity exist, certainly Christians were martyred in ancient Rome - clearly the evidence points to the existence of a real Jesus. Also, Josephus mentions Jesus in his Jewish histories. M*W's nonsense that Jesus worship is really sun worship defies common sense in light of the historical organization built around the man Jesus.
 
Why? said:
You cannot believe that Jesus is the son of God without deep faith. There are no miracles being worked by Jesus on this Earth anymore - at least not by a corporeal being named Jesus who is 2000 years old. However, it doesn't take any faith whatsoever to believe that Jesus was a real person. The Church exists, it's documents from early Christianity exist, certainly Christians were martyred in ancient Rome - clearly the evidence points to the existence of a real Jesus. Also, Josephus mentions Jesus in his Jewish histories. M*W's nonsense that Jesus worship is really sun worship defies common sense in light of the historical organization built around the man Jesus.
Click to expand...
-Every point of the reasoning that you wrote applies to my Religion and Kalevala too :D except the underline ones, because M*W is right on that one, and the irony that Kalevala isnt our religion... because of the...hmmmm, Christianity. Where is my holy book Kalevala :cool:
-Wanna word twister ?
kalavale ~ expression and compound word used when somebody is magnifying something, like adding lenght to the fish (piscies lol) when telling someone about it, it has it roots in that one I guess because...
kala=fish vale=lie.
Change a two letters and you get... Kalevala. :cool:
And thats not all, vala=oath
 
No doubt mankind has worshipped the Sun. Mankind has also worshipped other men, e.g. Roman Emperors. Why should the worship of Jesus refer to the Sun and not to an actual man? Seems absurd to believe Jesus is a really the Sun in light of the clear evidence of his historical existence. Give me your best argument - why should Jesus refer to the sun and not to a man?
 
You got it backwards.
Every miracle and quality is derived from the Sun and then imposed to, in this case Jesus.
Wäinämöinen in Kalevala was pretty mighty guy too, born from Ilmatar, The Mother God.
Sampo was the Sun.
Your best argument is the Bible which does have same validity as my Book Kalevala, which by the way is comdened to be paganism ~ heretics ~ hell, not very nice thing, by your book :( And this while your holy book has the part of Revelations which by your claims has no validity.
So, if I may rest my case, Kalevala ~ Bible ~ Story. Strip the part of the story that isnt relating astronomy/astrology/sun and you can do it to my book Kalevala too, and what is there left ? Psalms ~ Poems and stuff.
I ask you, what is God, and if you tell me that Jesus I will tell you that, no it was Ilmatar, then, who is right ?
It should be the Way of the God and the Nature of the God pounding our heads rather than this "pointless"[sarcasm] debate.
 
Any similarity between sun worship and worship of the historical Jesus is pure coincidence. If Jesus meant that God was the sun, he certainly would have said so. Jesus never claimed God was the sun.
 
Why? said:
Any similarity between sun worship and worship of the historical Jesus is pure coincidence. If Jesus meant that God was the sun, he certainly would have said so. Jesus never claimed God was the sun.
Click to expand...

And he never claimed to be the son of god, or a god himself.
 
Mythras was a Sun diety. And the similarities between Christ and Mythras are astounding. Constentine was a high priest of the cult. And was also he man responsible for consolidating the Christian religion. He called together the Christian Bishops to compile the Christian Cannon. And it is very interesting to see how the two religions merged. Now there is a Christian explanation for every pagan practice adopted, but frankly those reasons are not very substancial.
For example, Christmas the birth of Christ is celebrated on the day Mythras was reported to be born. Let's look at the cross, the cross was not a symbol associated with Christ until the time of Constintine. The cross and orb are Mythric symbols of God. Previously Christ was associated with the sign of the fish. The Sabath was moved from Saturday to Sunday. Sunday is the day devoted to the worship of Mythras.

However Mithras was not a religion for everyone. It was limited to males. So it would make sense to merge the 2 religions. Christianity made no such limitations. Mithraism could not survive as a male only religion.
 
Jesus in his early teens travelled to the east and brought back eastern philosophy, there is ancient Tibetan or Indian record of a child named" Issa" arriving and studying in one of the monastries at precisely that time.
 
Why?
-Any similarity between sun worship and worship of the historical Jesus is pure coincidence. If Jesus meant that God was the sun, he certainly would have said so. Jesus never claimed God was the sun.

-And your source is...The Bible. ? .
-Just analyze the passages in The Bible about God, they apply to sun near 100%.
-If Jesus did exist he was just a teacher, not a man-god.
-Its in my book too, or do I really believe that some blacksmith could provide machine like Sampo ?

" In Finnish mythology, the Sampo was a magical artifact constructed by Ilmarinen that brought good fortune to its holder; nobody knows exactly what it was supposed to be. When the Sampo was stolen, it is said that Ilmarinen's homeland fell upon hard times and sent an expedition to retrieve it, but in the ensuing battle it was smashed and lost at sea.

The Sampo has been interpreted in many ways: a world pillar or world tree, a compass or astrolabe, a chest containing a treasure, a Byzantine coin die, a decorated Vendel period shield, a Christian relic, etc. In the Kalevala, compiler Lönnrot interpreted it to be a quern or mill of some sort that made flour, salt, and gold out of thin air. The world pillar theory, originally developed by historian of religions Uno Harva and linguistic E. N. Setälä in the early 20th century, is the most widely accepted one."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampo

-The Sun does that very nicely, it created us too, with other King Stars like constellation of Virgo ~ Mary ;)
-World Pillar is the North Star, maybe the sun is better, well, closer to us anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
joepistole said:
Mythras was a Sun diety. And the similarities between Christ and Mythras are astounding. Constentine was a high priest of the cult. And was also he man responsible for consolidating the Christian religion. He called together the Christian Bishops to compile the Christian Cannon. And it is very interesting to see how the two religions merged. Now there is a Christian explanation for every pagan practice adopted, but frankly those reasons are not very substancial.
For example, Christmas the birth of Christ is celebrated on the day Mythras was reported to be born. Let's look at the cross, the cross was not a symbol associated with Christ until the time of Constintine. The cross and orb are Mythric symbols of God. Previously Christ was associated with the sign of the fish. The Sabath was moved from Saturday to Sunday. Sunday is the day devoted to the worship of Mythras.

However Mithras was not a religion for everyone. It was limited to males. So it would make sense to merge the 2 religions. Christianity made no such limitations. Mithraism could not survive as a male only religion.
Click to expand...

His name was ContAntine and he was known as "Constantine the maculo".

Although Constantine was one of the greatest influences in promoting the Christian faith, he is also credited with infiltrating it with pagan practices, and bringing idols into the church. While Christianity was growing in popularity, sun worship or Mithraism remained strong in the empire. Sun worshipers were converted to Christianity because of their surface similarities, practices, and analogies such as “the sun of righteousness” which were later implemented into the church.
Click to expand...
 
The cross we use today as a Christian symbol is not the type of cross that was used for Roman crucifixions. The Romans use a cross like the “T” as it was a much more efficient form compared to the traditional “+” cross used in Christian symbols and in Mythriac traditions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top