Sanders' Religion Thread, Begun @ LC Forum Options

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: usediscernment Jul 31 2006, 04:35 AM

I understand what you're saying, but the Bible and the Qu'ran have such adamently opposing positions on the character of God and Allah that I don't know how you can attribute that to human mistakes. These aren't just subtle differences, for instance, going from destroying Jews in the Qu'ran to loving them in the Bible is a HUGE leap.

The beliefs are not that closely related. Like Jesus dying on the cross for the sins of mankind in the Bible vs. no mention of such thing in the Qu'ran. The spiritual and physical death of Jesus is a huge deal to Christians and Jews, and yet, not at all existant in Islam.

The Koran, I believe, is the exact Word of God because it was dictated to an amanuensis.

Who dictated the Qu'ran to an amanuensis? That is important. After all, an amanuensis is also a human, and therefore prone to mistake.

If you take the pentateuch (first 5 books of the Bible, or otherwise referred to as the Torah) into consideration, they are considered to be written by Moses (who, after all, is only human) but are also considered to have been dictated by God to Moses.

Yes, the bible clearly mentions (over 94 times) that the God of the bible has given us his word to mankind. i will only post (2)

Paul writting to timothy
2Tim 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Jesus praying to the father
John 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

Now how is it possible for the God of the bible to hold mankind responsible
to his word if it was written from man??

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: Sanders Jul 31 2006, 04:41 AM

Well, this is a discussionboard about the 9/11 hoax.

So, why not talk about the biggest one, the MEGA HOAX: which of course is

CHRISTIANITY.

Could be. Either way, Christianity created a new vessel for Abraham's one god to replace the pagan gods of Europe.

BTW if you hold that 9/11 was a pretext for a religious war, this stuff is all related...

GM10,
Jacob had 12 sons, his son Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers and sent to Egypt. Joseph, by interpreting the Pharoh's dream, predicted a long drought and advised the Pharoh to stock up on grain. The drought came just as Joseph said and the Pharoh made him Prime Minister of Egypt (there is actually some evidence this person existed, his Egyptian name was Imhotep).

During the 7 year drought Egypt was the only place that had stores of grain, and the Pharoh allowed Joseph to invite his family. They came with their wives and children, and stayed. The descendants of Joseph and his brothers made up the 12 tribes. After Moses led the Israelites (all descendents of the 12 brothers) back to Canaan and they expelled the Canaanites, Israel was split up into 12 parcels, one each was given to each of the 12 tribes. That's basically the idea. (Actually the descendants of Joseph's 2 sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, each recieved a parcel. The Levites (descendents of Levi) became the priests and were not given land, but rather a tithe from the other tribes.)

The next thing to happen in Israel is Kings David and Solomon and the building of the Temple. Then Assyria invades. But I'm curious what's going on in Arabia all this time - tell us about the Ka'ab rites? Also, does the Quran say anything about the wars in Canaan?


I can't comment on the identity of God stuff, other than to say the obvious - that the source of Judaism's, Christianity's and Islam's belief in one God is the same (Abraham). Don't let me interrupt - carry on.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: usediscernment Jul 31 2006, 04:54 AM

Well, this is a discussionboard about the 9/11 hoax.

So, why not talk about the biggest one, the MEGA HOAX: which of course is

CHRISTIANITY. The whole hokus-pokus BS is built on the lie that Jaheeezus, was an historical person. In other words that he existed.

There is no historical proof of Jesus existence whatsoever. It is all made up.

Just as time goes on many years after 911 there will be many who could say that 911 was a hoax, just like there are some who say that there wasnt a holicaust.
Now check this out...

The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, 2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Spirit had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: 3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
Acts 1:1-3 (KJV)

People will have to make a concious decision to either believe or not to believe.
Either way it does not make the happening not true!!!

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: DayAfterTomorrow Jul 31 2006, 04:57 AM

I can't comment on the identity of God stuff, other than to say the obvious - that the source of Judaism's, Christianity's and Islam's belief in one God is the same (Abraham). Don't let me interrupt - carry on.

I am attempting to learn Hebrew, which is a long and excruciating process, but I remember reading a while back that the Hebrew word for "wife" in the Bible as used for Sarai/Sarah is different than the Hebrew word for "wife" as it relates to Hagar. This could occur because the Hebrew language is MUCH MUCH more specific than the English language, so there are sometimes like 7 words in Hebrew that mean different variations of one word in English. My understanding is that the word "wife" used for Sarai/Sarah means actual spouse, like we think of wife today. Whereas, the word "wife" as used for Hagar means more of the act of sexual intercourse or 'pretend' wife. This is not to be confused with sexual intercourse in relation to prostitution.

So if this is true (and I am still trying to find where I read this at), that would mean Ishmael was not Abraham's first legitimate child. It would further reinforce the fact that, in the Bible, God referred to Isaac as the one through whom the nation of Israel would be created. Also, there was huge significance to Abram's name being changed to Abraham, and additionally Sarai was changed to Sarah. Hagar's name was never changed. Was there this name changing fiasco in the Qu'ran?

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: bingo Jul 31 2006, 04:59 AM

I can't comment on the identity of God stuff, other than to say the obvious - that the source of Judaism's, Christianity's and Islam's belief in one God is the same (Abraham). Don't let me interrupt - carry on.

No, that is false. According to Christians, the source of belief is Jesus Christ, and this goes for both Christians, and the ancient Jews. Even before the incarnation, the Son of God was imparting faith. Abraham was the recipient, not the originator, of it.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: pr0mythius Jul 31 2006, 05:14 AM

I have questions (not to degrade anyone or their beliefs): how can Allah and God be the same being if they do not share the same attributes?

How can Allah be God, if God is a trinity and Allah is one being?

How can Allah be God, if God was to send a part of himself to die for the sins of mankind and Allah has done no such thing?

How can Allah be God, if Allah desires the destruction of the Jews and God does not?

I don't understand. I didn't take usediscernment's post to be offensive, but rather, pointing out that if Allah is God and vice versa, then Christians, Jews, and Muslims should agree that Allah/God has the same characteristics regarding love, sin, hatred, vindictiveness, murder, the trinity, one being, salvation, etc. But we all don't agree on that issue. So if we are not in agreement on that, how is it that they are one in the same?

I am just inquiring to further our understanding on the beliefs of each of these religions, I am not trying to insult anyone, and I believe this is crucial to understanding exactly what the conflict is.

ok ... lets say there is a supreme being, a "God"(which i believe) ... this is how allah can be God just as Jesus/God of christianity can also be.

call God jehovah .. allah .. or Fred Dickinson ... it doesnt matter. you can have a million different beliefs on the details of what God wants for his creation and such. but when it comes to worshiping and following ... you're all following the same God. even if you entertain the idea of more than one God ... your thoughts/prayers/energy .. are all going to the same entity. see what i'm saying? a christian prays to god ... a muslim prays to god .. a mormon .. a jew .. whoever .. they're praying to the same God. doesnt matter what you call him/her.

ok that was f'd up ... i work at a hotel .. and i'm at work right now ... and i just checked in one "Frederick Dickinson" how spooky is that? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

No, that is false. According to Christians, the source of belief is Jesus Christ, and this goes for both Christians, and the ancient Jews. Even before the incarnation, the Son of God was imparting faith. Abraham was the recipient, not the originator, of it.

i thought the jews didnt believe jesus was the son of God? that they're still waiting for the messiah?

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: DayAfterTomorrow Jul 31 2006, 05:25 AM

call God jehovah .. allah .. or Fred Dickinson ... it doesnt matter. you can have a million different beliefs on the details of what God wants for his creation and such. but when it comes to worshiping and following ... you're all following the same God. even if you entertain the idea of more than one God ... your thoughts/prayers/energy .. are all going to the same entity. see what i'm saying? a christian prays to god ... a muslim prays to god .. a mormon .. a jew .. whoever .. they're praying to the same God. doesnt matter what you call him/her.

Well I think there is a huge problem if one belief system is telling you to kill Jews and the other is telling you that Jews are God's chosen people. That kind of matters to the Jews....

ok that was f'd up ... i work at a hotel .. and i'm at work right now ... and i just checked in one "Frederick Dickinson" how spooky is that?  (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

In the words of the EXTREMELY knowledgeable Paris Hilton, "That's Hott." (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

i thought the jews didnt believe jesus was the son of God? that they're still waiting for the messiah?

It is my understanding, though I may be wrong, that Jews believe Jesus is the son of God, but that he has not come yet and has not yet been crucified. That kind of goes along with the fact that they only look at the old testament, and most specifically the first five books. So, you kind of miss out on the whole Jesus part when you don't read the new testament.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: bingo Jul 31 2006, 05:30 AM

i thought the jews didnt believe jesus was the son of God? that they're still waiting for the messiah?

The Jews believe in a Son of God, but most of them rejected him when he came. But he appeared before 500 believing Jews after the resurrection, the very small remnant that was referred to in the Old Testament.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: pr0mythius> Jul 31 2006, 05:36 AM

Well I think there is a huge problem if one belief system is telling you to kill Jews and the other is telling you that Jews are God's chosen people. That kind of matters to the Jews.....

well i was just meaning that ... here you have two groups of people ... both with a "holy book." both said to be inspired by God. so unless God is just instigating a fight to give him/her something to watch ... then i'm gonna stand by the fact that they're both wrong.

as if i'm supposed to choose sides or something. i'm not about to believe something just because one story sounds better than the other. they both have a lot of good things that they promote .. as well as bad things .. but its considered blasphemy to just pick and choose. like you believe it all or none at all.

any group of people that deal in absolutes shouldnt be trusted.
Bush: "you're either with us .. or with the terrorists"
Bible: "you're either of me or of Satan"

screw all of that!

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: DayAfterTomorrow Jul 31 2006, 06:07 AM

well i was just meaning that ... here you have two groups of people ... both with a "holy book." both said to be inspired by God. so unless God is just instigating a fight to give him/her something to watch ... then i'm gonna stand by the fact that they're both wrong.

as if i'm supposed to choose sides or something. i'm not about to believe something just because one story sounds better than the other. they both have a lot of good things that they promote .. as well as bad things .. but its considered blasphemy to just pick and choose. like you believe it all or none at all.

any group of people that deal in absolutes shouldnt be trusted.
Bush: "you're either with us .. or with the terrorists"
Bible: "you're either of me or of Satan"

screw all of that!

The Bible came before the Qu'ran, chronologically, if that matters at all. They are NOT the same God, actually, and if you look at the characteristics of each, that is quite evident; nothing against you or anything, they just have two very different natures.

Actually, the Bible does not promote bad things, whereas the Qu'ran specifically targets the Jews as a race to kill. That is also a huge difference. I have many athiest and agnostic friends, and they tell me the problem with Christianity/Judaism is that the majority of the Christians and Jews that exemplify those religions are huge hypocrites, extremely pushy about their beliefs, and often can't substantiate what they claim. The inherent flaw with Christianity and Judaism, if not with all religions in general, is people. People are imperfect. The difference between the Bible and the Qu'ran as far as this discussion has gone, is that the Bible accepts the fact that humans are imperfect, as we are designed to be, and institutes a plan of action to rectify this imperfection, which is salvation. But, if you notice, the only way the Bible says you can achieve salvation is through God alone, God whom is perfect. The Qu'ran does not have a plan of action to solve for imperfection, and to my knowledge, you don't know what Allah has in store for you.

The problem with Christians is they do not read their Bibles, and if they do, they do not do so correctly. God did not write in English, so why do Christian pastors read their Bibles from the English translations? The Bible was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, so it only makes sense that a pastor should be able to teach the Bible from those languages. Otherwise, you have the problem of inaccurate translations, like my "wife" example above, and many many more. Christian's claim to "know and love" their God, but when it comes right down to it, most do not even know what the Bible says about God. I could go on and on about this, so I'll stop. The point is, the average Christian is not an adequate representative of the religion.

I am a Christian, but I do not attend church physically because you don't learn anything about God. You learn about salvation on Sunday mornings and sin on Wednesday nights, and to me, that is complete BS. The Bible contains infinately more aspects than salvation and sin alone.

I have a great respect for Islamic people as a whole, as my best friend for 15 years is Islamic, so I don't want to create the impression that I hate them, I just disagree.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: Daniels Jul 31 2006, 06:13 AM


"O My brother!
When a true seeker determineth to take the step of search in the path leading unto
the knowledge of the Ancient of Days, he must, before all else, cleanse his heart,
which is the seat of the revelation of the inner mysteries of God, from the
obscuring dust of all acquired knowledge, and the allusions of the embodiments
of satanic fancy."

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: pr0mythius Jul 31 2006, 06:32 AM

well i was just meaning that ... here you have two groups of people ... both with a "holy book." both said to be inspired by God. so unless God is just instigating a fight to give him/her something to watch ... then i'm gonna stand by the fact that they're both wrong.

as if i'm supposed to choose sides or something. i'm not about to believe something just because one story sounds better than the other. they both have a lot of good things that they promote .. as well as bad things .. but its considered blasphemy to just pick and choose. like you believe it all or none at all.

any group of people that deal in absolutes shouldnt be trusted.
Bush: "you're either with us .. or with the terrorists"
Bible: "you're either of me or of Satan"

screw all of that!

The Bible came before the Qu'ran, chronologically, if that matters at all. They are NOT the same God, actually, and if you look at the characteristics of each, that is quite evident; nothing against you or anything, they just have two very different natures.

Actually, the Bible does not promote bad things, whereas the Qu'ran specifically targets the Jews as a race to kill. That is also a huge difference. I have many athiest and agnostic friends, and they tell me the problem with Christianity/Judaism is that the majority of the Christians and Jews that exemplify those religions are huge hypocrites, extremely pushy about their beliefs, and often can't substantiate what they claim. The inherent flaw with Christianity and Judaism, if not with all religions in general, is people. People are imperfect. The difference between the Bible and the Qu'ran as far as this discussion has gone, is that the Bible accepts the fact that humans are imperfect, as we are designed to be, and institutes a plan of action to rectify this imperfection, which is salvation. But, if you notice, the only way the Bible says you can achieve salvation is through God alone, God whom is perfect. The Qu'ran does not have a plan of action to solve for imperfection, and to my knowledge, you don't know what Allah has in store for you.

The problem with Christians is they do not read their Bibles, and if they do, they do not do so correctly. God did not write in English, so why do Christian pastors read their Bibles from the English translations? The Bible was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, so it only makes sense that a pastor should be able to teach the Bible from those languages. Otherwise, you have the problem of inaccurate translations, like my "wife" example above, and many many more. Christian's claim to "know and love" their God, but when it comes right down to it, most do not even know what the Bible says about God. I could go on and on about this, so I'll stop. The point is, the average Christian is not an adequate representative of the religion.

I am a Christian, but I do not attend church physically because you don't learn anything about God. You learn about salvation on Sunday mornings and sin on Wednesday nights, and to me, that is complete BS. The Bible contains infinately more aspects than salvation and sin alone.

I have a great respect for Islamic people as a whole, as my best friend for 15 years is Islamic, so I don't want to create the impression that I hate them, I just disagree.

so are you saying that the God of Christianity .. and the God or Allah of Islam ... are 2 different entities? so there are 2 Gods? thats what you're saying? if not .. then one must exsist and the other doesnt ... you cant have it both ways.

but if there are 2 Gods like that .. with opposing views on the universe and how things should be done .. then why dont they just duke it out and let us know who won? or better yet ... we can set it up for a PPV event! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)

and you said the bible doesnt promote bad things? how bout sadom and ghamorah .. or however you spell it. the plagues ... the city of jericho. the bible is peppered with stories of men who had the approval of God to slaughter others. this is not bad things?

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: pr0mythius Jul 31 2006, 06:38 AM

"O My brother!
When a true seeker determineth to take the step of search in the path leading unto
the knowledge of the Ancient of Days, he must, before all else, cleanse his heart,
which is the seat of the revelation of the inner mysteries of God, from the
obscuring dust of all acquired knowledge, and the allusions of the embodiments
of satanic fancy."

before i dove into "the knowledge of ancient days" i did what i guess you could say was a heart cleansing. for about 3 years ... i spent the majority of time answering one question. "who am i?" like socrates said ... "know thy self" .. i agree that this is the most imporant thing a person can do. i'm not completely there .. probably never will be. but i've come to understand much about myself. reasons for reactions to past events .. reasons for others actions to past events.(sometimes it comes clear in ones self when seeing such in another)

BUT ... i dont think Satan exsists. and even if he/she did ... it would be because of a physical manifestation because of the massive belief in the entity.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: Daniels Jul 31 2006, 07:09 AM

BUT ... i dont think Satan exsists.  and even if he/she did ... it would be because of a physical manifestation because of the massive belief in the entity.

Good point pr0mythius

Baha'is believe that Satan as referred to in the Scriptures means the self or the ego.

The 'self' is personified as 'Satan' to make it easier to identify.

That is the human condition. We have a choice -- to do good, or to do bad.

In the spiritual world we don't have that choice. Or, to be more exact, we do have the choice but faced with the overwhelming glory and loveliness of the Unknowable Essence we would never even think of doing anything ungodly.

Every moment of every day of our earthly lives we are faced with that choice.

The more choices to do good, the more saintly we become. The more choices to do bad, or to look after number 1 at the expense of others, the more satanic we become.

"Follow not the promptings of your own desires, nor the whisperings of the Evil One in your souls."

In the above quote, "your own desires" and "the Evil One" mean the same thing.

Those who believe that Satan is a separate creature, to my mind, believe in two gods, God and an anti-god.

Baha'is believe that God, the Unknowable Essence, is omnipotent. Being omnipotent means that there cannot exist anything but that it exists at His pleasure. Meaning that 'Satan', as a separate entity, cannot exist.



BTW Good work on your self exploration. I commend you for it.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: pr0mythius Jul 31 2006, 07:19 AM

i agree with that ... i've said for years that the "evil" is within us. and i have thought since i was about 13-14 that the concept of satan or the devil was just a way to blame everything you've done bad on something besides urself. no responsibility for ones action. SATAN MADE ME DO IT! blah

but not following the promptings of your own desires. hmmmmm what exactly does this involve. because if God created everything .. he created those desires that we have. for instance. christians seem to have this logic that sex is BAD ... long ago christian spouses would only have sex as a way for breeding. and while doing so would wear a full body robe with openings in the obvious areas.

THAT .. is rediculous of course. but it does seem to be a standing of many .. my father is a southern baptist preacher .. and the only times we even TALKED about sex was when i was 12 and we had "the talk" .. then when i had to tell him i wasnt a virgin anymore. he asked if i could go back would i do it again .. and i said absolutely .. he just looked all shocked. -shakes head-

my point is ... desires are not wrong .. some .. perhaps .. but for the most part i think its wrong to deny urself the things which give you pleasure. doing so doesnt glorify anyone or anything.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: Daniels Jul 31 2006, 07:47 AM

and the only times we even TALKED about sex was when i was 12 and we had "the talk" .. then when i had to tell him i wasnt a virgin anymore.  he asked if i could go back would i do it again .. and i said absolutely .. he just looked all shocked.  -shakes head-

my point is ... desires are not wrong .. some .. perhaps .. but for the most part i think its wrong to deny urself the things which give you pleasure. doing so doesnt glorify anyone or anything.

[laugh] I like the bit about telling your dad you weren't a virgin.

Baha'is are taught that desires are good. For example, the desire to excel, or the desire to spread Truth. Sexual desire within a marriage is good because it strengthens the bonds between husband and wife.

Those who do the full body suit thing are simply taking the idea of self-denial to an extreme.

Baha'is are encouraged to be moderate in all things.

So sexual self-control, abstinence, is praisworthy, but sexual expression with one's spouse for the sake of enjoyment is okay too. Mutilating our genitals (as some Islamic people do) or engaging in sexual promiscuity (as some Western people do) are both extremes and forbidden to Baha'is (though some of us Western Baha'is are a work-in-progress on the latter point (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif) )

Desire, moderately controlled is good. Desire without control is not.

[edit: Typos]

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: pr0mythius Jul 31 2006, 07:55 AM

yea i dont see the validity in the "no sex before marriage" thing. sure .. if you wanna do that .. its all good .. more power to ya. but i dont see how its all that important. i've never been married ... probably never will for several reasons .. but thats another issue.

but yea i've had sex .. and one thing i'm proud of tho .. is that i lost my virginity to someone i truely loved. thats why i told my dad i had no shame about it ... and there was no way in hell he could convince me otherwise. i was 18 the first time i had sex. most reactions i get when i tell people that is "wow .. i lost mine at 15" or 14 or 16 or whatever.

i dont think people should be rackless with thier sexual desires ... but i also dont think sex needs approval by a religion. when you get down to it .. we're just mammals. sure we're considered half-way intellegent and all that .. but still we're just animals.

oh yea .. and masturbation. why the hell do religions have this thing agaisnt masturbation ... catholics at least .. christians too .. dunno about muslims or some others .. but yea. they dont want someone else to pleasure you .. they dont want you to pleasure urself. WHAT THE HELL! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: Hound Jul 31 2006, 10:25 AM

Well, this is a discussionboard about the 9/11 hoax.

So, why not talk about the biggest one, the MEGA HOAX: which of course is

CHRISTIANITY.

Could be. Either way, Christianity created a new vessel for Abraham's one god to replace the pagan gods of Europe.

BTW if you hold that 9/11 was a pretext for a religious war, this stuff is all related...

GM10,
Jacob had 12 sons, his son Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers and sent to Egypt. Joseph, by interpreting the Pharoh's dream, predicted a long drought and advised the Pharoh to stock up on grain. The drought came just as Joseph said and the Pharoh made him Prime Minister of Egypt (there is actually some evidence this person existed, his Egyptian name was Imhotep).

During the 7 year drought Egypt was the only place that had stores of grain, and the Pharoh allowed Joseph to invite his family. They came with their wives and children, and stayed. The descendants of Joseph and his brothers made up the 12 tribes. After Moses led the Israelites (all descendents of the 12 brothers) back to Canaan and they expelled the Canaanites, Israel was split up into 12 parcels, one each was given to each of the 12 tribes. That's basically the idea. (Actually the descendants of Joseph's 2 sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, each recieved a parcel. The Levites (descendents of Levi) became the priests and were not given land, but rather a tithe from the other tribes.)

The next thing to happen in Israel is Kings David and Solomon and the building of the Temple. Then Assyria invades. But I'm curious what's going on in Arabia all this time - tell us about the Ka'ab rites? Also, does the Quran say anything about the wars in Canaan?


I can't comment on the identity of God stuff, other than to say the obvious - that the source of Judaism's, Christianity's and Islam's belief in one God is the same (Abraham). Don't let me interrupt - carry on.

Yes indeed, but was replacing the Pagan gods= Our European gods, our European culture, with the Abrahamic= totally alien semitic god, that got nothing to do with European culture.

A good thing?

It was the biggest disaster in the European history. When they got in power they burnt and slaughtered everything Pagan=European. The pagan culture (so much higher than the xtian) was completly destoyed. They burnt every library.

Europe descended inte the dark ages it lasted to the renaissance.


9/11 was certainly a pretext for war, not a religious war. But they are using the tremendous power of religion. They are deliberatly spreading hatred among xtians towards Muslims.


Aren't you too wise to view the bible as book of historiography? It is a book of myths. Take the myth that the Jews were slaves in Egypt. There is no evidence for this. It is pure fantasie, or rather a myth. With no basis in the historical reality.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: Daniels Jul 31 2006, 10:36 AM

Aren't you too wise to view the bible as book of historiography? It is a book of myths. Take the myth that the Jews were slaves in Egypt. There is no evidence for this. It is pure fantasie, or rather a myth. With no basis in the historical reality.

Hi Hound,

I have it on good authority that history didn't start to be chronoligically set down until Pliny the Elder set to work on it.

Apparently, prior to that history was passed down by word of mouth.

Yes, the Bible has its fair share of mythological references such as the story of Adam and Eve. But the fact that it is allegorical doesn't diminish its value. Same as the Aboriginal dreamtime stories, US Indian lore, etc. They speak to us on the level of mysticism, the language of the heart, significant to the soul.

And yeah, a lot of evil was done in the name of Christ in the Dark Ages -- but I think Christ is ashamed of those people.

[Guest_librarian_*]

Posted by: pr0mythius Jul 31 2006, 10:50 AM

Yes indeed, but was replacing the Pagan gods= Our European gods, our European culture, with the Abrahamic= totally alien semitic god, that got nothing to do with European culture.

A good thing?

It was the biggest disaster in the European history. When they got in power they burnt and slaughtered everything Pagan=European. The pagan culture (so much higher than the xtian) was completly destoyed. They burnt every library.

Europe descended inte the dark ages it lasted to the renaissance.


9/11 was certainly a pretext for war, not a religious war. But they are using the tremendous power of religion. They are deliberatly spreading hatred among xtians towards Muslims.


Aren't you too wise to view the bible as book of historiography? It is a book of myths. Take the myth that the Jews were slaves in Egypt. There is no evidence for this. It is pure fantasie, or rather a myth. With no basis in the historical reality.

well ... acctually christianity does have a bit to do with paganism. you could classify me as a pagan i suppose .. most of thier teaching seem to make more sense than more organized religions. but anywayz ... christianity did take a lot of thier holidays from paganism. for instance:

christmas .. jesus birthday id celebrated on december 25th when most scholars say from the story that jesus was more than likely born in august. but the christian church made december 25th the holiday to celebrate his birth to overshadow the Yule holiday. and early christians actually used to celebrate jesus's birthday on january 6th. by the way .. yule holiday celebrates the rebirth of the God. coincidence? HA!

easter .. christians celebrate this holiday to remember the crucifixion of christ .. so where did all the bunnies and eggs come from? pagans celebrate Ostara around the same time .. the spring equinox .. the return of spring .. and also with this came the birthing of farm animals.

Samhain/Halloween .. celebrated by pagans to remember thier loved ones that have passed on .. it symbolized the death of the God and the Goddess mourning him til the coming of Yule and his rebirth. Christians then created All-Saint day to counter this holiday.

interesting eh?

baptism is another one
the last supper

the imagery of the crucifixion, two theievs on each side of jesus .. in paganism Mithras had two torchbearers, one on each side .. one torch pointed up .. other down .. symbolizing ascent to heaven and hell.

and the ways people in the old testament would attone for thier sins matched that of pagan ritual.

ok i guess i'll stop now .. should be enough to convince i hope. (IMG:http://img451.imageshack.us/img451/5052/smokeoq4.jpg)