Who is the Antichrist?

[Dr H..]

Eclipse January 15 2010 A Sign of Revelation Part 3

What is Revelation part 3, please explain.:scared:

 

[JayRob]

He also ordered the anihilation of the Sidonians, Hittites, Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites, and Hamathites for starters.

More proof that YOUR loving god is a killer and lover of human blood.

My loving God hates sin. He makes no apologies for that. Should I choose a life of sin, I, too, will be destroyed.

You have a distorted view of love. Your so-called "loving" god supposedly made Satan as the strongest being ever, yet he's sentencing hundreds of thousands of humans to death because they can't overpower this being, a being that's innately stronger than them? What kind of love is that? The bible has changed the meaning of the term "love" into something sadistic and psychotic. Fear means love and to love means to fear. That's a sign of sadomasochism if I ever saw it.

I stand by what I said. Should God tell me to do so, I will make sure you're invited to oversee the proceedings.

I proved to you that this Old Testament god approved of human sacrifice. You can't refute it, so all you can say is, "I stand by what I say". Such hypocristy if I ever saw it. Ordering the death of innocent people does not equal love, especially if the victims are babies and children.

If you believe such nonsense, I wouldn't mind overseeing the death penalty being applied to you by a more just criminal justice system. This is more proof that religious fundamentalism has totally brainwashed otherwise sane people. Like I said, it takes religion to make a "good" person go bad.

Sir, Christianity is based on the life of Jesus Christ. That is all. If you want to make the conjecture above, please support it with evidence that you require of others. Not opinion; EVIDENCE.

Evidence for what? I already showed that your religion is based and founded on human sacrifice. This fictional Jesus supposedly died for mankind. Another form of human sacrifice. This is no different than the pagans sacrificing humans for their sins.

What I compared was two things that the Bible doesn't talk about (microscopic creatures vs. modern methods of execution) and how obedience to the laws given relative to those things protects you from those things.

So you finally admit that the bible doesn't mentioned the GREATEST cause of all diseases which are bacteria and viruses?! That was like pulling teeth to get you to do so.
The bible purports that evil spirits causing many diseases.

Dacon, in our day and age of science and reason, which theory has been proven to be the most accurate, a) that diseases are caused by evil spirits or b) that diseases are caused by bacteria and viruses? No need for an explanation, just answer the question.

Are you smarter than a second grader? Not in this case. That diet, like circumcision, was part of the distinction of the Jew in the OT. That is precisely why Paul did not demand it of the Gentiles and took Peter to task for it when he caused confusion with the Jews after his encounter at Cornelius' house.

So the Gentile body is not the same as the Jewish body? Is that what you're saying? Could the Gentiles have not benefitted from such important knowledge about health from Paul? If the diet was good for the Jews, why not for the Gentiles as well? Why not help the Gentiles with the prevention of health problems?
Your excuse for Paul makes no sense and it shows more biblical contradictions that don't make sense either.

Suppose you share another of those 31,000 with us.

Suppose you tell me which one of the 31,000 divisions of Christianity are teaching the so-called true gospel. Heck, you could be involved with preaching one of the false versions of Christianity. I guess that would automatically sentence you to eternal burning in hell fire. Hopefully, for your sake, that's not the case. At least you have something to look forward to.

In Romans 16, the same fellow opens the chapter addressing Priscilla as a deacon. What is clear is that you missed something.

Just shows another biblical contradiction. Paul says that ONLY men could be deacons, but here, you see otherwise. In another post, you even agreed with Paul's decision that women shouldn't be deaconesses either.
Evidently, the Romans didn't pay Paul any attention. They seemed to treat the women more fairly. Good for them that they ignored Paul's biasedness toward women.
NOTE: Of course we know that these stories are fictional.

I have felt, touched, smelled, and heard God. Seeing that you did not know that, I won't call you a liar. You're only ignorant to my experiences.

In your mind, you can convince yourself that you've done such things, but deep down, you know it's simply a feeling of pure emotion, just like deep down, you know that some, if not most, of the so-called biblical miracles are fictional.

What evidence is there that woman did not come from man? Please tell me. Other than mere words, where's the scientific evidence that woman DID NOT come from man? This has everything to do with procreation and much more. On the basis that the Bible is right and Adam (JayRob) was alone, how would I have gotten here without an Eve? We will never know.

Dacon, the bible says such nonsense, so the burden of proof is on you and those who believe such. You have NO evidence to support any theory that a woman was taken from a man. All you have is one of many fairytale stories stemming from a primitive and mostly outdated book. Again, the burden of proof is on the bible and those who believe such nonsense, so YOU need to provide the evidence, thank you.

Now just where is your anthropological evidence of this? Were you a woman at one time and now a man? I doubt it. I'm sure you will correct me if am wrong. Could the above position be your opinion? We have small colonies of people here in Florida from Moldova (sp?) since the Berlin wall came down and they would counter both your opinion and evidence.

I said no woman in her "right" mind. With no evidence to support such nonsense, why would ANY woman believe such or say such? They would have NO reason to believe such nonsense and it would be degrading to a woman to begin with to say such. It would simply be her opinion if she did.
Now if there was actual evidence that woman came from man, that's a different story, but there is none. Again, show me if there is.

Perhaps you are right. But, your religion has clearly forced you into not being willing to experience a personal relationship with the God who created you whom you have the opportunity to feel, tough, smell, and hear RIGHT NOW. My expectation is to live forever (eternity) with that same God. What expectation does your religion give to you of eternity? Such a shame.

There's no perhaps to it. You keep saying the same things out of a book that's been proven to be derived from pagan sources, a book that's unreliable, full of contradictions, unfulfilled prophecies, murders, human sacrifices, rapes, violence, theft, genocide, injustices, and so much more evil, YET you want me to put my trust in THAT?!
You want me to put my trust in a book put together by ignorant, nomadic tribesmen who were merely looking for and trying to explain their world as best they could with what they had at the time, most of which has been disproven and debunked by science? You want me to accept nonsense dictated by them.....on mere FAITH?!
Now think about that for a moment, then you should understand where I'm coming from. At least I hope you will.

 

[dacontinent]

...Your so-called "loving" god supposedly made Satan as the strongest being ever, yet he's sentencing hundreds of thousands of humans to death because they can't overpower this being, a being that's innately stronger than them? ...

Where do you find Satan as the strongest being ever? Not in Scripture.

I proved to you that this Old Testament god approved of human sacrifice. You can't refute it, so all you can say is, "I stand by what I say". Such hypocristy if I ever saw it. Ordering the death of innocent people does not equal love, especially if the victims are babies and children...Evidence for what? I already showed that your religion is based and founded on human sacrifice. This fictional Jesus supposedly died for mankind. Another form of human sacrifice. This is no different than the pagans sacrificing humans for their sins.

You proved nothing of the sort. You showed that Jephthah made a vow and had the integrity to keep it. That is all. The only human sacrifice God ever accepted was of Himself. In the meantime, come on with the evidence for your assertion.

If you believe such nonsense, I wouldn't mind overseeing the death penalty being applied to you by a more just criminal justice system. This is more proof that religious fundamentalism has totally brainwashed otherwise sane people. Like I said, it takes religion to make a "good" person go bad...

You are evidence of that.

...So you finally admit that the bible doesn't mentioned the GREATEST cause of all diseases which are bacteria and viruses?! That was like pulling teeth to get you to do so.
The bible purports that evil spirits causing many diseases...

Check my posts. You will find that I simply said that there was no need to mention what they couldn't see and all they had to do was obey what they were told. Now, there are approximately 54 diseases mentioned in scripture. What number of them would it take to constitute the "many" that you contend the bible says that evil spirits caused?

Dacon, in our day and age of science and reason, which theory has been proven to be the most accurate, a) that diseases are caused by evil spirits or b) that diseases are caused by bacteria and viruses? No need for an explanation, just answer the question.
...

Both or neither. You pick.

So the Gentile body is not the same as the Jewish body? Is that what you're saying? Could the Gentiles have not benefitted from such important knowledge about health from Paul? If the diet was good for the Jews, why not for the Gentiles as well? Why not help the Gentiles with the prevention of health problems?
Your excuse for Paul makes no sense and it shows more biblical contradictions that don't make sense either...

The bodies are the same. If Gentiles want to follow the diet, then it works for them as well. Why do you have trouble following this? Paul simply addressed whether following the dietary laws given to the Jews was required of the Gentiles. The answer is no, but the option is still there ... even today for you and me.

Suppose you tell me which one of the 31,000 divisions of Christianity are teaching the so-called true gospel. Heck, you could be involved with preaching one of the false versions of Christianity. I guess that would automatically sentence you to eternal burning in hell fire. Hopefully, for your sake, that's not the case. At least you have something to look forward to...

It's not the case...and I have much to look forward to.

Suppose you - who does not need the benefit of the Holy Spirit - tell us what the Gospel is. It will make narrowing your field of 31,000 down a little easier for me, since I am not privy to know what they are.

Just shows another biblical contradiction. Paul says that ONLY men could be deacons, but here, you see otherwise. In another post, you even agreed with Paul's decision that women shouldn't be deaconesses either.
Evidently, the Romans didn't pay Paul any attention. They seemed to treat the women more fairly. Good for them that they ignored Paul's biasedness toward women.
NOTE: Of course we know that these stories are fictional.
...

Who is "we"?

Paul NEVER said that ONLY men could be deacons. You don't find that anywhere. In every post that I have ever made on this subject, I have included the reference to Romans 16 where SEVERAL female deacons are mentioned. So, you conclusion is merely a delusion.

In your mind, you can convince yourself that you've done such things, but deep down, you know it's simply a feeling of pure emotion, just like deep down, you know that some, if not most, of the so-called biblical miracles are fictional...

So, what emotions to you touch, smell, heard, and felt? My emotions don't do that. Maybe I have been deprived. I live with a biblical miracle in my wife. We have medical records to prove it. We have medical records of hundreds of other people. So, when you want to start slinging evidence, just name the time and place.

Dacon, the bible says such nonsense, so the burden of proof is on you and those who believe such. You have NO evidence to support any theory that a woman was taken from a man. All you have is one of many fairytale stories stemming from a primitive and mostly outdated book. Again, the burden of proof is on the bible and those who believe such nonsense, so YOU need to provide the evidence, thank you...

Bruh, I have no burden of proof. I trust God who was there. You don't.

I said no woman in her "right" mind. With no evidence to support such nonsense, why would ANY woman believe such or say such? They would have NO reason to believe such nonsense and it would be degrading to a woman to begin with to say such. It would simply be her opinion if she did.
Now if there was actual evidence that woman came from man, that's a different story, but there is none. Again, show me if there is.
...

So...Moldovan women are not in their right minds. I have a stack of them that I can line up at any time your evidence is ready. Right now, it would appear that all you have to offer is one man's (yours) opinion. Where is your EVIDENCE?

There's no perhaps to it. You keep saying the same things out of a book that's been proven to be derived from pagan sources, a book that's unreliable, full of contradictions, unfulfilled prophecies, murders, human sacrifices, rapes, violence, theft, genocide, injustices, and so much more evil, YET you want me to put my trust in THAT?!
You want me to put my trust in a book put together by ignorant, nomadic tribesmen who were merely looking for and trying to explain their world as best they could with what they had at the time, most of which has been disproven and debunked by science? You want me to accept nonsense dictated by them.....on mere FAITH?!
Now think about that for a moment, then you should understand where I'm coming from. At least I hope you will.

Where is your PROOF of pagan derivation?
Where is your PROOF of rape advocacy?
In the scripture I found the acceptance of only one human sacrifice for sin: Jesus. What have you found?
I have asked for these three and you have yet to produce any one of them.

Trusting God will line you up with what He says. Trusting Him is synonymous with trusting His Word. God leaves the choice up to you and so do I.

 

[JayRob]

Where do you find Satan as the strongest being ever? Not in Scripture.

Out of my ENTIRE post, you chose to focus on the nonsense of whether or not satan is the strongest being created?! You conveniently chose to ignore my post that said....."this Old Testament god is sentencing hundreds of thousands of humans to death because they can't overpower this being, a being that's innately stronger than them? What kind of love is that? The bible has changed the meaning of the term "love" into something sadistic and psychotic. Fear means love and to love means to fear. That's a sign of sadomasochism if I ever saw it."
Tell me is this being just, to put to death thousands and thousands simply because they couldn't do the impossible? Be honest for a change and admit that it isn't.
Another thing, as far as satan being the strongest being created by this OT god, you tell me who was stronger than this imaginary Lucifer/satan.

You proved nothing of the sort. You showed that Jephthah made a vow and had the integrity to keep it. That is all. The only human sacrifice God ever accepted was of Himself. In the meantime, come on with the evidence for your assertion.

Dacon, I proved to you that your religion is no different from the pagan religions where they observed human sacrifice in payment for the sins of others and also to appease their god.
Christianity is founded upon the same theme by this Jesus person supposedly being sacrificed. No matter what you call his death, it's STILL human sacrifice.
As far as the Jepthah story is concerned, the OT god took this man's ONLY child. Where was the mercy? Where was the compassion? Where was the love? Simply put, your OT god showed neither. He could've forgiven this man for such. He could've showed compassion by waiving the vow. He could've showed compassion by allowing this innocent daughter to live. He did neither. He accepted her death as a payment.

You are evidence of that.

Dacon, you were the one who stated that you would KILL a loved one if your god told you to do so in a dream. You stated that, I didn't. I simply stated that it takes religion to make a "good" person bad. In this case, you'd be "the bad" person if you followed through with it.
In this nation, if you followed through with such nonsense, you'd be arrested, locked up, put in an insane asylum and/or given the death penalty.....and rightly so.
I'm so glad we live in a society that for the most part, don't think like you and those of your ilk do. Perhaps you need to move to the Middle East where people ACTUALLY do what you claim and get by with such nonsense cause allah told them to do so.

Check my posts. You will find that I simply said that there was no need to mention what they couldn't see and all they had to do was obey what they were told. Now, there are approximately 54 diseases mentioned in scripture. What number of them would it take to constitute the "many" that you contend the bible says that evil spirits caused?

Again, you're focusing on the minor. Show me ONE example in our day and age where an evil spirit has been PROVEN to cause a physical disease.
You're getting good at dodging simple and legitimate questions. No need for you to be afraid to answer honestly.
Again, show me ONE disease that's been proven to have been caused by an evil spirit. LOL!!

The bodies are the same. If Gentiles want to follow the diet, then it works for them as well. Why do you have trouble following this? Paul simply addressed whether following the dietary laws given to the Jews was required of the Gentiles. The answer is no, but the option is still there ... even today for you and me.

If the body is supposed to be the "temple of god's spirit", why would Paul play around with the health of that temple where god's spirit is dwelling? Why would he encourage the Gentiles not to take care of that temple by following supposedly the best dietary laws available? He basically contradicted what Peter tried to do.
This is more contradiction and more excuses from a book that's stark full of contradictions. Not surprised though.

It's not the case...and I have much to look forward to.

Suppose you - who does not need the benefit of the Holy Spirit - tell us what the Gospel is. It will make narrowing your field of 31,000 down a little easier for me, since I am not privy to know what they are.

You don't know what the case is as far as whether or not you're preaching the "true" gospel because there are 31,000 versions of it. What are the odds that you are? The odds are VERY slim that you are, which means that your chances of being a false prophet are very high, thus meaning that your chances of being sentenced to hell fire for preaching such, is high as well.

As far as me telling you what the true gospel is, that's easy. There's no such thing. This ought to be "good news" (no pun intended) for those 30,999denominations who are not preaching it.

Who is "we"?

Paul NEVER said that ONLY men could be deacons. You don't find that anywhere. In every post that I have ever made on this subject, I have included the reference to Romans 16 where SEVERAL female deacons are mentioned. So, you conclusion is merely a delusion.

The "we" are people who think with ration and reason, unlike those who put their trust in religion.
Dacon, deacons hold positions of leadership over men and women. Paul clearly mentioned the role of women in the church when he wrote the following:
1 Timothy 2:11-12 — "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."
Like I said, thank goodness the Romans didn't listen to Paul's command. This is a clear and unequivocal contradiction of what Paul stated in the above verses.
The following verses support what I say even more:
“...I am writing you these instructions so that ... you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God...†(1 Timothy 3:14-15).

Paul gave CLEAR instructions as to how women were to conduct themselves in the church of god. You can't get no clearer than that.

So, what emotions to you touch, smell, heard, and felt? My emotions don't do that. Maybe I have been deprived. I live with a biblical miracle in my wife. We have medical records to prove it. We have medical records of hundreds of other people. So, when you want to start slinging evidence, just name the time and place.
Bruh, I have no burden of proof. I trust God who was there. You don't.

I know you don't have any proof. All you have is faith in fiction.
You have the right to believe what you will, but don't try to pawn off something on others, especially when you can't prove it. Go ahead and believe that evil spirits cause diseases, that a day lasted more than 24 hours, that a donkey talked, that there was a worldwide flood in 40 days and so on. None of that can be proven no more than your hearing an OT god speak to you. As I said, you have the right to believe what you want to believe, regardless of how little proof you have. Faith is merely a belief anyhow.

So...Moldovan women are not in their right minds. I have a stack of them that I can line up at any time your evidence is ready. Right now, it would appear that all you have to offer is one man's (yours) opinion. Where is your EVIDENCE?

Again, the burden of proof is on you to prove that WOMEN COME FROM MEN. Your book said it, so show evidence to support it. Don't back down now. Show me scientific evidence proving that the first woman was taken from the first man. As of now, all you have to support you is a book written by Middle Eastern nomads trying to find their way in this world. You have nothing else to support such a theory.....nothing.

Where is your PROOF of pagan derivation?

Review my many posts on the subject. There's plenty in the prayer forum for you to glean from. No need for me to reinvent the wheel. If you really want to know, you can find it.

Where is your PROOF of rape advocacy?

I showed you that in previous posts. Israelite men were ordered to KILL all women who were not virgins, but they could keep the ones who were virgins, for themselves. If you'd honestly re-read my last few posts, you'd see the verses showing such. Quit playing like you don't know what I'm talking about.

In the scripture I found the acceptance of only one human sacrifice for sin: Jesus. What have you found?

Whether it's one sacrifice or a thousand sacrifices, the Christian religion is founded on that ONE human sacrifice. Again, it's in line with other religions teaching human sacrifice, proving that Christianity's no different. Same product, different flavor.

I have asked for these three and you have yet to produce any one of them.

More fabrication on your part, but I understand why you have to do what you do to save face.

Trusting God will line you up with what He says. Trusting Him is synonymous with trusting His Word. God leaves the choice up to you and so do I.

Trusting the god of the OT is like trusting that rabbits lay easter eggs and that from friday sunset to sunday morning equals THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS. Both are total fiction. Only in religion can you get three days and three nights from a day and a half. LOL!!!

 

[dacontinent]

Out of my ENTIRE post, you chose to focus on the nonsense of whether or not satan is the strongest being created?! ...
Another thing, as far as satan being the strongest being created by this OT god, you tell me who was stronger than this imaginary Lucifer/satan.

It was the most significant portion of the entire post. Stonger than Satan are:

• Adam & Eve before the fall
• [thousands of OT persons]
• Jesus Christ
• [thousands of NT persons]
• Me
• [thousands that will follow]

You are not currently in this list.

Dacon, I proved to you that your religion is no different from the pagan religions where they observed human sacrifice in payment for the sins of others and also to appease their god.
...As far as the Jepthah story is concerned, the OT god took this man's ONLY child. ... He accepted her death as a payment....

The readers of this thread have seen your opinions and contentions, but you've not given any proof.
Now, give us one verse of scripture where Jephthah was required to sacrifice his daughter.

Dacon, you were the one who stated that you would KILL a loved one if your god told you to do so in a dream. You stated that, I didn't. ...Perhaps you need to move to the Middle East where people ACTUALLY do what you claim and get by with such nonsense cause allah told them to do so.
...

Follow the bouncing ball here. If God were to tell me to follow in Abraham's steps and offer any human or animal in sacrifice - HE WON'T, JAYROB ... HE HAS ALREADY MADE THAT CLEAR - then I would do it. So, no one will be arresting me and I won't be relocating to the Middle East.

Do you really want to review cases - lots of them particularly in 3rd world countries - where people involved in occultic practices died suddenly from physical illnesses induced by the stress brought on by those practices? Would those be enough to satisfy you?

If the body is supposed to be the "temple of god's spirit", why would Paul play around with the health of that temple where god's spirit is dwelling? Why would he encourage the Gentiles not to take care of that temple by following supposedly the best dietary laws available? He basically contradicted what Peter tried to do.
This is more contradiction and more excuses from a book that's stark full of contradictions. Not surprised though.
...

Wrong again he who reads without needing the Holy Spirit! Try this again.

Gal 2:11-16 KJV
11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face , because he was to be blamed.
12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.​

That does not read like Peter was trying to help the Gentiles to a better diet. It seems that Peter was fully consumed in living like the Gentiles - including diet - when he was with them, but lived otherwise when he got around Jews assembled together with Gentiles. Reading the rest, my second graders know that living for Christ is not about rules and regulations; it is about our love for Him.

So...you would say that what other people are saying determines the probability of the truth of that I am saying? It's more like this:
If dacontinent has a bag of gospel with only 1 true gospel, what are the odds that it is the truth? I like those odds. In identifying the gospel, I knew I was charging you to do something that is beyond your current capabilities. So, when you submit your life to Jesus and allow the Holy Spirit to speak to you, then you will be able to recognize the gospel. Touch me back then.

The "we" are people who think with ration and reason, unlike those who put their trust in religion.
Dacon, deacons hold positions of leadership over men and women. Paul clearly mentioned the role of women in the church when he wrote the following:
1 Timothy 2:11-12
Like I said, thank goodness the Romans didn't listen to Paul's command. This is a clear and unequivocal contradiction of what Paul stated in the above verses.
The following verses support what I say even more:
1 Timothy 3:14-15... ...Paul gave CLEAR instructions as to how women were to conduct themselves in the church of god. You can't get no clearer than that.

Thank you for making my point. Your ration and reason IS your religion.
Let me make it a little clearer for you.

Rom 10:12-15 KJV
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek : for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!​

and

Gal 3:24-29
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek , there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.​

and

Col 3:11-17
11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew , circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
13 Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
14 And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.
15 And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful.
16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.​

And remember, the next part of this passage starts all of that submission stuff.

Now, if it is not clear to you, it is probably because you are not listening to the Holy Spirit.


Thanks for acknowledging that I don't have to believe you and that faith that requires proof is not faith at all.

I read all of your posts in this thread. I'm still asking for the rape. Where is it? Once instance will do.

Whether it's one sacrifice or a thousand sacrifices, the Christian religion is founded on that ONE human sacrifice. Again, it's in line with other religions teaching human sacrifice, proving that Christianity's no different. Same product, different flavor.

Is this Coke v. Coke Zero? I dunno. Christianity is the only faith where Deity sacrifices Himself.

More fabrication on your part, but I understand why you have to do what you do to save face.
Trusting the god of the OT is like trusting that rabbits lay easter eggs and that from friday sunset to sunday morning equals THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS. Both are total fiction. Only in religion can you get three days and three nights from a day and a half. LOL!!!

I guess you missed this. Let me try again.

Where is your PROOF of pagan derivation?
Where is your PROOF of rape advocacy?
In the scripture I found the acceptance of only one human sacrifice for sin: Jesus. What have you found?

Trusting the god of the OT is like trusting that rabbits lay easter eggs and that from friday sunset to sunday morning equals THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS. Both are total fiction. Only in religion can you get three days and three nights from a day and a half. LOL!!!

Trusting in rationale and reason is like leading yourself through a subterrenean labyrinth without the benefit of light.

 

[Dr H..]

JR

It appears t hat your main focus is “God, being a killerâ€￾ would your same thought hold true in 2010. Considering, thousands are being killed around the world.

Why are you so angry? You reminds me of a former co-worker, who became angry at God because his parents died. As I told him, God could care less at your anger, because He will have the final say-so in all phases of your life.

 

[JayRob]

JR

It appears t hat your main focus is “God, being a killer” would your same thought hold true in 2010. Considering, thousands are being killed around the world.

Why are you so angry? You reminds me of a former co-worker, who became angry at God because his parents died. As I told him, God could care less at your anger, because He will have the final say-so in all phases of your life.

No, that is not my main focus, it's only a part. The main focus are the hundreds of biblical contradictions, unfulfilled and ludricous prophecies, unscientific statements that have been disproven, and the many plagiarized stories stolen from other religions, religions that existed long before the Old Testament came on the scene. Those issues are the proverbial "smoking guns" I primarily focus on.

As far as anger is concerned, my anger is nothing in comparison to the ludricous stories involving uncontrolled anger described in the Old Testament. The hundreds of thousands of AUTHORIZED deaths from the OT god involving rape, genocide, human sacrifice, slavery, the authorized stealing of land, authorized killing of women, babies, children, etc., and you don't question that?!
You call what I say anger simply because I'm pointing out that this man-made OT god acts like the worst of human dictators when describing his anger?

What sane and "just" person wouldn't be upset and angry at such stories being spread about, taught to children and then labelled as "love"? That is purely psychotic and evil.
Would you teach your children to hack humans to pieces with a sword? Would you teach your children to kill all the women, babies and children of another race, but keep the virgins for yourself, THEN turn around and call those acts "love"? Today, we'd call the latter racism, murder and genocide.
Only religious folks would call such nonsense "love". How ironic and sad, especially among people whose ancestors recently came out of slavery. Think about that for a moment.

It's very disturbing when bible believers are so quick to criticize and dismiss other religions because of so-called pagan acts of murder and debauchery by their gods, yet when it comes to their OWN religion and murderous acts of their OT god, it's simply ignored and/or weakly explained away. That's the height of hypocrisy If I ever saw it.
Calling a spade a spade is the most honest thing a person can do in such cases, rather than sweeping it under the rug. You call it anger, I call it honesty.

 

[JayRob]

dacontinent;1659732]

It was the most significant portion of the entire post. Stonger than

Dacon, that statement is nowhere near the most significant portion of the entire post and I fall into that red herring. It's significant only for the reason that you want to ignore the many hundreds and thousands of atrocities involving murder, rape, thievery, genocide, human sacrifice, etc., dished out by the Old Testament god, a god you deem as a god of "love". I see why you'd rather try and change the subject to focus on whether or not satan is stronger than someone else. Honestly, I can't blame you. That won't help you cover the blood-stained hands of that OT god.

The readers of this thread have seen your opinions and contentions, but you've not given any proof.
Now, give us one verse of scripture where Jephthah was required to sacrifice his daughter.

Dacon, play dumb until the cows come home if you will. Your only defense IS to play the denial game.
Again, your Old Testament god could've pardoned this man's vow, thus sparing the death of the daughter, but he didn't. He accepted the sacrifice, the woman died and that was that.
Your Jesus was given as HUMAN SACRIFICE supposedly for mankind. It can't get no simpler than that. Obviously the authors of the new testament thought human sacrifice to be a good story to copy from the pagans, so they did. You can deny that too, if that makes you feel better.

Follow the bouncing ball here. God were to tell me to follow in Abraham's steps and offer any human or animal in sacrifice, HE WON'T, JAYROB ... HE HAS ALREADY MADE THAT CLEAR - then I would do it. So, no one will be arresting me and I won't be relocating to the Middle East.

The fact of the matter is that you stated that you would kill your loved ones in the name of your god. You said it, I didn't. Again, don't try and back out of it now. At least you were honest about it.

Do you really want to review cases - lots of them particularly in 3rd world countries - where people involved in occultic practices died suddenly from physical illnesses induced by the stress brought on by those practices? Would those be enough to satisfy you?

No, you prove that the biblical version of evil spirits caused diseases. To heck with what's going on in illiterate third world nations with superstitions they've believed in for thousands and thousands of years. Let's keep the focus on the bible's versions of evil spirits causing diseases, which are no different than the third world superstitions. Now prove your case. The burden is on you and the bible.

Wrong again he who reads without needing the Holy Spirit! Try this again.

Gal 2:11-16 KJV
14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.[/INDENT]
That does not read like Peter was trying to help the Gentiles to a better diet. It seems that Peter was fully consumed in living like the Gentiles - including diet - when he was with them, but lived otherwise when he got around Jews assembled together with Gentiles. Reading the rest, my second graders know that living for Christ is not about rules and regulations; it is about our love for Him.

See, this is why folks need to know the whole bible, even if it is fiction, to be able to counteract untruths by supposed holy spirit filled folks themselves.
The above verses you mentioned spoke about hypocrisy. It said nothing about the KINDS of foods Peter ate while he was with the Gentiles. If it did, please identify the kinds of foods he ate.

According to Acts 10:12-14, Peter was a Jew through and through. He stated the following:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

Peter clearly said that he had eaten nothing common or unclean ALL of his life, so why are you fabricating about Peter?
The verses you mentioned in Galatians referred to Peter's hypocrisy, not dietary laws. Show me where in the new testament where Peter overhauled his diet, even while eating with the Gentiles. You're mixing apples and oranges, but that's okay, you're still learning.
The fact of the matter is that Peter and Paul contradicted each other regarding the matter of diet. Peter favored the dietary laws, Paul didn't.
As far as your second graders knowing such, I'd assume that they don't since you didn't, but now you do.

So...you would say that what other people are saying determines the probability of the truth of that I am saying? It's more like this:
If dacontinent has a bag of gospel with only 1 true gospel, what are the odds that it is the truth? I like those odds. In identifying the gospel, I knew I was charging you to do something that is beyond your current capabilities. So, when you submit your life to Jesus and allow the Holy Spirit to speak to you, then you will be able to recognize the gospel. Touch me back then.

No, it's more like your chances of being a dispenser of the "true" gospel is between slim and none. In other words, it's one out of 31,000. That's akin to you having a .0000322 chance of being right. Not good at all. Oh well, you can always pray for mercy from eternal hell fire. Perhaps he'll have more mercy on you than he had on Jepthah's daughter.

Thank you for making my point. Your ration and reason IS your religion.
Let me make it a little clearer for you.
Rom 10:12-15 KJV
Gal 3:24-29
Col 3:11-17

Dacon, quoting a bunch of verses that contradict other verses only make you look more confused and disoriented. That's what mind control is all about in case you didn't know.
In a few verses it says women are equal, in other verses, it tells women to shut up, be quiet, be submissive, that they can be sold as property, that they're made FOR man, that they're the glory OF the man and not god, that they can be forced into arranged marriages, that they can be forced to marry their rapist for money, etc., etc.
Dacon, you can't have it both ways no matter how hard you try. What I say is all there in your bible in black and white no matter how much you try and deny it.

Thanks for acknowledging that I don't have to believe you and that faith that requires proof is not faith at all.

That's the beautiful deception of religion....without FAITH (believing in the imaginary), it falls flat on it's face because it requires no proof. Wow, what a concept. Too bad other religions beat Christianity to the punch.

I read all of your posts in this thread. I'm still asking for the rape. Where is it? Once instance will do.

Try asking one of your second graders. They should be able to help you out if you'd show them the same verses I showed you. They're more likely to be more honest and unbiased as well.

Is this Coke v. Coke Zero? I dunno. Christianity is the only faith where Deity sacrifices Himself.

This shows your ignorance of other religions, religions MUCH older than the bible and Christianity. Several religions have the death of their savior as it's foundational core. All you had to do was ask. I'd have told you that a long time ago. Actually I did, you just weren't listening.
Try the Egyptian god Horus, try Hindu's Kristna, try Mithra of Persia, try Prometheus of Greece who was called the Logos. I could go on and on, but you get my point. Dacon, you need to do your homework....seriously.

I guess you missed this. Let me try again.

Where is your PROOF of pagan derivation?
Where is your PROOF of rape advocacy?
In the scripture I found the acceptance of only one human sacrifice for sin: Jesus. What have you found?

If you'd go back and read my post, you AGREE with me. Your religion is founded on HUMAN SACRIFICE. Your religion, like so many others before it, is based on human sacrifice. Human sacrifice for sins existed long before Jesus came along. If only folks wouldn't be so afraid to find out the truth about religion, they could know this. Until then, Christians will continue to believe Jesus is the first human to be sacrificed for ALL humans, when he's not. It's a carbon copy of other religions, plain and simple.

Trusting in rationale and reason is like leading yourself through a subterrenean labyrinth without the benefit of light.

...and placing FAITH over EVIDENCE is not?! LOL!! Only in religion folks, ONLY in religion. Sad, sad, sad.

 

[dacontinent]

Dacon, that statement is nowhere near the most significant portion of the entire post and I fall into that red herring...

You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, just like I am.

Dacon, play dumb until the cows come home if you will. Your only defense IS to play the denial game.
Again, ...

...you offer no evidence; only your opinion.

The fact of the matter is that you stated that you would kill your loved ones in the name of your god. You said it, I didn't. Again, don't try and back out of it now. At least you were honest about it. ...

Never backed out. Thanks for the compliment.

See, this is why folks need to know the whole bible, even if it is fiction, to be able to counteract untruths by supposed holy spirit filled folks themselves...Peter clearly said that he had eaten nothing common or unclean ALL of his life, so why are you fabricating about Peter?
...Show me where in the new testament where Peter overhauled his diet, even while eating with the Gentiles. You're mixing apples and oranges, but that's okay, you're still learning.
...

Yours is the only mention of Peter overhauling his diet. Peter HAD NOT eaten anything outside of the Jewish diet prior to his visit with Cornelius. The vision changed him both naturally and spiritually. Did he abandon the Jewish diet altogether? No. But when he needed to demonstrate what happened with him in an amalgamated group setting, he took the role of a hypocrite by not eating with the Gentiles. Paul called him out on it because it was a controversial subject and Peter's influence made a huge difference. So, on that subject, my second graders and I do know more than you.

No, it's more like your chances of being a dispenser of the "true" gospel is between slim and none. In other words, it's one out of 31,000. That's akin to you having a .0000322 chance of being right. Not good at all. Oh well, you can always pray for mercy from eternal hell fire. Perhaps he'll have more mercy on you than he had on Jepthah's daughter.
...

I will be rewarded, as will Jephthah and his daughter. What will you get?

Dacon, quoting a bunch of verses that contradict other verses only make you look more confused and disoriented. That's what mind control is all about in case you didn't know.
In a few verses it says women are equal, in other verses, it tells women to shut up, be quiet, be submissive, that they can be sold as property, that they're made FOR man, that they're the glory OF the man and not god, that they can be forced into arranged marriages, that they can be forced to marry their rapist for money, etc., etc.
Dacon, you can't have it both ways no matter how hard you try. What I say is all there in your bible in black and white no matter how much you try and deny it. Also, please tell us where the scripture says that women are not the glory of God.
...

The easy one first...You say God sanctioned rape and that is in black and white. I refute that assertion and deny its existence, asking you to present it as I have repeatedly. I am still waiting.

That's the beautiful deception of religion....without FAITH (believing in the imaginary), it falls flat on it's face because it requires no proof. Wow, what a concept. Too bad other religions beat Christianity to the punch.

That statement might have some credibility if you had defined FAITH correctly. You know the beauty of it by your continuous exercise thereof.

Try asking one of your second graders. They should be able to help you out if you'd show them the same verses I showed you. They're more likely to be more honest and unbiased as well...

I asked them. They found none in any of the verses you have given. Your turn. Come on. It cannot be that difficult...can it?

This shows your ignorance of other religions, religions MUCH older than the bible and Christianity. Several religions have the death of their savior as it's foundational core. All you had to do was ask. I'd have told you that a long time ago. Actually I did, you just weren't listening.
Try the Egyptian god Horus, try Hindu's Kristna, try Mithra of Persia, try Prometheus of Greece who was called the Logos. I could go on and on, but you get my point. Dacon, you need to do your homework....seriously...

I haven't had any reluctance in admitting my ignorance before, so I am not going to start now. Horus, Kristna, Mithra, and Prometheus are all dead. I'll stick with Jesus.

If you'd go back and read my post, you AGREE with me. Your religion is founded on HUMAN SACRIFICE. Your religion, like so many others before it, is based on human sacrifice. Human sacrifice for sins existed long before Jesus came along. If only folks wouldn't be so afraid to find out the truth about religion, they could know this. Until then, Christians will continue to believe Jesus is the first human to be sacrificed for ALL humans, when he's not. It's a carbon copy of other religions, plain and simple.

Christianity does not teach that Jesus was the first person to be sacrificed for sins. Christianity teaches that because Jesus was sinless, His was the only one found acceptable and eternally satisfactory.

...and placing FAITH over EVIDENCE is not?! LOL!! Only in religion folks, ONLY in religion. Sad, sad, sad.

Everyone has faith. You have faith in your religion. Atheists and agnostics have it in abundance. The issue is not whether we have faith; it is in whom or what our faith lies. Some of us will be happy, happy, happy and others will be sad, sad, sad based on our faith.

 

[JayRob]

dacontinent;1660549]

You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, just like I am.

My opinion is supported by facts and actual writings about the atrocities committed in the Old Testament. It's amazing that you to tried to ignore this for so long. You barely wanted to talk about it because deep down, you're ashamed of such nonsense. No need to be afraid of what's in your favorite book because it's not true any how. It's just a plethora of plagiarized man-made stories of one or two gods amongst hundreds written about long before.

...you offer no evidence; only your opinion.

Your Jesus was given as a HUMAN SACRIFICE, supposedly for mankind, is that not true? Is this not true?

Never backed out. Thanks for the compliment.

So you STILL would KILL a loved one if given a dream to do so by your god? You still stand by this? Do you?

Yours is the only mention of Peter overhauling his diet. Peter HAD NOT eaten anything outside of the Jewish diet prior to his visit with Cornelius. The vision changed him both naturally and spiritually. Did he abandon the Jewish diet altogether? No. But when he needed to demonstrate what happened with him in an amalgamated group setting, he took the role of a hypocrite by not eating with the Gentiles. Paul called him out on it because it was a controversial subject and Peter's influence made a huge difference. So, on that subject, my second graders and I do know more than you.

What do you mean altogether? Where did he say that he abandoned the Jewish diet one inch? Nowhere. You seem not to want to admit the fact that those verses you mentioned in Galatians 2 had nothing to do with any dietary laws. It had to do with "hypocrisy". You all but say it, but you don't want to give me credit for first pointing it out to you. In addition to that, I asked you to show specific verses showing where Peter ate pagan food. You couldn't. Again, I ask, show me.
Your second-graders couldn't know cause you didn't. You confused Galatians 2 with food. I corrected you and showed you that it deals with hypocrisy, not dietary laws.

I will be rewarded, as will Jephthah and his daughter. What will you get?

You don't know any of that. Again, you only have a .000032 chance of preaching the true gosepel. Did the OT god tell you that you were preaching the "true" gospel? With that number, your chances seem next to slim and closer to none that you are. That means your chances of hell fire are exponentially greater.
Did your god tell you that Jephthah and his daughter would? Did they have the holy spirit? If not, how could they ever make it?
Fact of the matter is that the OT god took the daughter's life when he could've forgiven Jephthah.

The easy one first...You say God sanctioned rape and that is in black and white. I refute that assertion and deny its existence, asking you to present it as I have repeatedly. I am still waiting.

Where did god punish or reprimand the Israelites after they took virgins for themselves, while killing off the other women? Where did he accuse them of ANY wrongdoing in those cases? Show me those verses where he condemned them for such murderous acts.
In addition, why did this OT god sanction forced marriage between a raped woman and her rapist? You do know that's scriptural don't you?

That statement might have some credibility if you had defined FAITH correctly. You know the beauty of it by your continuous exercise thereof.

Faith is described in the bible as being "the substance of things HOPED for, the evidence of things NOT SEEN. In other words, it's imaginary hope with no supporting evidence.

I asked them. They found none in any of the verses you have given. Your turn. Come on. It cannot be that difficult...can it?

Well, it does take a bit of honesty and objective teaching from their instructor. Hint, hint. Just show me why god didn't reprimand the Israelite men for keeping the virgins, while murdering the other women who had had sexual relations.

I haven't had any reluctance in admitting my ignorance before, so I am not going to start now. Horus, Kristna, Mithra, and Prometheus are all dead. I'll stick with Jesus.

Huh?! Are you serious?! LOL!! Horus, Kristna, Mithra and Prometheus (along with dozens of other previous gods), are no more dead or alive than this Jesus, who is the same exact model of the four I mentioned. They're ALL one and the same. Sorry to break the news to you, but if the truth hurts, sometimes one has to hurt before he heals.

Christianity does not teach that Jesus was the first person to be sacrificed for sins. Christianity teaches that because Jesus was sinless, His was the only one found acceptable and eternally satisfactory.

Christianity teaches that, but so does dozens of other religions about their god. Jesus is simply one and the same as those dozens of gods. I could go down the list naming dozens of similar gods with similar characteristics as Jesus. As a matter of fact, the name Jesus is derived from the Greek god Zeus.....Je-Zeus. The term "Christ" is derived from the Hindu name Kristna, sometimes spelled Christna. I don'thave to lie. It's all in history. It's been there for years, if only one could break away from the hold their religion has on them to look it up.

Everyone has faith. You have faith in your religion. Atheists and agnostics have it in abundance. The issue is not whether we have faith; it is in whom or what our faith lies. Some of us will be happy, happy, happy and others will be sad, sad, sad based on our faith.

I have faith in what can be proven. The issue is NOT in whom one has faith in. As I said earlier, most religions are basically carbon copies of previous religions, so one believing in Horus is the same as one believing in Zeus is the same as one believing in Kristna is the same as one believing in Christ. If you can disprove that, give it a shot. If you can't, then you MUST admit that I am right, that's if you're honest and objective enough to do so.

 

[JayRob]

dacontinent: "Everyone has faith. You have faith in your religion. Atheists and agnostics have it in abundance. The issue is not whether we have faith; it is in whom or what our faith lies. Some of us will be happy, happy, happy and others will be sad, sad, sad based on our faith."

I have faith in what can be proven. The issue is NOT in whom one has faith in. As I said earlier, most religions are basically carbon copies of previous religions, so one believing in Horus is the same as one believing in Zeus is the same as one believing in Kristna is the same as one believing in Christ. If you can disprove that, give it a shot. If you can't, then you MUST admit that I am right, that's if you're honest and objective enough to do so.

 

[dacontinent]

I have faith in what can be proven. The issue is NOT in whom one has faith in. As I said earlier, most religions are basically carbon copies of previous religions, so one believing in Horus is the same as one believing in Zeus is the same as one believing in Kristna is the same as one believing in Christ. If you can disprove that, give it a shot. If you can't, then you MUST admit that I am right, that's if you're honest and objective enough to do so.

Well, let's see.
I believe in Jesus as the substitutionary atonement for the sin of all mankind.

• Lineage of Abraham
• Born to a virgin named Mary, who was married to a capenter named Joseph.
• Walked on water
• Calmed the seas
• Gave sight to the blind; healed the lame; cleansed leper; dumb speak; epileptic healed; raised the dead. All of which were recorded historically.
• Crucified on a Roman cross circa 33 AD
• Raised from the dead
• Ascended to heaven in a cloud

Horus ... not the same.
Zeus ... not the same.
Kristna ... not the same.
JayRob ... not the same.
Dacontinent ... not the same.

 

[ROYAL BLUE]

The Two Witnesses(Moses and Elijah return to earth before Christ) PART 1

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qwhGCKjCQlI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qwhGCKjCQlI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

The Two Witnesses(Moses and Elijah return to earth before Christ) PART 2

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PbHHvwCU0bM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PbHHvwCU0bM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[ROYAL BLUE]

The Two Witnesses(Moses and Elijah return to earth before Christ) PART 3

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nCaqJjhzuEs&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nCaqJjhzuEs&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

The Two Witnesses(Moses and Elijah return to earth before Christ) PART 4

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xb_KtylN1Yk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xb_KtylN1Yk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[JayRob]

Well, let's see.
I believe in Jesus as the substitutionary atonement for the sin of all mankind.

• Lineage of Abraham
• Born to a virgin named Mary, who was married to a capenter named Joseph.
• Walked on water
• Calmed the seas
• Gave sight to the blind; healed the lame; cleansed leper; dumb speak; epileptic healed; raised the dead. All of which were recorded historically.
• Crucified on a Roman cross circa 33 AD
• Raised from the dead
• Ascended to heaven in a cloud

Horus ... not the same.
Zeus ... not the same.
Kristna ... not the same.
JayRob ... not the same.
Dacontinent ... not the same.

Dacontinent, after reading the above post, I would question your honesty, but I'll chalk it up instead to ignorance. I do remember you admitting that you had no knowledge of the origins of other religions, so we'll stick with ignorance. It' helps to educate yourself on more than the tunnel vision of Christianity.

And to throw my name and your name in the equation won't change the fact that Horus, Zeus, Kristna and Christ ARE one and the same story of a supposed "savior" of mankind. Some Christians are just too afraid to check it out and prove it wrong. Some have checked it out but are so indoctrinated that they make excuses as to why Christ is the true savior, while the others are false. Nevermind that the savior in all of these religions has the same characteristics.

In the meantime, let me educate you on the following:

Again, look at the similarities below. Keep in mind that Hinduism was in effect at least 5 centuries (500 years) BEFORE Christianity. It's statistically impossible for there to be this many similarities from one religion to another without some plagiarism and copying going on.

--Christ and Krishna were called both God and the Son of God.
--Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man.
--Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity
--Both had adopted human fathers who were carpenters.
--A spirit or ghost was their actual father.
--Both were of royal descent.
--Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star.
--In both stories angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna's parents stayed in Mathura.
--Both Christ and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted.
56: Both were identified as "the seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head."
--Jesus was called "the lion of the tribe of Judah." Krishna was called "the lion of the tribe of Saki."
--Both claimed: "I am the Resurrection."
--Both were "without sin."
--Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine.
--Both were considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.
--Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Each cured "all manner of diseases."
--Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead.
--Both selected disciples to spread his teachings.
--Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners.
--Both encountered a Gentile woman at a well.
--Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies.

It can't get anymore similar than that. It's obvious that the authors of Christianity borrowed quite a bit from Hinduism and other religions. A blind man with an objective mind can see this. If one can't, his honesty HAS to be called into question.

 

[dacontinent]

Dacontinent, after reading the above post, I would question your honesty, but I'll chalk it up instead to ignorance. I do remember you admitting that you had no knowledge of the origins of other religions, so we'll stick with ignorance. It' helps to educate yourself on more than the tunnel vision of Christianity.

And to throw my name and your name in the equation won't change the fact that Horus, Zeus, Kristna and Christ ARE one and the same story of a supposed "savior" of mankind. Some Christians are just too afraid to check it out and prove it wrong. Some have checked it out but are so indoctrinated that they make excuses as to why Christ is the true savior, while the others are false. Nevermind that the savior in all of these religions has the same characteristics.

In the meantime, let me educate you on the following:

Again, look at the similarities below. Keep in mind that Hinduism was in effect at least 5 centuries (500 years) BEFORE Christianity. It's statistically impossible for there to be this many similarities from one religion to another without some plagiarism and copying going on.

--Christ and Krishna were called both God and the Son of God.
--Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man.
--Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity
--Both had adopted human fathers who were carpenters.
--A spirit or ghost was their actual father.
--Both were of royal descent.
--Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star.
--In both stories angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna's parents stayed in Mathura.
--Both Christ and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted.
56: Both were identified as "the seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head."
--Jesus was called "the lion of the tribe of Judah." Krishna was called "the lion of the tribe of Saki."
--Both claimed: "I am the Resurrection."
--Both were "without sin."
--Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine.
--Both were considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.
--Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Each cured "all manner of diseases."
--Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead.
--Both selected disciples to spread his teachings.
--Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners.
--Both encountered a Gentile woman at a well.
--Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies.

It can't get anymore similar than that. It's obvious that the authors of Christianity borrowed quite a bit from Hinduism and other religions. A blind man with an objective mind can see this. If one can't, his honesty HAS to be called into question.

...and One rose from the dead and appeared to thousands of eyewitnesses at the same time before ascending into heaven some 40 days later. That was not Kristna, Horus, nor Zeus.

Your list is a repeat of a post in another thread. I'll ask again for your FACTS and EYEWITNESS testimony about the 3 others.

Because I don't STUDY other religions and their origins does not mean that I have no knowledge of them.

 

[JayRob]

...and One rose from the dead and appeared to thousands of eyewitnesses at the same time before ascending into heaven some 40 days later. That was not Kristna, Horus, nor Zeus.

Another weak attempt to separate Christ's character from Horus, Zeus, Kristna and others.
Dacon, all the others were seen by eyewitnesses just as Christ is said to have been seen. That's a non-issue on your part. Surely you can come up with something stronger. Besides, outside of the bible, there's not ONE legitimate first hand eyewitness of Jesus.

Your list is a repeat of a post in another thread. I'll ask again for your FACTS and EYEWITNESS testimony about the 3 others.

So what if it's repeat, it's still accurate and it still lists the overwhelming commonalities of Hinduism and Christianity, that's why there's no reason to reinvent the wheel so to speak.
How do you explain such overwhelming commonalities and similarities is the REAL question. How do you explain it Dacon?

Because I don't STUDY other religions and their origins does not mean that I have no knowledge of them.

Even the bible tells you to "study to show yourself approved a workman who needeth not be ashamed". You just admitted that you never studied the detailed intricacies of other religions, therefore since you didn't, there's no way you could know what those religions are about. It's hight time you followed the advice given by your bible of studying to gain understanding.

Again, how do you explain the overwhelming similarities Christianity has with previous so-called pagan religions, especially Hinduism? That's the real issue.