|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Thank you. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
I'd argue it's hard for any person knowledgeable NOT to entertain these "fantasies". Even if they haven't ended up believing in the end, I've rarely found an intelligent person that hasn't at least considering exploring western religion on the premise that there could be some validity to it.
On a side note... the article was about Benedict saying that the Catholic Church is the one true church because of apostolic succession. So far, in counter to the point, people have mentioned (for example):
- The Church overwriting pagan holidays to gain converts
- The switch of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday at some point in history
- The Church trying to gain money through various means
- The priest scandals
- The Crusades
- The Spanish Inquisition
- Historical church corruption
All of which have absolutely nothing to do with the original point from Benedict, which is that the lineage of bishops that can be traced back to Peter legitimizes the Catholic Church over others. It's been a predictable pattern that whenever the Catholic Church comes up in any thread, the issue at hand is completely ignored and Church bashing takes place. It's pretty sad when nearly every single problem the Church has had over 2000 years has been listed, yet not one single solid counter-argument to the topic has been. It appears it's easier to rip on the Church for past failings than address issues that are difficult to refute.
Benedict has been called an "idiot" and "ignorant " by people in this thread, despite the fact that he has been an expert theologian for over 50 years, a professor at a university level, has written multiple books, speaks multiple languages fluently and holds one of the most important positions in the world. If you're looking to find a man qualified to read ancient text, master it and interpret its meanings, I'd say he's a pretty good resource... and better than anyone here by a longshot.
That all said, I still don't know why he came out and said this (even though it's been a teaching for ages) because it just creates a further rift, but I respect his passion.
Truly though, it's a shame that this thread has so little substance and so much resentment.
For me personally. I don't believe in this apostolic succession. I don't believe in the apostles nor Jesus. So the whole, our church is the true church is b.s. to me.
Prove this apostolic succession to be true. Especially since it was the Romans that crucified Jesus, and hunted down, and murdered most of his disciples (according to the book)
To me, the legitimacy of the Roman Catholic Church is null and void. More of a, if you can't beat em, steal their religion and put your face on it.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149 |
Quote:
- The Church overwriting pagan holidays to gain converts
- The switch of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday at some point in history
- The Church trying to gain money through various means
- The priest scandals
- The Crusades
- The Spanish Inquisition
- Historical church corruption
All of which have absolutely nothing to do with the original point from Benedict, which is that the lineage of bishops that can be traced back to Peter legitimizes the Catholic Church over others. It's been a predictable pattern that whenever the Catholic Church comes up in any thread, the issue at hand is completely ignored and Church bashing takes place.
I find the fact the issues such as following the customs of paganism can in any way be "Church bashing". Instead,they are well documented point of fact. So now your assertion is that "bringing fact to the table is Church bashing"???
I find that humerous at best. And a very logical reason to dismiss Catholacism as a whole.
The way that Priests who were pretty much child molesters were simply "moved around" to other positions,rather than removed from the Priesthood is also a "matter of fact". If you don't "like the facts" then fine. But calling "FACTS,BASHING" is no less rationalizing than the continued use of pagan customs.
And these "facts" are the very basis of why many have no belief or faith in the Pope or the Cathlic Religion. So yes,it is very relivant as to why people don't believe the Pope,don't believe "God talks to him" and discredit his every word in regards to being the true Church.
Quite relivant indeed IMO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Personally I think the believers would be better off saying, 'Hey, you don't have to beleive this but it makes us better people'....they should also realize that sometimes non-believers can live fine lives...if you realy believe they're going to Hell, that's fine, but keep it to yourself and treat them like your brother...that's what Jesus taught...I think nonbelievers should realize that sometimes these religions make these people better as well (but, yes, I feel, more often than not - or at least at a more noticeable volume - worse).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
That's basically what he said Phil ... he said other churches have "flaws" because they don't have aposolistic succession. He never said they were going to hell.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Let me ask you a serious question. If someone believes you are "going to hell", why wouldn't they try to say something to help them avoid that? To me, you're not "treating them like a brother" if you don't say something. If my brother were doing something that could lead to such a consequence, I would surely say something. You wouldn't?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
I'm not even touching on that...I'm getting to the crux of the debate (or at least that's my perception)...to be honest, I could care less what this idiot says...and yes, I feel no remorse for calling him an idiot...if you truly believe in the ideals and teachings of Christ, this guy is a blowhard.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
if you truly believe in the ideals and teachings of Christ ...
See that's the problem. You take a peice of scripture and read it to a group of 20 people. You get 20 different answers as to what it is really suppose to mean. That's actually the point of having a Pope. He's sort of the last word on any debate of what is the "correct" interpretation. You actually see this in the Bible, where some of the disciples were arguing about something regarding the church. Everyone turned to Peter (the first Pope), and after he gave his opinion, it was the end of the debate.
Quote:
I feel no remorse for calling him an idiot...if you truly believe in the ideals and teachings of Christ, this guy is a blowhard.
And why exactly is that? Because he says that other churches have "flaws"? Is it un-christlike to have an opinion?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 880
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 880 |
But the Pope shouldn't cast stones as to the flaws and mistakes of other churches.
I think this is a way for him or the Catholic Church to push more people away, which is exactly what Jesus DIDN'T do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
For me personally. I don't believe in this apostolic succession. I don't believe in the apostles nor Jesus. So the whole, our church is the true church is b.s. to me.
Prove this apostolic succession to be true. Especially since it was the Romans that crucified Jesus, and hunted down, and murdered most of his disciples (according to the book)
To me, the legitimacy of the Roman Catholic Church is null and void. More of a, if you can't beat em, steal their religion and put your face on it.
Jesus' existence is an almost universally acknowledged historical fact. If you don't believe in what people say Jesus was (God) and instead believe him to be a teacher, preacher, etc. then that's just one valid opinion, but it's a bit outlandish to say you don't believe in Jesus, period. There is also evidence (outside the Bible as before) that his apostles existed as well.
Apostolic succession is, again, something that really can't be argued. It does exist, it just matters what part of it you care about (if you care at all) that matters. Jesus appointed Peter as the leader of his church; Peter passed that on, the next man passed it on and so it goes up until present times. Under the kind of apostolic succession that the Catholic Church acknowledges, the Protestants can't stake claim to it because they left the Church during the Reformation and were created outside of it. However, that doesn't matter to them, as many of them perceive succession to be the succession of the word, not of church leadership. Orthodox worshippers have apostolic succession in the Catholic sense because they divided during the Schism, they didn't spring up, but Benedict argues that they're incomplete because they don't have the Pope - Orthodox don't seem to care.
Again, none of this may matter to you and that's fine - I can see that point of view. It DOES exist though, and Benedict happens to believe he has the best part of it, as the Catholic Church can be traced straight back to when Jesus told Peter to continue his work.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
I find the fact the issues such as following the customs of paganism can in any way be "Church bashing". Instead,they are well documented point of fact. So now your assertion is that "bringing fact to the table is Church bashing"???
I find that humerous at best. And a very logical reason to dismiss Catholacism as a whole.
The way that Priests who were pretty much child molesters were simply "moved around" to other positions,rather than removed from the Priesthood is also a "matter of fact". If you don't "like the facts" then fine. But calling "FACTS,BASHING" is no less rationalizing than the continued use of pagan customs.
And these "facts" are the very basis of why many have no belief or faith in the Pope or the Cathlic Religion. So yes,it is very relivant as to why people don't believe the Pope,don't believe "God talks to him" and discredit his every word in regards to being the true Church.
Quite relivant indeed IMO
It's not that you're bringing fact to the table so much as you're bringing completely irrelevent fact to the discussion. If you went into a UN conference on global terrorism and tried to speak out against the U.S., saying that we slaughtered Native Americans hundreds of years ago may be fact, but it's completely pointless in the discussion and irrelevent to the people currently involved.
The Church created holidays around pagan ones as a way of overwriting paganism and trying to gain converts by absorbing it. It's no different than anything going on today, like when an Xbox is announced before a Playstation in hopes of stealing Playstation's thunder and getting customers to Xbox. It makes definite sense, especially given how much disdain Catholics had for pagans.
The priest scandals are certainly unfortunate and I have no problems with the offending priests being defrocked and anyone who tried to protect them suffering the same fate as well. However, somewhere along the line, people lost the truth about the Church - it's an assembly of sinners, not saints. People in positions of power, whether it be teachers, ministers of other faiths, doctors etc. have been known to abuse their power at the expense of innocents. They should suffer an apt fate, but it happens because the Church is HUMAN.
However, to damn an entire group of people (Catholic priests) for the sins of the few is condemnable in itself. I've talked to a few very good, righteous priests/ministers that have been afraid to touch a child on the shoulder in a kind, friendly way because of how it might be construed. They've done nothing wrong and would never do anything wrong, yet they suffer every day. It's one thing to punish the guilty, it's another to punish the innocent because they fall in the same profession, but unfortunately, that's exactly what happened with the priest scandals.
Of course I don't like the facts - I don't know any Catholic (priest or lay) that does... but that doesn't mean that the burden should fall on their shoulders if they were innocent.
Mention the "facts" when they're relevant to the discussion. Mention the "facts" when you're referring to someone guilty and involved. Leave the them at home when they have no purpose. There's no reason to unnecessarily bash something you don't understand or something you do, but disagree with.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,427
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,427 |
lol! You support the view that other church's can't claim apostolic succession, then qualify it with describing apostolic succession as being "the kind of apostolic succession that the Catholic Church acknowledges".... well, if they're setting the definition, no wonder noone else can claim it   To me, it's all a joke anyway. The way I see it, there is nothing wrong with Faith, Belief or Spirituality (in fact, I have found them indispensable over the course of the last year)... but I have serious problems with organized religions and their little whizzing contests and their need to force their point of view on others (by subjugation if necessary) all the while belittling the views of others. The Pope and his OPINION on God is absolutely no more valid than my own. If you believe his to be more valid than your own, that's all well and good for you, but I feel sorry for you having such low thoughts of yourself and I would suggest you need to work on your conscious contact with God as you understand him. It is my view that most organized religions have less to do with the worship & praising of God than they do with control over Man, and that Man would be best served worshiping & praising with how they live Monday thru Saturday than by where they go and what they wear for a few hours on a Sunday morning.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
But the Pope shouldn't cast stones as to the flaws and mistakes of other churches.
I think this is a way for him or the Catholic Church to push more people away, which is exactly what Jesus DIDN'T do.
I don't think Benedict was trying to cast stones (though I can easily see how people get that from the harsh tone of his words) so much as he was trying to energize his people. Apathy has become a real problem with the Catholic Church lately and I think it's a good idea to try to re-energize Catholics around the world - I just wish he'd do it without offending others as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,086
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,086 |
Quote:
Jesus' existence is an almost universally acknowledged historical fact. If you don't believe in what people say Jesus was (God) and instead believe him to be a teacher, preacher, etc. then that's just one valid opinion, but it's a bit outlandish to say you don't believe in Jesus, period. There is also evidence (outside the Bible as before) that his apostles existed as well.
I believe that some friendly guy named Jesus roamed the Earth telling people to do good onto each other. Since life was incredibly boring back then, they took it to an extreme in starting a cult following of him. Some then took these stories in this book to be literal and some took it to provide general teachings, which are mainly treat yourself and others with respect.
I also believe that if the same thing happened today, he'd be labeled a crazy nut. Why? B/c he didn't literally turn water into wine or literally part a sea. It was a metaphor. Doing that same stuff today would get you locked up in a mental ward doped on happy drugs. I say this b/c the bible says Jesus and God will return some day (when is that gonna happen already by the way) and when he does, he better bring his A game b/c people will not believe unless he literally parts seas, walks on them and turns water into scientifically proven wine.
Point being that as cynical as people are today, I'm shocked at how many just want to believe there's more out there than has ever been proved. There's nothing to substantiate the existence of a higher being outside of some book of stories written thousands of years ago that have since been muddied and meddled with by humans.
![[Linked Image from i45.tinypic.com]](http://i45.tinypic.com/adhq2o.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
lol!
You support the view that other church's can't claim apostolic succession, then qualify it with describing apostolic succession as being "the kind of apostolic succession that the Catholic Church acknowledges".... well, if they're setting the definition, no wonder noone else can claim it
I said that to be polite because others have different interpretations of apostolic succession that they find equally valid and could successfully debate for. IMO, the Catholic and Orthodox churches possess true apostolic succession as logic tells you it should be, but that's just me.
Quote:
The Pope and his OPINION on God is absolutely no more valid than my own. If you believe his to be more valid than your own, that's all well and good for you, but I feel sorry for you having such low thoughts of yourself and I would suggest you need to work on your conscious contact with God as you understand him.
That all depends on whether or not you're a Catholic/Christian or not. I happen to realize the Pope knows far more about the early beginnings of the church than I can ever hope to because he has access to everything the Vatican has to offer (including having sat through the Vatican II counsel and having ancient interpretations at his disposal) as well as the ability to read documents in the original Latin. I won't even pretend that I have more of a clue than he does. If you're talking about a more abstract belief in God, then you're a better authority than you are at church matters, but again, someone who's been an expert at "the study of religion" for 50 years is probably a pretty good authority.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Point being that as cynical as people are today, I'm shocked at how many just want to believe there's more out there than has ever been proved.
Perhaps because being cynical and doubting everything is a miserable way to live and, even if it turns out that God and Jesus don't exist, the possibility that there was a higher being that walked amongst us, loved us unconditionally, and died so that we can live with Him in paradise forever is one worth our hopes and dreams.
I pray I never find out while I'm alive that a secular, hedonistic existence is all we have to live for.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
if you realy believe they're going to Hell, that's fine, but keep it to yourself and treat them like your brother...that's what Jesus taught...
Jesus taught disciples to sit idly by and let their brothers go to hell without saying anything, lest somebody might disagree with them? I must have missed that lesson.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,086
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,086 |
Quote:
Quote:
Point being that as cynical as people are today, I'm shocked at how many just want to believe there's more out there than has ever been proved.
Perhaps because being cynical and doubting everything is a miserable way to live and, even if it turns out that God and Jesus don't exist, the possibility that there was a higher being that walked amongst us, loved us unconditionally, and died so that we can live with Him in paradise forever is one worth our hopes and dreams.
I pray I never find out while I'm alive that a secular, hedonistic existence is all we have to live for.
I get that. I was taught that for many, many years.
But my question then is - outside of a book filled with stories that are thousands of years old, what else do you have to bank this faith on? Just faith and hope from one old book? I'm oversimplifying for a reason. Take a step back and see how silly that looks to outsiders when we live in a world of doubters, scam artists, etc. Could Jesus simply have been a smooth talker?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149 |
When assessing the validity of a Savior or Messiah, two major events are consistently mentioned, the Immaculate Conception or virgin birth, and the Resurrection or rising from the dead and ascending into Heaven or Paradise. Nothing supercedes these two occurrences as the most important in classifying one as a Savior. The problem we face here, particularly in the western world, is associating these events with only one being, Jesus, the Christ. Things become very difficult for the western mind when looking at these two events from other parts of the world, during different historical periods, even before the birth of Jesus. These two events have been associated with various other beings in different cultures. The first human recording of these two events are found in northeast Afrika, Kemet, which the Greeks called Egypt, around 4100 B.C.E. It focuses on Ausar (Osiris), Auset (Isis) and Heru (Horus), reputably known as the original trinity; the father, the mother, the son [parentheses indicates Greek names]. There are temples in Kemet where these events were drawn in stone thousands of years before the birth of Jesus. The Temple of Luxor, inscribed by King Amenhotep III (1538-1501 B.C.E.) shows four scenes on the birth of Heru (Horus): The Annunciation, The Immaculate Conception, The Birth and the Adoration. In the Temple of Seti I, in Abydos, the home of Ausar (Osiris), and in the temple at Denderah, one can see The Resurrection of Heru (Horus). Books such as: The Egyptian Book of the Dead (originally titled The Book of Coming Forth by Day and by Night) by E. A. Wallis Budge; The Coffin Text and The Pyramid Text; The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors by Kersey Graves; and Christianity Before Christ by John G. Jackson, among others, have recorded these various stories. Some Egyptologists feel that the triad of deities: Amon, Mut and Khonsu, at the temple in Karnak, was copied by the early Christians to form the present Holy Trinity. As a side note, according to most Christian scriptures, Jesus was said to have been born in Bethlehem, or Nazareth. In the Coptic writings, where the oldest Christians called Copts still reside (Kemet and Ethiopia), and according to Dr. Yosef ben-Jochannan, a Kemetologist, born in Ethiopia, Jesus was said to have been born in Kemet (Egypt). In Matthew 2:15, it still says, "Out of Egypt shall I call my son!" Contrary to written sources, Kemet (Egypt) is where Christianity was born, while Ethiopia built the first Christian Church and was the world’s first and oldest Christian nation. Christianity was originally an Afrikan religion, as was the Hebrew Afrikan religion called Judaism. When the Roman Empire converted to Christianity (312 A.D.), and wrestled it from Afrika, the story was changed. This was further confirmed at the Council of Nicea, on May 20th, 325 A.D., called by the Roman Emperor Constantine, and attended by 318 bishops and religious scholars. Together, they formed a new Imperial State Religion, known today as The Roman Catholic Church. Eighteen books were removed from the original scriptures at this conference. They are called the Apocrypha. The first book in particular, “The Book of Mary,” states that Mary was born of a virgin birth, giving her divine status, which was stripped during the conference. Also, it states that she had a son before Jesus by a virgin birth, James the Lesser. Most Christian denominations do not lend any credence to the Apocrypha. After much editing, it remains in the Catholic Bible. As mentioned earlier, other beings were associated with the Immaculate Conception and Resurrection story. Their life stories parallel that of Jesus, which parallel that of Heru (Horus). In Mexico, in the Codex Vaticanus, this being is called Quexalcote. In China, in the History of the Rajahs, the name Xaca is mentioned, and also Yu. In India they are called Buddha and Krishna. Sakia, Scipio, Arion, Zulis, Bacchus, Alcides, and Hesus are some of the beings associated with the two events previously mentioned. In actuality, the virgin birth/resurrection story has floated all over the world, in various cultures, various interpretations, before, during and after the Mary Jesus version. http://www.africawithin.com/kwaku/virgin_birth.htm
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
But the Pope shouldn't cast stones as to the flaws and mistakes of other churches.
He most certainly should if he believes it is keeping people from God...
Quote:
I think this is a way for him or the Catholic Church to push more people away, which is exactly what Jesus DIDN'T do.
LOL.. no, Jesus didn't push people away.. of course he never compromised on what he believed either... The opinions of Jesus were absolute.. one way is right, the other is wrong, no touchy feely, PC, everybody is entitled their own opinion, nobody is really wrong bullcrap for Him....... all of which leads me to believe Jesus would be an incredibly unpopular person if he was walking the earth today.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
I get that. I was taught that for many, many years.
But my question then is - outside of a book filled with stories that are thousands of years old, what else do you have to bank this faith on? Just faith and hope from one old book? I'm oversimplifying for a reason. Take a step back and see how silly that looks to outsiders when we live in a world of doubters, scam artists, etc. Could Jesus simply have been a smooth talker?
Anything is possible without proof, but I doubt a smooth talker would willingly stare death in the face and slowly suffer in one of the most excruciating tortures possible for a lie... especially when he saw it coming.
I also think the tradition of the church is a huge plus on top of the Bible. The core beliefs of the church have been formed by people that lived much much closer to the time of Jesus than we have. When in doubt, if I'm trying to figure out if Jesus was God, was meant to be worshipped, and what he meant by certain sayings, I can either trust myself 2000 years later in a world of skeptics and an age where information has faded over time, or I can trust core tradition that has gone relatively unchanged for over hundreds and thousands of years. I'll lean to the side of tradition established by people who knew what they were talking about in that case and hope for the best.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,427
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,427 |
So, Horus is Jesus.  Jesus is the Falcon, which means that Christianity is really one of the very "pagan" religions that other religions have tried to stamp out.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
So, Horus is Jesus.
Jesus is the Falcon, which means that Christianity is really one of the very "pagan" religions that other religions have tried to stamp out.
Except that this article even says "Contrary to written sources, Kemet (Egypt) is where Christianity was born". When I'm looking up information from 2000 years ago, I can't imagine not going with the written source. Christianity eventually spread to the areas in question but it likely started as a Jewish sect. Plus, the quote they use is much more likely in reference to Mary and Joseph's exodus to Egypt to escape Herod.
I was half expecting a reference to Jebus. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149 |
If you're REALLY interested in how the very FACT is that Jesus was NOT the first "proclaimed Savior" and just how eerily his story and message was to one who proceeded him,take a look at this......................................... http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htmBoth virgin biths. Both had mothers with names beinning with M Both were attempted to be murdered as infants Both baptised at age 30 Both had 12 diciples Both were crusified Birthdates celibrated four days apart Both died by crucifiction Both were crucified accompanied by two thieves Both spent three days in the grave and were resurrected There's a LOT MORE similarities involved in the stories of these two entities. But Hosus was alive BEFORE Christ. Now I'm not indicating anything here accept that these stories are eerily similar. And the story of Jesus is eerily similar to the story of someone who came before him.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Wow, that convinces me....I guess that proves the the assassination of JFK was all fiction since his and Lincoln's have so many similarities. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149 |
I don't have any idea ppl. And I don't claim to.
But I decided a while back to study things. To open my mind up to other possibilities and search for answers as to the beginning of certain concepts I was taught, Such as the virgin birth. Where did it originate? What about resurrection? Where did that originate?
And some of the things I stumbled across I found to be very perplexing and has left even more questions and doubts in my mind.
So I don't know the answer to your question but I am still wondering,studying and searching for answers that have puzzled mankind since its inception.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
I'd be very very cautious before trusting documents like that. Often, pieces such as those written in present time to discredit Christianity have a DaVinci code-like effect. They write a story to cast doubt (possibly either loosely based in history or complete fabrication), but because no one ever inquires about the original sources, people can end up believing works of total fiction as though they're truth. If you can find an Egyptologist that has the original story of Horus translated and it matches with what people claim, then it's at least cause for question. Unfortunately, none of that is provided, which raises a giant red flag IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149 |
Quote:
I was half expecting a reference to Jebus.
There are MANY entities with many of these same similarities Spectre. Horus is just an example of one such entity. However,I don't just shrug everything off because it doesn't fit into the way I was indoctrinated. I keep an open mind and look at everything.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Everyone knows the REAL Pope is the Easter Bunny since St. Peter was really a rabbit and the Vatican covered that up in the last supper painting. If you erase Peter in the painting, a bunny appears.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,427
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,427 |
I don't know the answer either, but I decided long ago to discard what I had been taught to date and to look at it for myself.
What I've come up with is that there IS something greater than myself, I have no idea what or who it is but it IS there. I have no idea if all the Bible stories or the Jews or the Muslims or the Buddhists are right.... and I honeslty couldn't care less as I firmly believe that none of those beliefs matter in the slightest.
The only thing that matters is living right and doing the next right thing.... you do that and everything else will take care of itself. If you don't do that, at the very least you are assured your very own hell on earth.... what happens after you die, I have no idea on... and can't worry about.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
There are MANY entities with many of these same similarities Spectre. Horus is just an example of one such entity. However,I don't just shrug everything off because it doesn't fit into the way I was indoctrinated. I keep an open mind and look at everything.
I don't either, but at the same time, I'm not so eager to disprove religion as to believe everything at face value and buy into it all as gospel truth without intense scrutiny first (not saying that you are, I'm just saying that the people who write these things are trying to get that reaction out of people). In fact (back to the original topic), that's probably the reason Benedict is going through the motions rehashing dated yet important church teachings. All too often, Catholics are so poorly taught of their faith that the second a question comes up that they don't have an answer to (one that could easily be shot down by someone educated), they simply drop their faith for this new "truth" (which is probably a lie) and then claim enlightenment when, really, it's anything but.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,149 |
I think if you look at my posts,I don't take them as "fact". The one thing that is odd,that much factual data on Horus,pre dated Christ.
I do however know,that the Roman Cathlic Church is THE MAJOR reason that so many Pagan customs and symbols were indoctrinated into the Christian Religion. And that in and of itself steers me as far away from Catholacism as I can get.
I find it odd that it's Cathlics themselves many times that try to discredit such stories,when it's their very own Religion that adopted so many Pagan customs that originated from these same Pagan teachings.
No,I believe in Jesus Christ. But in doing so,his teachings are not related in many ways to anything Christianity teaches today. Three days and nights in the grave aren't from Friday afternoon untill Sunday at sunrise. I think Jesus had better math skills than that. He teaches us to keep "seven Holy Days" none of which are any of Christianities "Holidays".
Jesus observed the Sabbath on Saturday.not Sunday.He told us not to celibrate his birth,but his death. He didn't celibrate Easter,Christamas,or Halloween. I believe in the "teachings of Christ. The Bible" Not Religion. They're far too steeped in paganism for me to even begin to take them seriously.
I don't call a dog a cat,nor a cow a pig. I'm certainly not going to follow the rituals of paganism while trying to profess to be Christian. Nor would I try to discredit Paganism of I practiced MANY of their customs on an annual basis. But that's just me. To each their own.
JMHO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Jesus' existence is an almost universally acknowledged historical fact. If you don't believe in what people say Jesus was (God) and instead believe him to be a teacher, preacher, etc. then that's just one valid opinion, but it's a bit outlandish to say you don't believe in Jesus, period. There is also evidence (outside the Bible as before) that his apostles existed as well.
"almost"! There's no hard evidence to prove Jesus existed. Mainly, because his name was not Jesus. Secondly, the mythical story (the immaculate conception, death, and ressurection) is all just the retelling of the original trinity of Horus (Horu), Isis (Aset), and Osisris (Asar). That story was edited to encompass the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost (mainly because the Greeks had a big problem with the divinity of women as most Greeks then were largely homosexual (see the Symposium)). Different names and faces, but the same story...look it up. A story that outdates the bible by thousands of years. The bible used today is nothing more than the evolution of the first Greek bible. It is a historical fact (not almost), that the Greeks got their knowledge out of the Nile Valley, medicine, mathematics, and religion...including the original concept of monotheism.
Now, there was a man named Yeshua (mostly spelled Joshua) whose life has been deified, and is now called Jesus (whose name comes from Zeus).
Quote:
Apostolic succession is, again, something that really can't be argued. It does exist, it just matters what part of it you care about (if you care at all) that matters. Jesus appointed Peter as the leader of his church; Peter passed that on, the next man passed it on and so it goes up until present times. Under the kind of apostolic succession that the Catholic Church acknowledges, the Protestants can't stake claim to it because they left the Church during the Reformation and were created outside of it. However, that doesn't matter to them, as many of them perceive succession to be the succession of the word, not of church leadership. Orthodox worshippers have apostolic succession in the Catholic sense because they divided during the Schism, they didn't spring up, but Benedict argues that they're incomplete because they don't have the Pope - Orthodox don't seem to care.
Again, none of this may matter to you and that's fine - I can see that point of view. It DOES exist though, and Benedict happens to believe he has the best part of it, as the Catholic Church can be traced straight back to when Jesus told Peter to continue his work.
No proof of any of these people has ever been found....outside of the bible. So to say it exists, is only a belief, and beliefs are hardly facts. Why would Jesus entrust the fate of his church to Peter and in turn annoint the ROMANS?!?! Not likely.
But I'm not here to rain on your parade. But don't try to pass beliefs off as fact. Nothing in religion can ever be proven. Not Jesus, Peter, Mohammad, Allah, Buddha, Krishna, whoever. That's what makes it so debatable. But in no way, shape, or form, does the Roman Catholic Church have a right to stake a claim as the one true church...especially since Jesus was a hebrew. Catholocism is a created religion.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
To use that logic, then you can't "prove" that Ramesis, Caeser, Aerostotle, or anyone from long past "existed".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
You can if there is archaeological or historical evidence supporting their existence. They believe they have found Ramses mummy. As for Aerostotle, and Ceasar. I can't prove it, I do believe they left behind bodies though.
Jesus is NOT a historical figure, but a religious, mythological figure.
I'm sure you know the difference Coach
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
No proof of any of these people has ever been found....outside of the bible. So to say it exists, is only a belief, and beliefs are hardly facts.
The Bible is one of the best sources out there, but so quickly gets discounted by skeptics because of a genuine lack of respect that it truly is more than just a made-up story. You can't exactly get a DNA verification of a guy that lived 2,000 years ago (and rose from the dead depending on your belief), but there was the written word, and there IS mention of Jesus in documents outside of the Bible and Christian community. Here's a good link that I found on google easy enough with multiple legitimate historic sources that mentioned Jesus (which also rings true with the account of the Bible)
http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77/
I don't really know what else you're looking for... Jesus did exist. When I say almost universally accepted, I say that because there's a few people that will deny Christ's existence no matter how hard it slaps them in the face.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
I applaud you verocity. But the Bible will not hold up as a verifiable, historical document. Sorry, just not gonna happen.
And that link, provides a bunch of second hand accounts, and the page itself is a christian site, what else are they gonna say.
I'm not here to really argue with you, I'm not trying to change your mind, and you don't stand a chance in hell of changing mine.
My point remains, the Roman Catholic Church cannot claim to be the one true church.
You disagree, and that's fine. Enjoy your Christianity, let me know how that works out for you!
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
if you realy believe they're going to Hell, that's fine, but keep it to yourself and treat them like your brother...that's what Jesus taught...
Jesus taught disciples to sit idly by and let their brothers go to hell without saying anything, lest somebody might disagree with them? I must have missed that lesson.
Jesus spent way more of his time admonishing those who admonished sinners than admonishing sinners himself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Jesus is NOT a historical figure, but a religious, mythological figure.
Jesus Christ of Nazareth is most certainly a historical figure. He really existed and definitely died on the cross. Whether you believe him to be the son of God or not is an entirely different story, but the man existed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,249
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,249 |
Quote:
But the Bible will not hold up as a verifiable, historical document. Sorry, just not gonna happen.
Sorry, but it does. Here's a paper written by a grad student at Harvard by the name of Taalib al’Salaam, who also has a degree from MIT.
The Bible as a Historical Document
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Pope : Other Christians not true
churches
|
|
![[Linked Image from thumb0.webshots.net]](http://thumb0.webshots.net/t/34/34/0/73/58/2594073580091396520Miskbz_th.jpg)
