Catholicism, the Univeral church:what that means

a reply to: Tsuro

Actually, Aryan refers to the Persian and Indian people's of ancient times. Iran, what Persia in now called, MEANS literally "Land of the Aryans" and isn't referring to Nazis and the Aryan myth of. Aryan is an ancient designation for the Indian and Persian people, the swastika was even taken from the Hindus.

But good job scrutinizing my comment. But you are way way off. The Aryan I speak of has nothing to do with what you are speaking.

Don't criticize what you don't know, like what I am talking about. Are you one of those people who stalks people's comments in the hope that you can prove someone wrong about something? Pretty lame if you are.

originally posted by: Tsuro
a reply to: Esephech

So they could all be the same person, Brahma, Ibrahim Zeradust, and Abraham.

Wow, all of a sudden logic seems to prevail..

Christianity has a purpose and a meaning, see it like this.. Humans are stupid as s***, they dont care, nor will they ever care, they are lazy, and will rather kill something than work for it...

What a sweeping description. Fortunately, it is not true. Many enlightened individuals have freed themselves from the shackles of ignorance, we just don't tell you about it.

Christianity has a purpose? Not an honorable one, other than what's done for appearances sake. Christianity has never had a goal that involves the benefit of all mankind.

a reply to: Esephech

who is the enlightened "we", Christianity interest always lies with humanity, is it with "mankind"?.. No, it isnt with mankind, cause mankind is nature at its finest.. Do you know how to hunt, gather, medicine, farm? You dont, do you?

Would you survive with the laws of nature? Or you something called an intelligent design? Cause you sure aint human evolution, evolution happens in nature.. Gods work happens in society..

When you learn how to provide for yourself, then do come back and tell me what you choose? And im gonna bet you pick the most comfortable road cause your a primate with a reptilian triune, and that thing you called consciousness or enlightenment is values and ideals from mimicking your surrounding, its called a soul in the Christian church.. I like to reference it to mimic your natural environment, cause that tiny little reptilian brain inside your big brain does anything for it to reproduce..

If you think there is more to life than what you learn from the age of 5-12, ill give a hint.. there is nothing more..
Hopefully you learn enough about humanity before your testosterone levels skyrocket, if guilt and shame wasnt there, id bet you would see human nature at its finest..

Or do you live in a world of fairies and peter pan?

a reply to: Esephech

Do you know what the swastika represent? Do tell me, i can lay the whole foundation, i even have books on the topic...
You know where someone really took the time and effort to write something useful..

Scholars point out that, even in ancient times, the idea of being an "Aryan" was religious, cultural and linguistic, not racial

wow, did you see that first thing, its that word, Scholar..

The word was used by the Indic people of the Vedic period in India to refer to the noble class and geographic location known as Āryāvarta where Indo-Aryan culture was based

wow, again.. The Indians must have really something there..

dp

a reply to: Tsuro

The swastika is related to astronomy or what was astrology and tracking of certain celestial orbs. But I don't claim to be an expert and you are clearly trying to compete or show off. Churlish.

Like I said Iran, which is Persia, literally means land of the Aryans. I said Zoroaster was Aryan, which is a fact. I don't know what mythological aspect of Aryanism you are using but I am using it in the racial sense that describes Indians and Persians. You don't have to listen, but I didn't use the term Aryan in the mythical sense but the one that has been used to describe Persians and Indians for millenia.

And it was a side comment about the race of Zoroaster, has nothing to do with Catholicism and what you are doing is hunting for errors so you can make people think you are smart by "correcting" people. But you have revealed that you don't know that Aryan is a legitimate term for a Persian and that Iran means "Land of the Aryans." You aren't concerned with what really matters, just desperate to correct someone on anything. Sad that you are that lame. But you can analyze this message now, and Google something that makes you feel like it could refute me, and I will again have to explain myself because you don't understand anything at all, you are a really fun guy though. I get to make you look foolish every time you try and correct me because you always misunderstand or don't understand at all, everything I say. That's because I have spent real time learning about the subjects that I talk about because I am not a wannabe sage. I just read a LOT every day. So you don't know everything about the word Aryan, understanding, not many do. But you have books about the swastika, I am going to buy them so I need names and authors and I need you to explain the mystery of the swastika.

a reply to: Tsuro

Again, Iran or modern day Persian, literally means land of the Aryans. I used it race specifically, as that is what Indians and Persians are, Aryans. Not the mythical Aryans. It's a legitimate term to describe Persians and Indians of the ancient world.


Plus all you are doing is nit picking through my comments looking for something to correct, which is just a dumb way to spend time. Plus I am not going to say something that isn't true unless I am just mistaken, but this thread topic is not something I am going to likely make any errors. I'm too careful and too educated about religious history. It's possible, but the fact that you have nothing better to do than scrutinize my comments and try and refute me says a lot about you.

But, you can try. I will be here to rebuke you and explain everything twice, as is the minimum with you.

originally posted by: Tsuro
a reply to: Esephech

who is the enlightened "we", Christianity interest always lies with humanity, is it with "mankind"?.. No, it isnt with mankind, cause mankind is nature at its finest.. Do you know how to hunt, gather, medicine, farm? You dont, do you?

Would you survive with the laws of nature? Or you something called an intelligent design? Cause you sure aint human evolution, evolution happens in nature.. Gods work happens in society..

When you learn how to provide for yourself, then do come back and tell me what you choose? And im gonna bet you pick the most comfortable road cause your a primate with a reptilian triune, and that thing you called consciousness or enlightenment is values and ideals from mimicking your surrounding, its called a soul in the Christian church.. I like to reference it to mimic your natural environment, cause that tiny little reptilian brain inside your big brain does anything for it to reproduce..

If you think there is more to life than what you learn from the age of 5-12, ill give a hint.. there is nothing more..
Hopefully you learn enough about humanity before your testosterone levels skyrocket, if guilt and shame wasnt there, id bet you would see human nature at its finest..

Or do you live in a world of fairies and peter pan?

I live amongst the gnomes and trolls, actually.

The who? is me and anyone else who has been enlightened by learning. Free from the shackles of ignorance wasn't a mystical comment. I just meant that I am not any of the things you said about humanity. Sounds like a description of your self to me.

Does the word buffoon mean anything to you?

a reply to: Esephech

Did you ever read a work by Plato called the allegory of the cave? Learning how the puppetshow works in the cave does it make you more enlightened? Or do you just become a part of the play you once was only a viewer? There is a world outside the cave, it's a simple place, where you just need to observe..

a reply to: Esephech

"The book of symbols" is a fantastic reference book

The Book Of Symbols: Reflections On Archetypal Images by (ARAS),

Which one do you want to use in astronomy, King Solomons Judaic Or the modern Christian with Ptolemy..

oh you taught it was magic?

originally posted by: Tsuro
a reply to: Esephech

"The book of symbols" is a fantastic reference book

The Book Of Symbols: Reflections On Archetypal Images by (ARAS),

Which one do you want to use in astronomy, King Solomons Judaic Or the modern Christian with Ptolemy..

oh you taught it was magic?

I taught what was magic?

I like the Testament of Solomon.
It's a good lesson. 72 demons, that's how many he had dominion over with his ring. In the Kabbalah they are called the 72 chief spirits or "names" of God.

72 is the total number of God's, or the total of the 70 children of El and Asherah and, El and Asherah make 72, in the Ugaritic tablets. That's the oldest significance of 72.

The best book I think for Torah interpretations is the Zohar, but you really need to have serious biblical knowledge or it is impossible to understand. Not magic though, just interpretations.

I like to read about the ancient world religions and their traditions. Symbology is less interesting to me than good stories. Magic has nothing to offer me.

I just like to know ancient history and religion. It's a passion. Spells and sorcery are foolish to me.

a reply to: Esephech

I give up, buy the book of A. Crowley instead you seem to be on the same levels..

buy a little cabin in the woods, well they burned his..

a reply to: Esephech

The Swastika, but im sure you love a story to go with it...

originally posted by: Esephech
a reply to: Tsuro

The swastika is related to astronomy or what was astrology and tracking of certain celestial orbs. But I don't claim to be an expert and you are clearly trying to compete or show off. Churlish.

Like I said Iran, which is Persia, literally means land of the Aryans. I said Zoroaster was Aryan, which is a fact. I don't know what mythological aspect of Aryanism you are using but I am using it in the racial sense that describes Indians and Persians. You don't have to listen, but I didn't use the term Aryan in the mythical sense but the one that has been used to describe Persians and Indians for millenia.

And it was a side comment about the race of Zoroaster, has nothing to do with Catholicism and what you are doing is hunting for errors so you can make people think you are smart by "correcting" people. But you have revealed that you don't know that Aryan is a legitimate term for a Persian and that Iran means "Land of the Aryans." You aren't concerned with what really matters, just desperate to correct someone on anything. Sad that you are that lame. But you can analyze this message now, and Google something that makes you feel like it could refute me, and I will again have to explain myself because you don't understand anything at all, you are a really fun guy though. I get to make you look foolish every time you try and correct me because you always misunderstand or don't understand at all, everything I say. That's because I have spent real time learning about the subjects that I talk about because I am not a wannabe sage. I just read a LOT every day. So you don't know everything about the word Aryan, understanding, not many do. But you have books about the swastika, I am going to buy them so I need names and authors and I need you to explain the mystery of the swastika.

I believe he said he new the swastika was astronomical. But you provided a nice picture anyway.

Back to the Catholic church, it's long been known that paganism is the true religion of the Catholic church, with the Jesus myth as the uniting factor being so similar to other sun god myths. Christianity is a pagan religion in disguise.

The Jesuits are master sorcerers and the true power in the church.

originally posted by: Esephech
a reply to: chr0naut

Jewish tradition is that Shem was Melchizedeck and Zoroastrianism was not the religion of Shem.

Melchizedeck means king of Righteousness and Jewish tradition supersedes Christian. If he is Shem in Judaism he SHOULD be in Christianity, but Christianity is not shy about tinkering with tradition.

It's a bad theory that Melchizedeck was Zoroastrian because Shem is older than Zoroaster could ever have been. Zoroaster was a Persian also, Aryan to be more precise. Which means he is either Indian or Persian. Abraham is a also legendarily A Brahman from India who also reorganized the daeva worshippers into monotheism. So they could all be the same person, Brahma, Ibrahim Zeradust, and Abraham.

How could Abraham be a Brahman from India? His descendants are Semitic, an identifiable genetic line different than South Asian ones.

The Semitic lines were very tribal and kept themselves racially pure. The Indian caste system did the same.

So, the idea that Brahma and Abraham could be the same person, or that Abraham was from India, is totally debunked.

originally posted by: Merari
Just off the top of my head, I can think of several elements in Christianity that are pagan.

1. The comprimising of the true Sabbath for the purposes of making the transition for pagans to Christianity easier and more likely. A strategic move that cares not about God's ordinances. Or Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish tradition. It comes down to attracting converts without regard to what God says about adopting pagan customs. It's forbidden to worship the sun and for the pagans SUN day was the holy day. So if you make it the holy day of your church you have adopted the pagan custom of sun worship, knowingly or not. God ordained the 7'th day the Sabbath and he isn't known for letting small infractions go unpunished. I am pretty sure you could even be killed for certain Sabbath violations. Changing the Sabbath is not biblically allowed and akin to overruling God. God never changed the Sabbath and despised paganism and adopting pagan customs is forbidden. But people find ways to justify it, usually by saying that Jewish law doesn't apply or something similar. I think Jesus said to keep the Sabbath holy. Saturday. You aren't keeping the Sabbath holy by following mans decree to observe sunday, the day of the sun, as holy. That is forsaking the actual holy Sabbath, the opposite of keeping it holy. To attract pagans.
... [snip] ...

Christians never "changed the Sabbath day".

They worshiped on the Sunday because it was "the Lord's day", the day Jesus arose (Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, Mark 16:9, Luke 24:1 & John 20:1).

It was also and the day Jesus appeared to them while they were taking a communal meal (Mark 16:14, Luke 24:33-53, John 20:18-20 & John 20:26).

It was also the day they regularly met for the purpose of fellowship (Acts 20:7, Acts 27:33-35, Acts 2:1 [Pentecost, the 16th of Nisan was a Sunday that year] & 1 Corinthians 16:2).

Many in the early Church in Jerusalem were orthodox Jews and were still keeping their Sabbaths and visiting the Temple too (Acts 5:42 & Acts 2:46). Paul is recorded as going to the Temple or synagogue and preaching there on Sabbaths (Acts 18:4, Acts 13:42 & Acts 13:44) but this is different than the Christian only fellowship meeting when they usually partook of the Lord's supper.

Also, Jesus makes plain that He expected the the Disciples to observe the Sabbath (Matthew 24:20), which is the seventh day of the week (see previous references).

The naming of the day as Sunday was merely Roman convention. They worshiped on Sunday not to reverence the sun, but because it was the Lord's day. And before you go into the 'son = sun' nonsense, that homonym only works in English. To include that in your post, when this has been pointed out to you before, is the disingenuous repetition of an untruth.

From very shortly after the Resurrection, the Christian Church began worshiping on the first day of the week (Sunday).

originally posted by: Merari
Just off the top of my head, I can think of several elements in Christianity that are pagan.

... [snip] ...

2. Christmas. A new name for a very old holiday that puts Jesus in the position and company of the many sun gods from Tammuz to Mithras or Sol Invictus (the unconquerable sun) who all were said to be born on December 25. Every Christmas tradition from the tree to the mistletoe to the caroling and giving of presents is pagan. It originates with the first trinity of Nimrod and the ressurected Nimrod known as Tammuz, son of Semiramis who was the sister and wife (possibly mother as well) of Nimrod, the slain first potentate of the world. Christmas is one of two pagan high holidays which are the winter and summer solstices.

... [snip] ...

Although the birth date of Jesus isn't recorded in the Gospels, the angel Gabriel announced to Mary that she would become pregnant with Jesus on the equivalent of our calendar month March 25 (Luke 1:26-40). Nine months later is December 25th.

Nothing pagan about it at all.

Perhaps the belief that significant things happened at significant astronomical times (which is very Jewish and also has a Biblical basis) reinforced the idea (it was the Winter solstice).

The fact that a pagan festival occurred during the same week was coincidence. Nothing specific to the festival of Dies Natalis Solis Invicti is present in Christmas.

Similarly, an analysis of the Sol Invictus cult reveals that it did not have Roman acceptance until Emperor Auralian decreed it to be an officially acceptable cult in 274 AD.

So, instead of Christianity being a syncretic belief, perhaps it would be more accurate to say that both Mithraism and Sol Invicts cults were syncretist, borrowing from Christianity and pagan sources, as attested by the fact that they arose hundreds of years after Christianity.

The idea that Jesus was born in the spring time, and not at peak of winter, is based upon the supposition that shepherds would not be pasturing flocks overnight (potentially in the snow) and that the Roman census would not be likely at the coldest point of winter. Both points are highly suppositional, with no actual fact to back them up.

originally posted by: Merari
Just off the top of my head, I can think of several elements in Christianity that are pagan.

... [snip] ...

3. Easter. The name Easter is an English way of saying the name of the pagan goddess Ishtar. Or in Greek it's Ioestre, I think. Ashtoreth is another version. There are many names for the pagan goddess Easter, but it is the name of a pagan goddess and a pagan high holiday that was disguised as a Christian holy day or holiday. Jesus didn't ordain any holidays that I am aware of, and none of these two holidays are Christian at all. They are both older than Christianity itself. And pagan.

... [snip] ...

Christ's death and resurrection occurred during the Jewish Passover or 'Pesach', in Hebrew and Aramaic. In both Greek and Latin this translates to 'Pascha'.

Only in English is the word Easter (which does have pagan roots) used. Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Aramaic languages make no reference to anything pagan.

None the less, Easter is not a celebration of some ancient goddess, despite the origin of the word.

I'm pretty sure that rabbits don't lay eggs, too.

a reply to: chr0naut

Oh so just because you say debunked it is now a fact?

Many, many people know that Abraham was A Brahman
Sara is Sarasvati

Both consorts and siblings.

Nobody knows where Abe was from originally, but ancient historians insist the Semitic people of India called Kalani are the descendants of the Jews and Abraham.

You just don't WANT to believe it. But the names and relationship between the two couples are almost Identical.

If you see the etymological similarities as coincidence AND the nature of their relationship, you are simply ignoring the obvious.

But you "debunked" it so you must be correct. I mean, there is absolutely no possible way you could be wrong, after all, you said debunked. Nobody who says that is ever wrong or agenda driven.

You can't even prove a single thing about Abraham, that he did or didn't exist, where he was born etc...

But the evidence is in the names and nature of their relationship, and that is undeniable. TOO similar to be a coincidence. Most likely, the concept of Brahma was woven into a story about the Jews, as they are well known for adapting other people's mythology into their own.

Blind.