It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: burgerbuddy
Why you think your going to 've raptured in the clouds or by alien spaceships?
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
You ever think about learning BEFORE you decide to argue about subjects that are not your area of expertise?
Instead of searching out non canonical thinkers to argue with about the mundane features of Christianity you could actually learn something other than the Bible in its literal and most useless form and speak not out of blind zealousness but intellectualy and in line with reality.
Unless you like being proven wrong again and again because I don't just say things that are not researched a hundred times before I say them so just some advice.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
You ever think about learning BEFORE you decide to argue about subjects that are not your area of expertise?
Instead of searching out non canonical thinkers to argue with about the mundane features of Christianity you could actually learn something other than the Bible in its literal and most useless form and speak not out of blind zealousness but intellectualy and in line with reality.
Unless you like being proven wrong again and again because I don't just say things that are not researched a hundred times before I say them so just some advice.
You have yet to actually prove me wrong. It takes more than repetition of your assertions to prove a point. You need to address each point and provide corroborative links that speak to each issue and from reputable sources, as I have done.
Now, am I required to know things before I learn them?
How very Socratic of you.
Why would it matter to you about the order with which I acquire knowledge?
originally posted by: amazing
The Problem with Christianity is the this.
1. The New Testament is History, yet many Christians take it as Dogma. Either it's Dogma or History. If it's history, then take it out and make it a "History book for Christians" The problem with telling us it's the old testament, is that it can then be considered Dogma and it's okay to hate, kill, rape and hold slaves.
2. Paul--Paul holds more authority over Christians than Jesus. Go to any church service and they will be quoting Paul instead of Jesus.
3. Christian's think that God stopped speaking to us thousands of years ago. If there is a God, why would he suddenly stop speaking to us thousands of years ago? Riddle me that!
4. We are told that we cannot change the bible, it is the unerring word of God. But when did it become the unerring word of God? Before Constantine the false Christian changed it? Or after king James changed it? When? It's been changed. It needs to be changed again to make Christianity relavent.
originally posted by: amazing
The Problem with Christianity is the this.
1. The New Testament is History, yet many Christians take it as Dogma. Either it's Dogma or History. If it's history, then take it out and make it a "History book for Christians" The problem with telling us it's the old testament, is that it can then be considered Dogma and it's okay to hate, kill, rape and hold slaves.
2. Paul--Paul holds more authority over Christians than Jesus. Go to any church service and they will be quoting Paul instead of Jesus.
3. Christian's think that God stopped speaking to us thousands of years ago. If there is a God, why would he suddenly stop speaking to us thousands of years ago? Riddle me that!
4. We are told that we cannot change the bible, it is the unerring word of God. But when did it become the unerring word of God? Before Constantine the false Christian changed it? Or after king James changed it? When? It's been changed. It needs to be changed again to make Christianity relavent.
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
I decided to extend an olive branch to you so you can learn something.
Tammuz Christmas
The Christmas tree is described in Jeremiah 10. It was called the Tammuz tree and based off the myth of Tammuz being Nimrod ressurected. Tammuz mother Semiramis/Ishtar claimed a miracle involving a tree that grew from a stump happened as aversan of sortz. Tammuz was born on Dec. 25 according to myth as the god of the sun and ressurected Nimrod. People would decorate whatever tree grew in their area after chopping one down and putting in their home.
Weeping for Tammuz by the Hebrew women (Ezekiel 16:14) is apostasy and God warns not to ever adopt heathen customs and mentions the tree as an example in Jeremiah 10.
The link will explain everything else and has links upon links itself to verify what it says.
Any other refusal to accept that both Christmas and Easter are pagan in origin is wilful ignorance on your part as the Catholics freely admit all of this if you bothered to check a Catholic or even Jewish encyclopedia or any of a million other sources that also acknowledge pagan origins in these two holidays. It is a matter of pure historical fact and denying it is ridiculous. They are the two oldest holidays on earth and are astronomy based on the the change from longer days to longer nights and visa versa.
Christmas is the birth of the sun because the days get longer and nights get shorter.
Ishtar or Easter is a fertility goddess and a holiday celebration of the fertility goddess. That is the eggs symbolic meaning. It has zero to do with Christ or the resurrection (Easter).
Edit: if that link doesn't work go to www.(malwaresite)/cmc-48.HTML or Google Christian media research Tammuz Christmas
Alternative Tammuz Christmas link
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
I decided to extend an olive branch to you so you can learn something.
Tammuz Christmas
The Christmas tree is described in Jeremiah 10. It was called the Tammuz tree and based off the myth of Tammuz being Nimrod ressurected. Tammuz mother Semiramis/Ishtar claimed a miracle involving a tree that grew from a stump happened as aversan of sortz. Tammuz was born on Dec. 25 according to myth as the god of the sun and ressurected Nimrod. People would decorate whatever tree grew in their area after chopping one down and putting in their home.
Weeping for Tammuz by the Hebrew women (Ezekiel 16:14) is apostasy and God warns not to ever adopt heathen customs and mentions the tree as an example in Jeremiah 10.
The link will explain everything else and has links upon links itself to verify what it says.
Any other refusal to accept that both Christmas and Easter are pagan in origin is wilful ignorance on your part as the Catholics freely admit all of this if you bothered to check a Catholic or even Jewish encyclopedia or any of a million other sources that also acknowledge pagan origins in these two holidays. It is a matter of pure historical fact and denying it is ridiculous. They are the two oldest holidays on earth and are astronomy based on the the change from longer days to longer nights and visa versa.
Christmas is the birth of the sun because the days get longer and nights get shorter.
Ishtar or Easter is a fertility goddess and a holiday celebration of the fertility goddess. That is the eggs symbolic meaning. It has zero to do with Christ or the resurrection (Easter).
Edit: if that link doesn't work go to www.(malwaresite)/cmc-48.HTML or Google Christian media research Tammuz Christmas
Alternative Tammuz Christmas link
I hardly consider mystery-babylon.org as authoritative or reputable and I do not want to be served malware, so I won't bother browsing the first link.