The Mark of the Beast Identified

Originally posted by themillersdaughter
The Bible is a compendium of stories. Many are taken from ancient Egyptian texts (Psalm 104 in the Old Testament is an almost-dead-on-copy of the Great Hymn to the Aten, written by Pharoah Akhenaten several hundred years prior to the authorship of the Psalms); the Indian epic "Mahabahrata" supplied the verbatim text for 22 verses of the Book of Matthew - and on it goes. Christ, as it turns out, is the invention of the Council of Nicaea; his 'acts' are the simple adoption of stories from several ancient religions (for example, Mithra was crucified on a cross, bound in linen, rose on the third day after his burial in the third week of March - now called "Easter" after either the Babylonian goddess Ishtar or Astarte, or the Celtic equinox-festival, Eostar).

Well the only part you got right is that "easter" is not a christian holiday. It is in fact pagan. As far as the rest of your "tripe" it is typical of the fallen.

May GOD bless you and open your eyes..........

Pardon my skepticism, but I find it hard to believe that the Bible is the inherent word of God since it was cobbled together from plagiarized work (from an assortment of religions) written hundreds of years before.
What... the creator of the universe had writer's block?

The good thing here is: I don't have to believe. Well, not yet, anyway. It isn't illegal to not be a Christian...yet.

As far as JK Rowling being tortured (which, btw, my country actually approves of and accepts testimony collected under torture). Our Christian President approves. I don't think that'll be necessary..she isn't promising to send my soul to the eternal lake of fire if I don't believe the kid with the scar on his head.

And all that money she's making? She deserves it for her work in increasing literacy in America.

On the other hand...did those fine fine writers of the "Left Behind" series deserve all THAT money...and why the heck does it take 11 books to get to the end of the world? Ohhh...to make morrrrre money.

ps..I've read them..they suck...don't bother.

Oh, I see...."tripe" is what you call whatever you don't agree with.

Ok..I accept that..have you ever read the great hymn to the Aten? Or the Mahabahrata? Or would that get you kicked out of the club?

Is it against your religion to read other religious writings? I can imagine that it would make you uncomfortable to see the words in your 'inspired word of God' had actually been written by someone else. That would be most uncomfortable to me, as well. Might just shake my faith.

I'll accept your blessings though..which God did you ask to bless me?

If you're going to adopt someone else's religion (Judaism) you really should read about the foundations, don't you think?

Originally posted by themillersdaughter
Pardon my skepticism, but I find it hard to believe that the Bible is the inherent word of God since it was cobbled together from plagiarized work (from an assortment of religions) written hundreds of years before.
What... the creator of the universe had writer's block?

The good thing here is: I don't have to believe. Well, not yet, anyway. It isn't illegal to not be a Christian...yet.

You have every right to be skeptical and to not believe. We are told to choose who we will serve. It is nothing that can be forced upon you. Even Jesus told us to respect the right of people who do not want to accept Him. Sadly, some think they can convert by force. They fail to realize it's an internal choice that no one can force upon another. Oh, and the "plagiarized" accusation is pretty much debunked and dismissed. The correlations are stretched to make a fit.

As far as JK Rowling being tortured (which, btw, my country actually approves of and accepts testimony collected under torture). Our Christian President approves. I don't think that'll be necessary..she isn't promising to send my soul to the eternal lake of fire if I don't believe the kid with the scar on his head.

On the other hand...did those fine fine writers of the "Left Behind" series deserve all THAT money...and why the heck does it take 11 books to get to the end of the world? Ohhh...to make morrrrre money.

I personally couldn't care less what J.K. Rowling or La Haye and Jenkins are doing. None of my business either way. You brought them up- not me. I never did read the entire Left Behind series. It was good at first but then became monotonous, IMO. I have read their non fiction work, though. Pretty cool stuff.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Anyway I can be bothered for this post much more, I need something new to think about, just some thoughts in what you said without your quotes:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I have read it in question to what the end time world will be like for Jews and Christians , it will especially happen in Israel where 2/3 will be killed off by surrounding armies on land attacks worse than WW2, which Jesus tells the future people to flee to the mountains. Also in Revelations 13 and 20 speaks of the those killed during the end times for not worshipping the beast.

Sadam was hanged, but they used Islamic laws against him because democracy had not yet been established. Not saying any capital
punishment is right I don't like it my self. But what people are thinking is that a Roman-esque type system that beheaded John the Baptist or put Jesus on the cross will come about in Europe too. France can take back their beheading if Muslims make their own government out of their increasing immigrations and growth rate populations. I don't think France would say no to their past ways if it was as recent as 1977 for them to remember.

Everyone will become fundamental if their God shows up in the form of their own Jesus and Madhi because they expect them anyway to get rid of any future Jews and infidels, so when their signs come they will do anything to kill for the sake of honour, if fundamentals are doing that now, imagine the whole Islamic world convinced and being told at the same time to do so. Also populations have to grow and problems will have to be worse in this future. This could apply to another religion if it was a faked comming of some type or Alien invasion to get people against a particular group.

Likewise, yes they would kill their own if they become a non-Muslim also by choice or change religions like to Christianity or simple athiesm. Many have fled Muslim countries and it is happening around Africa and the Philippines too I bet more churches are being burned than built. You would not hear about that too often either, but do they them selves care enough to has the strength to do something about it? They cannot do much about it anyway. Honour killing and extremism is happening in the West due to an influx of immigrants bringing their culture and problems with them however they may spread to the next generation born Muslims. A threat is there which is one that may not have been.

What people are doing is predicting this scene that will suppose to happen in the future, this future is specific to the coming of Jesus.
This future to try and predict it to contemporary times seems to fit some puzzles of prophecy. We can still be wrong, It could also be a new Nazi type group that forms this beast system, but it will join forces with everything that is non Christian because it will be the ultimate battle with God, man will try and fight God also.

So what would you expect in a future that will be ruled by the Devil and ask for such things to take place? Christians will know the truth by then after Christianity becomes underground knowledge. We are seeing it from that point of view and not so much now. We can make comparisons to how it may spill onto the rest of the world. The world might end up the way some African nations are, man against man in civil war and cocentration camps for the opposing.

Islam does their own work internally, by persecuting the freedoms them selves, the invasion is from within, hence why many flee or try and immigrate else where or are persecuted for having another belief. Much of the persecution towards non-Muslims is from Muslims and it has a one-way system. I doubt if Islam would have lasted as long as it has had it left Islamic law out of its nations policies and people were free to decide rather than abide. The army and the recent politics in the UK and America seem to blur, it seems recent freedoms have become Orwellian 1984 vision which is not much difference to what Saddam had planned for his own people, maybe this beast system will evolve into something combined but new.


Many Christians are not too bothered about persecution, but we don't want the mark of the beast in the process, so what people are afraid of is that in the times of persecutions our souls could be Marked up for Hell. That is what to avoid, death is a way out but not if it leads to Hell because of the deceptions.

reply to post by AshleyD

You're so close! The "AshleyD account" is actually an automatic responder bot. No person behind the curtain. "There is no Dana. Only Zu'ul." But I do... er... I mean "the bot" finds it amusing that when you cannot rebut "its" arguments you have to criticize "AshleyD" as a "person." The humor is compounded by the fact you consistently preach against judging others. Hypocrisy? The bot thinks so.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!!!!! I'm still waiting for that research from sources that are not "faith based" (in otherwords anyone can set up multiple web sites and make claims with the bible being the source...just because you have multiple web sites for your basis does not make it "multiple sources"...the only place you can get away with this is in Christendom" trust me...you have tainted sources that come with an agenda...I asked you for some sources outside of that, and yet I still wait, but you say I'm the one who doesn't rebut LOL my whole entire thread is one great big wet sloppy rebut and so are many other threads you post on, yet you can't offer up anything other than what they tell you at your church, or that is directly or based on the bible...that's fine, but we need more sources besides the very thing we are debating (does this make since? you can't argue the validity and reliability in something by using the very something to make your argument) But carry on with the very kind of thinking that drives many of us "educated heathens" farther away from such a farce.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by skyshow]

reply to post by heliosprime


What, exactly, WERE you hoping for? Rapt agreement? Requests to join your newsletter? Mass suicide by those shaken to the core with the idea that they might be observing Sabbath on the wrong day of the week?

You're a fundamentalist. Awesome. Go shake it out in a cave or whatever you guys do, but don't expect too many to follow in your believe that Yahweh is nothing deeper than a grouchy IRS worker who will damn you for worshiping him correctly but on the wrong day.

AshleyD,

Remember what I said about head-smackings? Here's your chance.

reply to post by skyshow

I'm still waiting for that research from sources that are not "faith based" you have tainted sources that come with an agenda...I asked you for some sources outside of that, and yet I still wait, but you say I'm the one who doesn't rebut.

*Comment updated to add emphasis due to a lower post by Skyshow.

Rick Carr, John Buescher, Michael Grant, etc. to name a few off the top of my head. Don't think any of them are Christians but atheists and historians that refuted the story of Jesus being based on pagan figures. Haven't looked into it for a while so that is off the top of my head only.

Update: Here are some more. Martin Kahler, Gotthold Lessing, possibly Soren Kierkegaard but not sure, Rudolph Bultmann. They were all critical of Christianity and debated the difference between what they believed to be the historical Jesus vs. the Jesus of faith but also did not believe the Christ Myth hypothesis. Albert Schweitzer is another good one it looks like. He also set out to dissect the "Jesus of faith" while rebutting the pagan myth hypothesis and it looks like he even won a Nobel prize for his work.

Sorry- I'm going straight out of a book that dissects the historicity of Jesus and am only focusing on the secular authors who specifically took the "pagan myth Jesus" into consideration and disagree with it. Seems like there are many who disagree with the hypothesis even though they were personally against Christianity. I'm just browsing, though. I might have put some incorrect names into the mix.

And here are some more: Bart Ehrman, Ed Sanders, and James Robinson. I'm finding dozens of names who are critical of Christianity but still refute the myth hypothesis. I'll stop there.

[edit on 1/31/2008 by AshleyD]

Celsus wrote his work The True Word as a polemic against the Christians in approximately 178 CE., or generally between 170 and 180 CE, according to Wikipedia.

So..this is a source that proves that Christ lived? One hundred and eighty years after this 'supposed' Messiah dies, someone writes about delusional people who worshipped him and that's proof?

Hooboy.

This guy contends the one they call Jesus was the illegitimate child of a Roman soldier...are you SURE you want to use this guy as a source?

OK, then...Jesus was a little bastard...but he was definitely REAL. It sheds new light on the whole "I swear, Joey, it was an ANGEL!" scenario.

But, wouldn't that put a damper on the whole "Son of God" thing?

Or, oh...we are just using Celsus as a source of secular writing to prove Christ lived, but we should assume he's a doggone liar when it comes to the nitty-gritty details.

Maybe it was just that the details got fuzzy after about 200 years. I'd be interested to see Pilate's account of of Jesus...know where it might be? Ever read it? Or, just hear about it?

reply to post by themillersdaughter


If you want to add fuel to the fire, you can also point out of the fact (if you are aware of it, that is) that Celsus' original work does not exist to this day and is only reproduced in Origen's work which is why many Christian apologists do not cite it.

Due to the destruction of the library of Alexandria, there is no telling how many interesting bits could have mentioned Jesus. Depending on when it was believed to be burned (only one speculative date precedes the life of Jesus) we will never know what we lost in regards to the history of Jesus and Christianity.

But proving a historical Jesus is an argument no Christian will ever win without a time machine. The eye witness testimony is either included in the Bible (and you cannot use the Bible to verify the Bible, obviously) and external sources written by eye witness... Christians. We also have references to Jesus' surviving family members and those who testified in the Roman courts documented in secular records but they were still... Christians. Even though they died for what they proclaimed was true, the hard core skeptic will continue to deny the evidence for comfort's sake. It will never be enough.

Alexander the Great's accounts were written up to five centuries after his life but no one doubts he exists even though there is not a single (not one!) eye witness account of his life. Socrates only had four accounts written about him and that was after his death. Apollonius had his first account of his life penned over a century after his death, etc. But people have no problem believing those accounts. Only Jesus'. So how can we win? We can't. But the evidence is there.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
AshleyD,

Remember what I said about head-smackings? Here's your chance.

I was being silent for a reason, I swear!

1) I've explained The Jewish Law and how it relates Christianity so many times on ATS I'm exhausted on the subject and bored with it now.

2) We are told in the N.T. not to judge others for whichever day they decide to hold their services, whether it be on Saturday or Sunday.

3) And the most important: Every day should be a "Sabbath" in our lives. So we're supposed to only love Jesus, worship God, and behave ourselves one day of the week? Give Him one day of reverence while we hoard the rest? No thanks. Our "Sabbath" should be celebrated Sunday through Saturday. Not Sunday or Saturday. And that is Holy Rolling defined for all.

[edit on 1/31/2008 by AshleyD]

reply to post by AshleyD


Charles K. Johnson, Marjory Waugh Johnson, Alexander Dowie...these all believe in the Flat Earth theory. Oh, and I'm just browsing looks like some more here: Glen Voliva, Samuel Shenton, Samuel Rowbotham, Thomas Dolby...

Looks like quite a large organization filled with all kinds of people. Must be true then!

I BELIEVE! *** dodges a lightning bolt *** trembles at the presence of our "awsome god"... why if the world was round, there would be proof in the bible of it, and obviously it has been debunked...

looks like the Flat Earth Society also has a page so that you can sign up and send them some money, and also donate to the cause since the central premise that the organization is built on is backed up by so many people and their work...Oh, looks like another page here to send some money in if you support this belief. I'm sure glad churches don't do that sort of thing...

Originally posted by skyshow
Looks like quite a large organization filled with all kinds of people. Must be true then!

You asked me to provide names twice of secular authors who are hostile to Christianity but still refute the Christ-Myth hypothesis. So, I provided several individuals (there are dozens more) per your request. You asked, taunted me when I didn't see your request on your other thread, apparently thought I couldn't back up my assertions on your other thread, and asked again on this thread. I gave you what you wanted.

I'm not saying they are right or wrong. In fact, they all deny Jesus' divinity- every single one of the names I mentioned so you should be stoked at least on that end. Then you have to go on the defensive again when you see the information you requested and see there are indeed secularists who rebut the Christ-Myth claim. I'm sure you realize this logic and purpose. Let's at least hope so.

Sheesh.

Ashley, Ashley, stop, please stop putting words in my mouth. I did not say "that were hostile to Christianity" learn to recognize your defensiveness. Thanks for finally moving forward and providing some names...that is step one.

I am growing tired of having to play catch up with you and explain every little detail like I might if I were teaching an introductory course in research methods...but anyway, now step 2 is to find out what these people are purporting and so we are a long ways away from establishing credibility here in terms of a source.

It seems like you may have mastered your religion in terms of all its teachings. Have you considered any formal education at the University level in say one of the sciences to learn research methodology, and maybe history? I bet with some extensive training and post graduate studies you could be a tremendous service to humanity. Well, whatever you do, best of luck...I do thank you for providing some names, now can you provide some of that "solid" evidence that one of them provides? Have you read all of them? One doesn't write a research paper, or a thesis, and make references without first having fully read and understand their work...and then what references one does provide in their research generally bu trusses the central claim rather than detract from it...

Originally posted by skyshow
Ashley, Ashley, stop, please stop putting words in my mouth. I did not say "that were hostile to Christianity."

Quote from one of your above comments:

I'm still waiting for that research from sources that are not "faith based" you have tainted sources that come with an agenda...I asked you for some sources outside of that, and yet I still wait, but you say I'm the one who doesn't rebut.

You asked for sources that were not faith-based and that would be agenda-free. You got them. I never accused you of saying "hostile to Christianity." I didn't realize there was a rule to use the exact same wording of another poster when you are answering your question. But if semantics is your only defense then that says a lot.

And the rest of your reply is just more sarcasm against the "AshleyD bot" and "prove it" requests. Whatever else was provided you would offer something else along the lines of your flat-earth analogy. Not my problem if you don't see it. Kind of odd to see someone argue the research of scholars who agree with them in that Jesus was not God. But if you want to take the opinion of the people who made Zeitgeist over the research of Nobel prize winners and published historians and theologians then that is your prerogative, too.

[edit on 1/31/2008 by AshleyD]

If only Jesus would have stressed for his followers to get a higher education...*sighs*

Now what one of those names should one of us who are interested look at, and why? What is their argument, how do they back it up, what is the author's credentials etc... establish a basis for your names, else they might as well be part of the Flat Earth Society...

Thank you in advance for your hard work
Sky...

[edit on 31-1-2008 by skyshow]

Originally posted by themillersdaughter
Oh, I see...."tripe" is what you call whatever you don't agree with.

Ok..I accept that..have you ever read the great hymn to the Aten? Or the Mahabahrata? Or would that get you kicked out of the club?

Is it against your religion to read other religious writings? I can imagine that it would make you uncomfortable to see the words in your 'inspired word of God' had actually been written by someone else. That would be most uncomfortable to me, as well. Might just shake my faith.

I'll accept your blessings though..which God did you ask to bless me?

If you're going to adopt someone else's religion (Judaism) you really should read about the foundations, don't you think?

Heh!! Very well said - again Yes, I thought, although I could be mistaked here, that the credo of ATS was 'DENY IGNORANCE'? Why then I wonder, is there a sudden upsurge in bizzarre and ignorant religious nonsense being posted all over the forums here? Disturbing & irritating I say.

J.

reply to post by AshleyD



Yes, but people do not insist on changing society to please the 'Will of Alexander the Great'. Nor do they ask people to blow themselves up in the name of 'Socrates' either. The analogy you give is inneffective and irrelevant.
People do not kill innocents in the name of these ancient figures - as 'real' or imaginary as they may or may not be.
And nothing really rides on them being 'real' people in their time either.

Religious figures are however an entirely different matter.


To the best of my knowledge, there are no 'eyewitness' accounts of Jesus outside of those in the New Testament. Hence, most intelligent, educated people's complete dismissal of the subject. You are correct however in asserting there is no evidence for the existence of Jesus - and not because the 'witnesses' were christian either.... but because - there is no evidence.

Simple.

J.

[edit on 1-2-2008 by jimbo999]

[edit on 1-2-2008 by jimbo999]

[edit on 1-2-2008 by jimbo999]

It should also be noted, in light of the constant barrage of christian nonsense on this board recently, that most well-informed and intelligent higher ranking members of Christ's first and most powerful church, the roman catholic church, admit privately that Jesus was just a man, and nothing more. They 'deified' him in order to diseminate his teachings with more credibility (it being a time of much superstitious belief).

I would also think it became very convenient to continue with the charade once they became a legitimate church in the eyes of Rome, in order to maintain their power base indefinitely.

The Vatican after all, possess the vast majority of early christian works - many of which have yet to see the light of day - so I imagine they would know what they're talking about.

J.

[edit on 1-2-2008 by jimbo999]