Sun worship or Son worship?

Originally posted by andre18
Logic…..commonsense

I use my brain....my mind......

Let me ask you this. I hate using this analogy but it will work for now. I have never seen a UFO in my entire life but millions of others have. We can say all of these millions of people are delusional, all of these millions are lying, or all of these millions mistook a weather balloon, aircraft, or something else for a UFO. But this would be silly and possibly even arrogant. It doesn't seem logical that all of these millions of people's claims can be dismissed. Some of them, sure. Maybe even most. But not all.

Although we are also left with wondering if people who have had a divine encounter are delusional, lying, or mistaken concerning what they saw, it doesn't sound logical to dismiss them all. You cannot tell the person who has seen something they are undoubtedly wrong just because you haven't seen the same thing. To me, that isn't logic. It's even arrogant. You don't have to believe it hook, line, and sinker, but it seems any logical person would say that something is going on here. They cannot know that everyone else who has seen something is wrong while they alone are right because they have not seen it.

You also take that 99% on faith as the evidence for you belief can only be backed up by a 2000 year old book that was used by the Roman empire to gain a more stable control over the population

Not remotely true. I'm one of the ones who have seen something. And I also did not fully believe before I had seen. Now, I could either be delusional, a liar, or mistook what happened for something else. I know I'm not delusional or lying but did I mistake what happened to me as being Jesus and not simply "God?" That is why I am 100% sure there is a God and, through research and faith, I believe it is the Judeo-Christian God. Although it will never be something that can be proven to another person without their own personal evidence. This is why we call it faith. Some people believe even though they have not seen.

So, no. I don't believe you can know God does not exist.

Originally posted by AshleyD
Let me ask you this. I hate using this analogy but it will work for now. I have never seen a UFO in my entire life but millions of others have. We can say all of these millions of people are delusional, all of these millions are lying, or all of these millions mistook a weather balloon, aircraft, or something else for a UFO. But this would be silly and possibly even arrogant. It doesn't seem logical that all of these millions of people's claims can be dismissed. Some of them, sure. Maybe even most. But not all.

Now to take you to task on the same current... All this means is that people have seen a flying object they cannot identify - i.e., a UFO. It does not mean that these are secret government aircraft, or pilotred by little grey men, or that they are all a mass hallucination. It just means someone saw something that they can't explain.

Although we are also left with wondering if people who have had a divine encounter are delusional, lying, or mistaken concerning what they saw, it doesn't sound logical to dismiss them all. You cannot tell the person who has seen something they are undoubtedly wrong just because you haven't seen the same thing. To me, that isn't logic. It's even arrogant. You don't have to believe it hook, line, and sinker, but it seems any logical person would say that something is going on here. They cannot know that everyone else who has seen something is wrong while they alone are right because they have not seen it.

Again, it's not "right vs wrong" it's "most likely vs. least likely." Something definately IS going on, but a divine explanation is nearer the "least likely" end of the spectrum. Especially with the randomness of such encounters. For some reason, God never speaks to an Atheist.]

[edit on 5-2-2008 by TheWalkingFox]

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Now to take you to task on the same current... All this means is that people have seen a flying object they cannot identify - i.e., a UFO. It does not mean that these are secret government aircraft, or pilotred by little grey men, or that they are all a mass hallucination. It just means someone saw something that they can't explain.

Exactly which is why I said they could be a case of mistaken identity. We don't know if they are filled with "little green men." But we could use alien abductions. Alien sightings. Ghost sightings. Angelic or demonic encounters. Near death and out of body experiences. Seeing Jesus or God. Whatever example we want to use, we cannot tell someone who has seen something they are wrong because we didn't witness it.

I don't believe in all of the above phenomenon but it would be pure arrogance on my part to tell someone they are wrong because it hasn't happened to me or that I know it's all bogus. We can have our opinions and let them have theirs.

Again, it's not "right vs wrong" it's "most likely vs. least likely." Something definately IS going on, but a divine explanation is nearer the "least likely" end of the spectrum. Especially with the randomness of such encounters. For some reason, God never speaks to an Atheist.

I totally agree with you in that it at least gives us something to think about even though we cannot use personal experiences as scientific proof. So, that leaves us with allowing that person to register their experience into their own database of beliefs. Some atheists have had encounters and have undergone some pretty extreme conversions because of them. But in the end, that is still their account that cannot be replicated for anyone else- even those that choose to believe them.

Why do people worship the son of God and not God Himself? If you want to please God, praise him for everything good He did for you; no Sunday mass required. How many people can say that they do not like to be praised for their work? How many feel a bit better when someone tells you "Good job, buddy"? I'm sure God is the same way, just thank Him every once and a while, and there is my form of worship.

reply to post by AshleyD


AshleyD are you claiming there exists texts from the twelve apostles, all twelve of them? Didn't you also agree with a claim that it was decades after jesus' death that anything was written about him?

This is my latest version of the bible(not yet complete):
thebricktestament

Is this what anyone here believes in any way similar to what is presented there?

Another question what was the purpose of the human sacrifice? Why is a human sacrifice needed? This is at the center of the christian belief, so I'd like some clarification.

PS

As for the associations with horus, etc, I'm glad they're being refuted, but the similarity with the celestial connections remains although slim.

Has anyone noted that the Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek? The real question here should be...

hêlios worship or yios worship?

shemesh worship or bar worship?

This little fun homonym game really only works if you translate the text into modern English first before you make the comparison. The words don't sound anything alike in their native language.

Originally posted by Xenogears
AshleyD are you claiming there exists texts from the twelve apostles, all twelve of them?

I don't know if all twelve apostles wrote texts as some are apocryphal and pseudographical (Barnabas, Thomas, Bartholomew, etc.) But as for the canonized books we have:
Matthew (The Gospel of Matthew)
John (The Gospel of John among others)
Peter (Peter's Epistles)
Jude (His Epistle)
James (His Epistle)

Then we have some early eye witnesses testimony that confirm their existence and possibly some extrabiblical writings but to be honest I haven't looked into it too much.

Didn't you also agree with a claim that it was decades after jesus' death that anything was written about him?

The very first writings took place within 20 years but I'm not sure how that matters for this purpose as all the apostles outlived Jesus with the exception of Judas. They obviously wouldn't have written their accounts before Jesus' death or after their own deaths. I also explained the methods of oral evangelism in depth on another thread due to an approximately 95% illiterate population.

Another question what was the purpose of the human sacrifice? Why is a human sacrifice needed? This is at the center of the christian belief, so I'd like some clarification.

Jesus' death was supposed to be the final and eternal atonement for man's sins. It reflects the OT atonement laws and is foreshadowed by the paschal lamb, among other things. And it was not necessarily a "human sacrifice" that was needed or demanded for atonement. A 'perfect lamb' was required and Jesus is represented as the "perfect lamb' repeatedly.

As for the associations with horus, etc, I'm glad they're being refuted, but the similarity with the celestial connections remains although slim.

It is definitely slim for what the connections the Christ Mythers are trying to to use. Perhaps one day they'll stumble onto the study of the Hebrew Mazzaroth. No doubt that will open up a new can of worms for them to chew on. I've been hesitant to mention it here because, well, you know how that goes. If they refuse to see the simple stuff they won't be able to conceive the complex. It would make a great discussion with some open minds, that and Joseph Seiss' work, but everyone seems way too testy here at times and not sure how well it would go over. lol

reply to post by dbates


Many times! Even pasted the texts and words in the original languages to show the extreme differences on other threads. But for some reason, we're supposed to be impressed with things like Israel's similarity to Isis-Ra-El in English.

(P.S. You know I love you, XLuc, even when you pull my pigtails over and over again. )

[edit on 2/5/2008 by AshleyD]

Originally posted by AshleyD

Jesus' death was supposed to be the final and eternal atonement for man's sins. It reflects the OT atonement laws and is foreshadowed by the paschal lamb, among other things. And it was not necessarily a "human sacrifice" that was needed or demanded for atonement. A 'perfect lamb' was required and Jesus is represented as the "perfect lamb' repeatedly.

The need for this is what I question. It would seem that a simple forgiveness from God would also be possible, without requiring a ritual involving him/aspects-of-him taking flesh and dying a gruesome death. How and why a gruesome death plays a part and was necessary in the act of forgiveness is something I'm curious about, and I've not been satisfied by the answers I've received.

reply to post by AshleyD


What’s interesting Ashley……is you accept that Constantine completely took hold of the creation of the bible, he decided with the help of a few priests what will be and what won’t be in the book…….

You also accept that the Roman Empire used the religion of Christianity to control the masses, a form of power etc….

With these things and more, you still use the bible as proof of Jesus and your god’s existence……surely you know everything about Christianity only began as a form of power and control…… Constantine, Roman Empire etc…..and still you quite from the bible every damn day as if it was the word of god……

Logically you know it was entirely created by man…..and yet for some strange reason you still accept it as the real deal….WTF……..?

Simply put….. Constantine made the bible, why do you quote from a book made by man……………………………?

Originally posted by andre18
What’s interesting Ashley……is you accept that Constantine completely took hold of the creation of the bible, he decided with the help of a few priests what will be and what won’t be in the book…….

Someone already explained the canonization process to you thoroughly on another thread and addressed your arguments which happen to be amazingly similar to the ones you are regurgitating in this post. Even I was blown away by his answer and looked up the facts for myself for verification. He was absolutely right. So why ask again when you didn't listen to the answer the first time?

With these things and more, you still use the bible as proof of Jesus and your god’s existence……

You can't use the Bible to prove the Bible. Everyone knows that. And that's not what I used as has already been explained. Why repeat myself? You didn't listen the first time, Andre.

surely you know everything about Christianity only began as a form of power and control…… Constantine, Roman Empire etc…..and still you quite from the bible every damn day as if it was the word of god……

Also already explained on another one of your threads. Did you forget what Jesus was about? Truth, freedom, liberty, grace, and a personal relationship with God that no man can come between. That is how it began and that is still what is said in the Bible.

[edit on 2/6/2008 by AshleyD]

Truth, freedom, liberty, grace, and a personal relationship with God that no man can come between. That is how it began.

Truth: Only Your truth counts, of course. Everyone else's truth is a satanic lie meant to deceive you and the rest of the special creatures.

freedom: You have a choice: Worship Jesus, or suffer eternal damnation and torment for any number of finite sins.

Liberty: Only if you follow these laws, bylaws, traditions, secret handshakes, etc. Your life is meant to be servitude to others to prepare you for the liberation to live as an eternal worshipper of God.

Grace: Christians always land on their feet!

A personal relationship with God that no man can come between: Except of course for Jesus, who is the intercessor between you and god, who happens to be a man...

Someone already explained the canonization process to you thoroughly on another thread and addressed your arguments which happen to be amazingly similar to the ones you are regurgitating in this post. Even I was blown away by his answer and looked up the facts for myself for verification. He was absolutely right. So why ask again when you didn't listen to the answer the first time?

Daniel has had so many prophecies come true that many deny that it was written as long ago as it was. One of which related to Alexander the Great, king of Greece:


Dan 8:20 – 26: The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand. And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days.

Is that it.........lol.........that proves nothing...... and firstly nothing about Constantine......

You can't use the Bible to prove the Bible. Everyone knows that. And that's not what I used as has already been explained. Why repeat myself? You didn't listen the first time, Andre.

And what evidence is that…..what other evidence do you use….the Sea Scrolls…..?

Also already explained on another one of your threads. Did you forget what Jesus was about? Truth, freedom, liberty, grace, and a personal relationship with God that no man can come between. That is how it began and that is still what is said in the Bible.

No man can come between because Jesus & god because they don’t exist... as I have also already explained before.......all Jesus is, is a representation of the holy spirit......If you don't think it makes sense then you're not looking at the logically enough, it makes complete and utter sense…........ but anyway.....show me where it is already explained in the other thread….

Originally posted by andre18
Is that it.........lol.........that proves nothing...... and firstly nothing about Constantine......

Did that comment have anything to do with the canonization process? No.

And what evidence is that…..what other evidence do you use….the Sea Scrolls…..?

Why do I bother?

No man can come between because Jesus & god because they don’t exist... as I have also already explained before.......all Jesus is, is a representation of the holy spirit......If you don't think it makes sense then you're not looking at the logically enough, it makes complete and utter sense…........ but anyway.....show me where it is already explained in the other thread….

Again, why do I bother? How can anyone have a nice discussion about theology and religion when someone's only rebuttal only comes down to "it doesn't exist." I love discussing with Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and others just to learn about what they believe and to share and debate. But I don't understand those who engage in religious debates then say "No God exists" when they get stuck in an argument.

If I say you don't exist am I excused from dealing with you any longer?

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Truth: Only Your truth counts, of course. Everyone else's truth is a satanic lie meant to deceive you and the rest of the special creatures.

Is the absolute truth based on one's beliefs or does it remain the absolute truth in spite of them?

freedom: You have a choice: Worship Jesus, or suffer eternal damnation and torment for any number of finite sins.

Well, we can't say we weren't warned. Thank goodness the way to avoid such a fate is something no man can take away.

Liberty: Only if you follow these laws, bylaws, traditions, secret handshakes, etc. Your life is meant to be servitude to others to prepare you for the liberation to live as an eternal worshipper of God.

We've had this discussion before so I'll give you my view. Our "laws" are to love God and each other. That's it.

Grace: Christians always land on their feet!

A personal relationship with God that no man can come between: Except of course for Jesus, who is the intercessor between you and god, who happens to be a man...

Jesus became a human but He existed before that. Yes, He is our link to salvation but we can still have a personal relationship with God. No mortal (we apparently need to get technical ) can take that away from us.

Originally posted by AshleyD

Is the absolute truth based on one's beliefs or does it remain the absolute truth in spite of them?

The absolute truth remains, but you can't ascertain it, you can only find evidence to back what seems to be the truth, not the truth itself.

We've had this discussion before so I'll give you my view. Our "laws" are to love God and each other. That's it.

I've read those who follow the laws of moses and the prophets will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. And those whose righteousness does not surpass the experts in such laws will not enter it.

I think the whole thing can be summed up in the following humorous hymn sung by many Unitarian Universalists around Christmas time:

God Rest Ye, Unitarians

God rest ye, Unitarians,
let nothing you dismay;
Remember there's no evidence
there was a Christmas day.
When Christ was born is just not known,
No matter what they say.
Oh, tidings of reason and fact,
Reason and fact;
Oh, tidings of reason and fact.

Our Christmas celebrations come
from Persia and from Greece;
From Solstice celebrations in the
ancient Middle East;
This whole darn Christmas spiel is just
another pagan feast.
Oh, tidings of reason and fact;
Reason and fact.
Oh, tidings of reason and fact.

There was no star of Bethlehem,
There was no angels' song;
There were no wise men, for the trip
would have taken too long.
The stories in the Bible are
historically wrong.
Oh, tidings of reason and fact;
Reason and fact.
Oh, tidings of reason and fact.

Originally posted by AshleyD
Is the absolute truth based on one's beliefs or does it remain the absolute truth in spite of them?

As we have covered, the "truth" of religion cannot be proven, and so is purely conjecture and opinion. Therefor there is no "absolute truth" when speaking of matters of faith. Certainly you can look at your religion's four hundred odd denominations and understand the lack of an absolute truth. If there WAS an absolute truth, no doubt you - and countless others besides - would not be embracing it at the moment because the odds are astronomically against it.

Well, we can't say we weren't warned. Thank goodness the way to avoid such a fate is something no man can take away.

Servitude under threat of death and torture is no more a choice when it comes to religion than when it's applied to agriculture.

We've had this discussion before so I'll give you my view. Our "laws" are to love God and each other. That's it.

Yes, YOUR view. Your view is hardly the universal outlook among the two billion or so Christians milling about. Even among those who adhere to your views,there are numerous "varieties." When you mingle the fact that many people have a twisted view of love with the fact many people eagerly use their religion as an excuse for their wrongs rather than as a guideline to prevent wrongdoing...

Grace: Christians always land on their feet!

Awwww. No snark?

Jesus became a human but He existed before that. Yes, He is our link to salvation but we can still have a personal relationship with God. No mortal (we apparently need to get technical

) can take that away from us.

Unfortunately I haven't seen anything from the OT about Jesus having existed back then. All you have is some self-referencing mythology about "Well, we believe that there are three gods inside our god and that the old testament prophets couldn't have witnessed any of them except Jesus, so therefor the OT prophets were dealing with Jesus!"

[edit on 6-2-2008 by TheWalkingFox]

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
As we have covered, the "truth" of religion cannot be proven, and so is purely conjecture and opinion.

Exactly. It's a belief. A personal belief that everyone is entitled to so it is kind of hard to debate the beliefs of another or for someone to defend their own beliefs. It all comes down to, "this is my belief." We can debate facts, sources, and evidence but it's rather impossible to debate someone's belief.

Servitude under threat of death and torture is no more a choice when it comes to religion than when it's applied to agriculture.

The thing is, there are a lot of people that aren't remotely worried about Hell, don't dwell on Hell, and they did not become a Christian out of fear of Hell. We were attracted to God's love and Jesus' teachings of love. I don't know what else to say that hasn't been said a million times before. My choice was based on love- not fear. Others might have but I cannot speak for them.

Yes, YOUR view. Your view is hardly the universal outlook among the two billion or so Christians milling about.

Again, and you know it's coming: I cannot speak for someone else. Some believe they should follow the OT dietary laws or celebrate the Sabbath. I do not. It is kind of hard discussing this with you because it's like explaining physics to Einstein. You are obviously very knowledgeable on the subject and you said on another thread you used to be a Christian and have read much of the Bible. You already know the answers to your own questions.

Awwww. No snark?

No, but it did make me laugh when I read it the first time. Were like cats in that regard.

Unfortunately I haven't seen anything from the OT about Jesus having existed back then. All you have is some self-referencing mythology about "Well, we believe that there are three gods inside our god and that the old testament prophets couldn't have witnessed any of them except Jesus, so therefor the OT prophets were dealing with Jesus!"

The OT as in the Old Testament? The OT books were completed over 400 years before Jesus' birth so why would they mention His life, teachings, and ministry? They prophesy His coming in what is known as the "Messianic Prophecies" but why would books written centuries in advance would record his life? Talk about major accusations of interpolations if that was the case.

Oops. Missed this comment addressed to me. Sometimes it's hard to see comments from users who don't have avatars when they get squeezed in between those who do.

Originally posted by Xenogears
I've read those who follow the laws of moses and the prophets will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. And those whose righteousness does not surpass the experts in such laws will not enter it.

The context shows Jesus using a lot of hyperbole with the disciples and others to show them the way to salvation through Him. In essence, He was saying if you don't want to believe in Me, then you better follow the law better than the temple leaders who weren't even able to do it right. In essence, such a thing would be impossible to follow perfectly. And judging by Jesus' frequent criticism of the Pharisees we can see the temple leaders were anything but "righteous" in Jesus' eyes. He also makes it clear our salvation is not due to works or through our own "goodness" but through Him only. Hope that helps.