The Bright and Morning Star "Mary" Queen of Heaven and husband Allah

reply to post by FlyersFan

Says you.
Jesus .. true man and true God. God came down from heaven ... John 6:38
Jesus own words "I came down from heaven ... "

Post the full quote please.

For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent.

It says nothing about Jesus being the true God. He was sent to do the will of God who sent him.

Muhammad wasn't a prophet .. he was a politician who killed people and who claimed visions from God in order to subdue the masses. That's all.

Thats what you have been taught to believe. The "masses" you are talking about were idolatrous pagans who were looking to kill him. Despite that they left behind their idolatry to accept Islam.

Everything in the Qu'ran came from th Jews, Christians and Zorostarians but got their own little twist on it. That's not 'anti-Islam bigotry'. Those are the just the historical facts ... deal with it.

"Historical facts" only in the minds of the loons behind Chick tracts and such.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

 

You posted a quote from a book I consider totally invalid, and nothing but a copy of other works mixed in with old religions.

Even if you consider the book invalid, the book is still representative of what muslims worship and what they don't. So no point trying to change facts.

As for the data, lonewolf already did a great job showing how you are off there. No need to repeat that.

Lonewolfs "research" involves repeating what has been said by loons such as the guy behind Chick tracts and psuedo-scholars with an agenda. It proves nothing.

P.S - Its also funny how the "evidence" you provide are from Christian sites with an agenda against Islam. I could post refutations from a muslim website but I guess you wouldn't consider that.

edit on 7-1-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

The point is, there is evidence offered from the opposing side that validates the claim. Did you look, at all, at the link I posted, or did you automatically dismiss it because it's a Christian site? I note that you call those disagreeing with you "loons".

As for an "agenda against Islam", from what I have seem, Muslims tend to have an agenda against Christianity, so that would be a moot point. It's clear the two sides disagree. What I tend to look at is evidence that isn't from the Bible or the Koran, in a case like this. When there are parallels between certain things in Islam and certain older religions, then comparing the two is logical.

Of course, all such considerations are historical in nature. If there were things that were borrowed from other beliefs, but the current followers of the religion don't follow those things, then it's more a historical debate than one of beliefs. For me, anyway. I have had discussions about various aspects of some Christian denominations, too, when there was some indication that some pagan practice or other had been mixed in with this or that practice. We can study these things, and discuss them, without it affecting what we believe today.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
That's the thing about Catholicism that has bothered me the most; the worship of Mary.

Then put your mind to rest ... Catholics do not worship Mary. Never have. Never will.
Click here and read what Catholics REALLY believe

I have seen that before, and read that same source, even. In some cases, that is true. With others, though, I have heard differently. I would guess that it's the same for Protestants, and there are different beliefs among different people. In any case, I have had some Catholics argue that Mary was at the same level as Jesus. They would argue that she should be worshiped, that calling her "holy" was right, as she was somehow elevated. The practice of putting a halo on her in artwork, and praying to her, adds to the confusion.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
"Baptist missionary cult"? Do define that, please. As a Baptist, I am very curious as to the meaning of that phrase.

1 - All religions are technically a CULT by definition. Catholic. Baptist. Muslim. Buddhist ... all of them.

2 - The author of this thread is self professed Baptist missionary and is on a mission to convert as many people as possible to his cult. He uses IGNORANT sources of material in his quest. JACK CHICK TRACTS for example. The author posts out right lies about other faiths and continues to do so even after having been corrected.

edit on 1/7/2013 by FlyersFan because: typo

The definition that most use when talking of a cult is this one:

a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
b. The followers of such a religion or sect.

source

From Cultwatch - link - we have the following:

There are two primary definitions of a cult. The modern definition of "Cult" refers to any group that uses manipulative psychological “Mind Control” techniques to recruit and control their members. To learn more about these techniques read the CULTWATCH article "How Cults Work". Most people, except cult leaders of course, accept that using mind control is a fair reason to classify a group as a cult.

Secondly, the historical definition of a cult is any group, which claims to be a Christian group yet teaches something that is not primarily a Christian belief. For example a group that teaches Buddhism, but claims to be Christian is a cult under the historical definition, but not if they claim to be Buddhist. The issue is one of deception. This definition is still of vital interest to Christians but is considered passé by others.

I won't claim to know the motivations of the thread author. I certainly would not state that a Baptist missionary was a member of a "cult", though. Baptists are simply Bible-believing Christians, that tend to be evangelistic in practice. That does mean they will share what they believe, and hope that people come to know the truth of the Bible, but that doesn't make someone a cult member. If it does, then, by your definition, I would be one. I have discussed issues in other religions with people, too. I share my faith. I have never seen a cult defined as expressing an opinion on spiritual matters before.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
"Hail" is a form of praise.

Hail is also a form of greeting. That is how it is used in this case. It is taken from the bible. It is being used in the same manner as the angel used it in greeting Mary .. Luke 1:28 ,, 'Hail Full of Grace, the Lord is with you ..' If it was good enough for the ArchAngel Gabriel to use when talking to Mary .. it's good enough for everyone else.

A greeting is one thing, but calling Mary "holy" is another, and that is done. This link, from a Catholic source, shows this is true.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
It is definately in the bible. *snip*

As Scripture indicates, those in heaven are aware of the prayers of those on earth. This can be seen, for example, in Revelation 5:8, where John depicts the saints in heaven offering our prayers to God under the form of "golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints." But if the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God, then they must be aware of our prayers. They are aware of our petitions and present them to God by interceding for us.

That is misrepresenting what the passage actually states. Revelation 5:8 reads, "And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints." The passage speaks of prayers, not the saints themselves. Even if they were there, nothing in that chapter tells people to pray to them.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

In any event, it is clear from Revelation 5:8 that the saints in heaven do actively intercede for us. .....Thus the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God mentally. In other words, they are interceding.

And even if it wasn't in the bible .. so what? Not everything that is true is in the bible.
The bible itself says there are a lot more truths out there than are just in the bible.

No, it is not clear from that passage that those in Heaven intercede for those here. It is clear that our prayers are known in Heaven. Nothing there states that those gone before us can hear them. Where, exactly, does the Bible state that? Chapter and verse, please.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Jesus says we are all supposed to pray for each other. Asking others to pray for us is doing exactly what Christ said to do. Asking Mary to pray for us is doing exactly what Christ said to do. "hail full of grace ... pray for us sinners' ... that's what Catholics say to Mary and it's all biblical.

There are many places in the Bible where we are warned not to even attempt to talk to the dead: link with verses

Plus, many times, Mary is talked about as though she is on the same level as Jesus.

Poppycock. The Catholic church is VERY clear that Mary, and any other saint, is NOT part of the Holy Trinity - Father, Son, Holy Spirit. *snip*

There is a lot about May that the RCC teaches that simply isn't true. For example, her supposed eternal virginity.

John 2:12 - "After this He went down to Capernaum, He, His mother, His brothers, and His disciples; and they did not stay there many days."
Matthew 12:47 - "Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.”

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The Catholics and the Orthodox have that recognition as part of their belief system. So naturally they will be the ones declaring who is officially a 'saint' (in heaven). SO WHAT? It's part of their belief system. It doesn't effect you Baptists. Let them state who they believe to be in heaven if they wish. (which is what a person declared a 'saint' is .. someone who the church believes is in heaven).

So, where is it that Catholics think the rest of those saved go? Why would some group of people get to decide that for anyone else, and not God?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
If Catholics start up forced conversions at the point of a sword (or at the end of a gun barrel) or they start flying planes into buildings in an attempt to mass kill people because those people worship differently than they do .. then you should worry. Until then ... relax about the Catholics.

How many millions were killed during the Inquisition, for things like "heresy" (meaning, not in agreement with the RCC)? No, that isn't happening today, but that doesn't mean we can't discuss differences of opinion, now does it? You called a Baptist missionary a cult member, and tell me to "relax"? I happen to be Baptist. Same sort that the RCC would have killed during the Inquisition.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

On that we agree. The Qu'ran is a 'copy and paste' job from the Christians, the Jews, and Zoroastrianism.

Believe what you want to.

It's not a question of 'belief' .. it's a matter of historical record.

The jews can say the same thing about the Christian bible.... that it was a copy-paste of their Torah and that Christianity hijacked the Abrahamic religion and corrupted it with pagan ideas and concepts.

Christians copied the Old Testament from the Jews .. word for word. Uncorrupted. Unlike the Qu'ran which took bits and pieces of the three major religions at the time and perverted what was in them to fit Islams agenda. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that the Christians took the Jewish books UNCORRUPTED as their Old Testament. Christianity considers itself to be a continuation of that faith so naturally they'll have the UNCORRUPTED Jewish texts as their Old Testament .. and add a New Testament to them without corrupting the old.

As for your term 'hijacking and corrupting with pagan ideas and concepts' .. that's exactly what the Quran is. Hijacked from the Jews, Christians and Zoroastrianism .. but twisted and corrupted and interjected with Islams agenda from UNPROVEN so-called 'revelations'.

There, we are in complete agreement! That's a matter of history. Also agree that people can choose to believe whatever they wish. We can all discuss those beliefs, and state what we think is true or false, but every person has to decide for themselves.

For Christianity, everything in the New Testament follows the prophecies in the Old, so there is even clear continuity, unlike with some other groups that add things on to this or that belief.

Please understand, too, that a lot of what I know of Catholicism was learned from a formerly Catholic friend. None is meant as any sort of attack; only as discussion and Biblical analysis. I have had similar discussions with other Christians, from various denominations.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

Well even if we remove the Jack Chick stuff and even the comparison drawn to the catholic church and Islam we still have this whole body of evidence that shows long ago the world became subverted by the mother goddess/sunworshipers.

Taking that overwhelming amount of evidence into account, it is hard to believe that this cult just died out. In fact as has been shown, it is clear that they have been forced to take on the trappings of christainity to survive in some form. Giving mankind the outward appearance of a union compatible mixture of the one time all powerfull "mysteries" and the truth of Jesus Christ.

In fact the last great war that has been fought on this earth, WWII, was a war between two Sun kingdoms, Japan....rising sun....and the Nazis... swastika old old sun symbol...and people that had become enlightened enough to bar religion from direct influence and power sharing in government.

Of course, most of the early false religions were based on demonic worship. Those demons didn't leave, and would logically change their "look" to suit the times. Adjust this or that, insert themselves into something better, and so forth. The most believable lies are, after all, those woven in with truth.

reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

Did you look, at all, at the link I posted, or did you automatically dismiss it because it's a Christian site? I note that you call those disagreeing with you "loons".

The link is worthless, not because its a christian site....but only because it was parroting the lies and fabrication of pseudo-historians (who also happen to be christian fundamentalists). Look up this gentleman called Robert Morey. This pseudo-historian / fraudster is the original source of those ridiculous ideas which you posted as "evidence".

So, I'm calling them loons because they are loons... not because I simply disagree with him. You can cling on to his lies and nonsensical theories. But it doesn't mean its the truth.

What I tend to look at is evidence that isn't from the Bible or the Koran, in a case like this. When there are parallels between certain things in Islam and certain older religions, then comparing the two is logical.

By that same approach, we can draw parallels between Christianity and certain older religions. We see that the trinity is present in many ancient religions. We also see that the idea of God becoming a man as christians believe is also something that hindus believe.

So what now, shall we logically conclude that Christianity is pagan, because of similaities in beliefs with pagan / eastern religions?

If anything at all, Islam has parallels with the semitic religions of Judaism and Christianity, but you guys want to deny that.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
I hear an angel crying for us to come out from Babylon.

Can you tape the audio for us?, if not I
suggest you seek counseling.
I truly hope you find the way out of your personal Babylon.
As for 'us', do Not include 'us' in your scheme of relishing hate.
Us educated know that creationism is founded
on the concept of a Creator, not planets.
Abraham peace be upon him, built the world's first house of
worship to God the same God of Islam. That historic
house that Abraham built still stands today in Mecca. If you
say that Abraham worshiped the moon that is beyond ignorant.
A full understanding of history can not be acquired by a grade
ten education, and cocooned in your parents basement.

____________________________

reply to post by ToneDeaf


This is Islam's god:







Sorry but, Abraham never went to Mecca, he never went any further south than Memphis (Noph) in Egypt. The god of Islam is this "supreme rock god" on the side of the Kaaba, which is why you folks prostrate towards the Kaaba when you pray 5 times a day, you're worshipping that chunk of rock. Classic case of old school idolatry. Abraham never went to Hajj, never walked around this thing 7 times for remission of sins, never kissed touched or prayed to this stone, and if he saw you folks doing this today he'd dismantle the thing and destroy every brick and that is truth. Your god is just an idol and what Muhammad didn't steal from the hebrew bible and subsequent jewish new testament scriptures, he completely fabricated so he could pretend to be Abraham and play the father of a nation.

Abraham never went to Mecca

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Those ideas that you keep parroting come from a fraudster and a charlatan named Robert Morey. You may have never heard of him, but he happens to be the source of the ideas that you love to post here.

For the benefit of misguided Christians such as yourself, I made a detailed thread to educate Christians on as to where these ideas came from.

Robert Morey... originator of the moon-god theory.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

Those ideas that you keep parroting come from a fraudster and a charlatan named Robert Morey. You may have never heard of him, but he happens to be the source of the ideas that you love to post here.

For the benefit of misguided Christians such as yourself, I made a detailed thread to educate Christians on as to where these ideas came from.

Robert Morey... originator of the moon-god theory.

edit on 9-1-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

It ain't a theory and we're not misguided. Your islamic crescent symbols were seen 3000 years ago by Gideon in Judges 8:21. Jethro, the father in law of Moses was a Midianite and Midia is modern day Saudi Arabia and it was recorded that Jethro worshipped a moongod before he came over to the God of Abraham Isaac, and Jacob. Your God is a chunk of rock on the side of a building and you prostrate towards it 5 times a day and you're so blind you don't even see it. Hardcore denial.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

It ain't a theory and we're not misguided. Your islamic crescent symbols were seen 3000 years ago by Gideon in Judges 8:21. Jethro, the father in law of Moses was a Midianite and Midia is modern day Saudi Arabia and it was recorded that Jethro worshipped a moongod before he came over to the God of Abraham Isaac, and Jacob. Your God is a chunk of rock on the side of a building and you prostrate towards it 5 times a day and you're so blind you don't even see it. Hardcore denial.

Not that crescent moon BS again.
That design has been used across cultures in different contexts. I have addressed that in a different
thread already.

Also, crescents in the Old Testament mean nothing... but you are trying to fabricate a meaning into it. I'll see your judges 8:21 and raise you an Isaiah 3:18 where God is speaking to the women of Zion.

Your God is a chunk of rock on the side of a building and you prostrate towards it 5 times a day and you're so blind you don't even see it. Hardcore denial.

My God is God as defined in the Koran... i.e - Creator of the universe.
....not how a confused follower of Robert Moreys teachings defines it.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
The link is worthless, not because its a christian site....but only because it was parroting the lies and fabrication of pseudo-historians (who also happen to be christian fundamentalists). Look up this gentleman called Robert Morey. This pseudo-historian / fraudster is the original source of those ridiculous ideas which you posted as "evidence".

So, I'm calling them loons because they are loons... not because I simply disagree with him. You can cling on to his lies and nonsensical theories. But it doesn't mean its the truth.

By that same approach, we can draw parallels between Christianity and certain older religions. We see that the trinity is present in many ancient religions. We also see that the idea of God becoming a man as christians believe is also something that hindus believe.

So what now, shall we logically conclude that Christianity is pagan, because of similaities in beliefs with pagan / eastern religions?

If anything at all, Islam has parallels with the semitic religions of Judaism and Christianity, but you guys want to deny that.

edit on 9-1-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

So, you are, in fact, dismissing facts because you don't agree. You are, again, calling names, instead of offering any evidence that the information posted is less than accurate. Apparently, you have nothing to back what you say, and so resort to name-calling.

No, Christianity isn't based on pagan religions. No, there are not "trinities" in old pagan religions. The only reason there are similarities between Judeo-Christian beliefs and Islam is that Islam took material from those.

reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

So, you are, in fact, dismissing facts because you don't agree. You are, again, calling names, instead of offering any evidence that the information posted is less than accurate. Apparently, you have nothing to back what you say, and so resort to name-calling.

What name calling?
Robert Morey, the man behind the moon-god idea is a known fraudster... with bogus claims of degrees and PhDs. He was accused of financial fraud and abuse of authority by HIS OWN church and booted out.

I have all the evidence on Robert Morey in a recent thread I wrote.

Robert Morey... originator of the moon-god theory.

Read that and realize that the "moon-god" idea that you keep posting is the fabrication of this fraud with fake degrees. I guess I cant blame you for supporting Robert Morey.... after all he is one of your own.

El/Il/Allah/Elohim had consorts before the emergence of restrictive monotheism. Yahweh also had a wife. You folks should do some research into ancient Near Eastern belief.

However, if you are a devout christian or muslim don't. Once opened, your eyes will never look at scripture the same.

reply to post by seen2much

You folks should do some research into ancient Near Eastern belief.

However, if you are a devout christian or muslim don't. Once opened, your eyes will never look at scripture the same.

I'm aware that some sources show that there was an entire pantheon of gods. These sources are from people who over time, kept adding partners to God in error.

The "evidence" of God's so called partners is simply evidence that some people added partners to God.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


You have not read your Bible. Read it again. Jethro was a priest of Yahweh! He did not convert, he was already one! lol Not only that, he influenced the Torah in that he told Moses to divide decision making amongst judges so Moses could take a break. If Jethro worshipped the moon, so did Moses.

Read your Bible.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Find me one shred of evidence that monotheism precedes polytheism. The burden is on you. Also, give me evidence that god was a he before it was a she when all evidence points to the contrary.

reply to post by seen2much

Find me one shred of evidence that monotheism precedes polytheism. The burden is on you. Also, give me evidence that god was a he before it was a she when all evidence points to the contrary.

There's no real way to actually prove that monotheism "preceded" polytheism just like there is no way to prove the reverse. Unless of course we can go back in time.

If we are to go by the earliest written records, then we need to go with whatever the Sumerians wrote down... because after all, they invented writing. Point to note : Oldest does NOT equal "most correct". They could have been dead wrong on the matter.