It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Jesus/Horus/Krshna/etc=the same?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 02:38 PM
What was that, Toltec?

Where on Earth did you come up with that utter rubbish.

Jesus and his apostles NEVER accepted reincarnation. It is Evil if there is such a thing. I think the word you are looking for is RESURECTION.

Maybe reincarnation is possible with balck magic and voodoo, But as the Bible says witchcraft is an abomination in the sight of God.

Do you know what happened to king saul when he summond up the spirit of samuel.

It cost him his life.

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 02:50 PM
The *act* of having Samuel's spirit summoned was not what doomed Saul...It was his previous sins & lack of true faith evident in his life that did it.

Even Samuel, when still alive, had much to tell Saul about the true faith...He even had to tell Saul that true obedience to God is better than merely performing ritual sacrifice.

Saul was doomed before he had summoned Samuel's spirit...Samuel's spirit merely *confirmed* it.

[Edited on 10-11-2002 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 02:50 PM
Ther eis a verse ... which I can't locate at present ... that says "Man is born to live once and after to face the judgement"

Hardly speaks of reincarrnation....

There is no place for reinacrrnation in the christian theology....

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 03:15 PM
Excellent point Netchicken

Mr Md
Yes you do have a very valid point on that, I made the mistake of thinking from the top of my head and not refering to the good book for actual fact.

So after all it was his disobedience that killed him. Surely you also do agree with me about the fact that God does abhor witchcraft.

In what you said here and in reading some of your other posts it would seem that you do have a good knowledge of the Bible. Yet you have said that you do not have faith in somthing written by man.
How come you have such a knowledge of the Bible if you do not fully trust it?. What are your full feelings for the Bible?.

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 03:21 PM
Steward its apparent that you do not know what you are talking about.

Rather that repost would request you review this page in a thread.

[Edited on 10-11-2002 by Toltec]

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 03:41 PM
M-D, I understand where you are coming from, but understand that the same God that created the universe and all in it, and gave the words for the prophets to write can also ensure that his words are protected throught the ages. While there have been many erroneous translations, some intentionally and some out of carelessness, there is still one that has stood the test of time and one that is beautiful to read - KJV 1611.

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 05:46 PM
Wait a second??? You believe god created other worlds??? AND ACTUALLY POPULATED THEM????????!!!!!!!!



(a little of your own medicine should open your eyes?

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 06:38 PM
FreeMason calm down TC, NC Steward, MD
myself, Ycon, James,Kano, William and even Truth and everyone else that posts at this site are people who come here to discuss there opinions. There is no reason to get angry or insult just because you disagree. The whole point is to enjoy yourself and debate your point. If debating a point is something you
like to do.

If anything this site is very much about people of different opinion getting together and talking and that is something good.

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 06:45 PM
True...but I was hopping my
would suffice to show that that is not inteding to be an actual threat or anger or anything.

It's just a view of the good ol' pre-16th century Christian//Catholic belief.

Which of course if the bible is the word of god than it should be as it always was...and yet today that does not go on, therefore they are disproving their own beliefs by their own actions...well...I should say, THEIR OWN BELIEF'S SCRIPTURES...through their own actions.

Beliefs...and writing are seperate...I don't doubt that christianity teaches good morals...and I don't care if someone wants to believe in their god...but the bible is taken too literal by too many...restricting their the point where they themselves even disprove themselves.

no signature


posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 06:45 PM
He can't help it, Toltec. He is consumed by hate. His postings are hatefilled. His mind and his heart are exposed by his postings. The twistedness of his mind is displayed by his attempts to twist that which he has no clue.

I'm afraid this one is going to be one that can only be overlooked.

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 06:53 PM
I'm not consumed by hate, I'm consumed by your calling me today have done nothing but point out the "ignorance" of my posts...hence I point out the DESCREPANCIES of your eye for an eye my good man.

And I am by far not the one out of line either...I was having a good posting with JamesG about how Science answers the How and Religion answers the Why, when you interrupt with your bible throwing, and totally derail a decent and educated conversation.

no signature

[Edited on 11-11-2002 by FreeMason]

posted on Nov, 10 2002 @ 07:04 PM
FM when you use uppercase that means you are angry. Also the only person that can derail your point is you.

posted on Nov, 11 2002 @ 04:30 AM

Originally posted by stewards
So after all it was his disobedience that killed him. Surely you also do agree with me about the fact that God does abhor witchcraft.

Actually, I think it's more that the Church abhors witchcraft...Simply because they don't worship the same God as the Church. If God *truly* abhored witchcraft, then why would He have allowed Saul to use witchcraft (actually, he hired a witch to do it) & why would He have allowed Samuel's spirit to respond in order to *deliver* that warning?

There's a lot *more* to that situation than meets the eye...

[Edited on 11-11-2002 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Nov, 11 2002 @ 04:37 AM
Actually I use UPPERCASES for anything I wish to EMPHASISE!

If you think I'm angry when I use uppercases...purge that thought from your head, it's simply a way I write to show where'd I'd be stressing if I were old habbit...

no signature

posted on Nov, 11 2002 @ 06:49 AM
I use asteriks around the words that I wish to emphasize...You use capitalization. So what did I post that made you think that your capitalizing was offensive?

posted on Nov, 11 2002 @ 07:02 AM
You didn't post anything to make me angry, in fact, I never was angry

no signature

posted on Nov, 11 2002 @ 08:10 AM
Where did the thread about polytheism and the Bible Go? I saw it this morning right when I got on, and then it disappeared. Why? I really wanted join in.

posted on Nov, 11 2002 @ 08:19 AM
It was deleted by Williams because he thought it was too much anti-christian bashing...but I've reposted it...if you haven't noticed
took me 2 times but I think williams might let this version stay.

It isn't anti-christian...I want legitimit responses concerning these scriptures of the bible.

no signature

posted on Nov, 12 2002 @ 03:43 PM
The truth may be FM that we are way of topic which started with a link am posting more of that link for the sake of getting back into the subject.

Quexalcote of Mexico:

He was:
* born of a spotless virgin
* retired to the wilderness and fasted for forty days
* was worshipped as a God
* crucified between two thieves
* was buried and descended into Hell
* rose the third day

Buddha, the 'Enlightened One' who spurred a new form of spirituality which is a tangent of Hindusim:

walked on water:

"He (Buddha) walks upon the water without parting it, as if it were solid ground."
~ Anguttara Nikaya 3.60 (see Mark 6:49 for parallel)

calmed a storm:

"Now at that time a great rain fell, and a great flood resulted. Then the Lord (Buddha) made the water recede all around, and he paced up and down in the middle on dust-covered ground."
~ Vinaya, Mahavagga I.20.16 (see Mark 4:39 for parallel)

walked through walls:

"He (Buddha) goes unhindered through a wall."
~ Angutta Nikaya 3.60 (see John 20:26 for parallel)

performed miracles:

"As soon as the Bodhisattva (Buddha)was born, the sick were cured, the hungry and thirsty were no longer oppressed by hunger and thirst. Those maddened by drink lost their obsession. The mad recovered their senses, the blind regained their sight, and the deaf once more could hear. The lame obtained perfect limbs, the poor gained riches, and prisoners were delivered of their own bonds."
~ Lilitavistra Sutra 7 (see Luke 7:22 for parallel)

Other 'mythologies' that compare in one form or another include Hercules, Mithra, Hermes, Prometheus, Perseus and others compare to the Christian myth. According to Patrick Campbell of The Mythical Jesus, all are pre-Christian sun gods, yet all allegedly had gods for fathers, virgins for mothers; had their births announced by stars; were born on the solstice around December 25th; had tyrants who tried to kill them in their infancy; met violent deaths; rose from the dead; and nearly all were worshiped by "wise men" and were alleged to have fasted for forty days. [McKinsey, Chapter 5]

The pre-Christian cult of Mithra had a deity of light and truth, son of the Most High, fought against evil, presented the idea of the Logos (the 'Word'). Pagan Mithraism mysteries had the burial in a rock tomb, resurrection, sacrament of bread & water (Eucharist), the marking on the forehead with a mystic mark, the symbol of the Rock, the Seven Spirits and seven stars, all before the advent of Christianity.

Even Justin Martyr recognized the analogies between Christianity and Paganism. To the Pagans, he wrote: "When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)." [First Apology, ch. xxi]

Virtually all of the accounts of the savior Jesus Christ can be accounted for by past pagan mythologies which existed long before Christianity and from the Jewish scriptures that we now call the Old Testament. The accounts of these myths say nothing about historical reality, but they do say a lot about believers, how they believed, and how their beliefs spread.

"In saying that the Word was born for us without sexual union as Jesus Christ our teacher, we introduce nothing beyond what is said of those called the Sons of Zeus." Justin Martyr, Apology, 3

"The mystic child at Eleusis was born of a maiden; these ancients made for themselves the sacred dogma 'A virgin shall conceive and bear a son,' by night there was declared 'Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given." Ibid, 48

The Christian Christmas song, "Oh Come Let Us Adore Him" was adapted from the Egyptian poem to Osiris:

"He is born! He is born! O come and adore Him!
Life-giving mothers, the mothers who bore Him,
Stars of the heavens the daybreak adorning.
Ancestors, ye, of the Star of Morning.
Women and Men, O come and adore Him,
Child who is born this night..." Murray, MA (1949) 68

References for these are as follows:Egyptian Religion by Wallis Budge (1899), The Bacchae by Euripedes lines 5, 723, 836, The Hermetica, The Ibid, F Cumont, 48 (1903), Cleanthes, from CH Kahn (1979), Concerning the Gods and the Universe 4 by S Angus (1925)


Hercules....Who was this guy?

If a person accepts hearsay and accounts from believers as historical evidence for Jesus, then should they not act consistently to other accounts based solely on hearsay and belief?

Take this one example for instance. Examine the evidence for the Hercules of Greek mythology and you will find it parallels the historicity of Jesus to such an amazing degree that for Christian apologists to deny Hercules as a historical person belies and contradicts the very same methodology used for a historical Jesus, making it hypocritical.

Note how Herculean myth resembles Jesus in many areas. Hercules was born from a God (Zeus) and a mortal virgin mother (Alcmene). Similar to Herod who wanted to kill Jesus, Hera wanted to kill Hercules. Like Jesus, Hercules traveled the earth as a mortal helping mankind and performed miraculous deeds. Like Jesus who died and rose to heaven, Hercules died, rose to Mt. Olympus and became a god. Hercules was perhaps the most popular hero in Ancient Greece and Rome. They believed that he actually lived, told stories about him, worshiped him, and dedicated temples to him.

Likewise the 'evidence' of Hercules closely parallels that of Jesus. We have historical people like Hesiod and Plato who mentions Hercules. Similar to the way the gospels tell a narrative story of Jesus, so do we have the epic stories of Homer who depict the life of Hercules. Aesop tells stories and quotes the words of Hercules. Just as we have mention of Jesus in Josephus' Antiquities, so Josephus mentions Hercules in his 'Antiquities' (see 1.15, 8.5.3, 10.11.1). Just as Tacitus mentions a Crestus, he also mentions Hercules many times in his Annals. And most importantly, just as we have no artifacts, writings or eyewitnesses about Hercules, we also have nothing about Jesus. All information about Hercules and Jesus comes from stories, beliefs, and hearsay. Should we then believe in a historical Hercules, simply because ancient historians mention him and that we have stories and beliefs about him?

People consider Hercules a myth because people no longer believe in the Greek and Roman stories. Christianity and its churches, on the other hand, still hold a powerful influence on governments, institutions, and colleges. Anyone doing research on Jesus, even skeptics, had better allude to his existence or else risk future funding and damage to their reputations. Christianity depends on establishing a historical Jesus and it will defend, at all costs, even the most unreliable sources. People want to believe in Jesus, and belief alone can create intellectual barriers that leak even into atheist and secular thought. We have so many Christian professors, theologians and historical 'experts' around the world that tell us we should accept a historical Jesus that if repeated often enough, it tends to convince even the most ardent skeptic. The establishment of history should never reside with the 'experts' words alone or simply because a scholar has a reputation as a historian. If a scholar makes a historical claim, his assertion should depend almost solely on the evidence itself and not just because he/she says so. Facts do not require belief. And whereas beliefs can live comfortably without evidence at all, facts depend on evidence. This being said, we have no solid evidence to call this...a fact. It will remain...a belief.

Quickie similarities:

Krshna, Mithra of Persia, Quexalcote of Mexico, the Chinese savior Xaca, Ya, the Chinese monarch, Plato, Pythagoras, Tamerlane, Gengis Khan, Apollonius of Tyana and Augustus Caesar, were all supposed to have been the product of immaculate conceptions.

Krshna, Mithra of Persia, Quexalcote of Mexico, Chris of Chaldea, Quirinus of Rome, Prometheus, Osiris of Egypt, Atys of Phrygia, all rose from the dead after three days.

At the birth of Confucius, five wise men from a distance came to the house, celestial music filled the air, and angels attended the scene.

The Sacrament or Eucharist was practiced by the Brahmins of India, and was introduced into the mysteries of Mithras, as well as among the Mexicans.

The concept of the 'Trinity' is Hindu. The Sanskrit term is 'Trimurti', meaning 'three bodies in one godhead'. In the Hindu trinity, it was Siva; the other members of the trinity being Brahma and Vishnu. [sidebar: In the Mexican trinity, Y Zona was the Father, Bascal the Word, and Echvah the Holy Ghost, by the last of whom Chimalman conceived and brought forth Quexalcote.]

"The sign of the fish is widely used today as a symbol of Christianity, but originated in Pagan sacred geometry. Two circles, symbolic of spirit and matter, are brought together in a sacred marriage. When the circumference of one touches the center of the other they combine to produce the fish shape known as the vesica piscis. The ratio of height to length of the shape is 153:265, a formula known to Archimedes in the third century BCE as the 'measure of the fish.' It is a powerful mathematical tool, being the nearest whole number approximation of the square root of three and the controlling ratio of the equilateral triangle."

posted on Jan, 7 2003 @ 02:13 AM
Just "resurrected" this thread from page 5 because it seemed to tie in with the post I made about the Christian opinion, that's all

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in