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.

 

If it wasn’t for Jesus, you would cease to exist! Really…

page: 7
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by ImaNutter

Originally posted by OldThinker
Yes, you are right....I remembered wrong....looked over the prior thread...sorry it's late, what was the questions again....fixed the other post, ok


Will you please tell me what you think about the cross originating as the symbol for the pagan sun god, pretty please?

I believe it is pertinent because say I have a car, and someone steals that car... it does not rightfully belong to the thief, it belongs to me.

So in this instance we have the symbol of a cross... that belonged to the pagan sun god... that was then taken by Christianity to represent their new faith. Since the cross rightfully represents the Sun God, by your original logic in the OP, we are held together by the sun?

How do you justify the cross, as well as many other pagan traditions, being stolen by Christianity?



LAST post!!! Promise



You are correct, the cross did originate BEFORE the person of Jesus Christ was concieved on the earth...


It was a tradition of killing criminals....


Of which they thought JC was....

Boy they were suprized 3 days later....



What?? You had to have misunderstood me... Here, this is my question:

"How do you justify the cross, as well as many other pagan traditions, being stolen by Christianity?"

I ask this not because they crucified people before they supposedly did JC, but I ask this because it was a symbol representing the Sun God!! Nothing to do with killing criminals... It was a symbol of worship to the life giving Sun! And by Sun I mean that big shiny thing in the sky that feels warm when it hits you... The SUN God, the giver of life.... THIS is the origination of the cross.




posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by justamomma
 



I do not buy into beliefs though. That is the point. The *fact* is, this is allegorical and to expect others to buy into it on the surface level is misconstruing its meaning.


Yes, I do understand.


New to this perhaps, but quickened in it most assuredly since I have gone back to my heritage and learned their ways of teaching. No, it is not a competition, thus the purpose for telling the Truth. Jesus is not G.d and Jesus does not hold anyone together... in fact, he stated clearly that he would separate and all one has to do is look at the current state of the world to see that he was not joking.


Nor do I believe Jesus is God. A God yes, but not Jah. For he to be one in the same with Jah, as in a trinity, is also promoting pagan beliefs as my cross thread goes into. He did indeed say that he came to divide the people, as all these religious threads exemplify.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaNutter
"How do you justify the cross, as well as many other pagan traditions, being stolen by Christianity?"


I do not see the problem here...

There was no such thing as breach of copyright at the time, so it's all good



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma

I think you know the answer to this.
You are correct. It is a paganistic view and those who believe in it have fallen for the very thing the Tanakh spoke against. It was a test for the Jewish people and unfortunately, Benoni.. generalized... (explained in the blessings of Jacob .. Genesis 49) took what was entrusted to him and sold it out to deceive not only his own, but the world. The whole of the Tanakh can help one to decipher the truth from the lies in the NT. Only about 20% is applicable to the Jewish people.. The rest of it is lies and paganism.

All in all, the point of it is that this was applicable to only the Jewish people in the first place. The fact that it made its way out into the gentile world is not even supported by Jesus, despite the Pauline crowd that stuck in their own words and attributed them to Jesus. G.d does not need our acknowledgment in order to exist.. and this is the Truth. Jesus, on the other hand, does need our acknowledgment and thus, this would show the deception quite clearly.


Thank you for such a clear and thoughtful response... I can't seem to get these out of OldThinker
And I don't think he's going to give me one...

I fear I'm going to have to leave this thread again simply agreeing to disagree with his opinions. But at least it is nice to hear a very well written response supporting my ideas about Christianity and the many fallacies in it. Star for you.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 



PS: Did you see the vid? if not take a look and we'll talk to moorow ok?


I only saw a bit of it and will promise to check it out tomorrow!





posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaNutter
 


I will state the Truth which is likely to ruffle feathers.. however, that is not my concern. You will not get a clear answer for the question you are asking because you are right. To admit such would mean that they would have to let go of their security blanket. This was my awakening call in leaving Christianity. I was "soaked" in the religion and any time I asked a question that would stump my teachers, I was ousted from the classroom and have even been verbally harrassed by several teachers at once.

Christianity can not look at its origins because they want to base their origins in something that is practical.. but the practical does not support the fantastical. It is just that simple. Therefore, to expect an answer is to expect the true type of miracles that are consistent with the Laws of nature.. that being a Christian admitting they are wrong or that their beliefs are on the whole based on something other than what they claim it to be based on.



[edit on 16-2-2009 by justamomma]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Great posting! Pretty Amazing!



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaNutter
 



I ask this not because they crucified people before they supposedly did JC, but I ask this because it was a symbol representing the Sun God!! Nothing to do with killing criminals... It was a symbol of worship to the life giving Sun! And by Sun I mean that big shiny thing in the sky that feels warm when it hits you... The SUN God, the giver of life.... THIS is the origination of the cross.


Actually, it was only one of the meanings! In Egypt it had a couple of different meanings: the Ankh representing "Key of the Nile" as a fertility (phallus & womb) symbol - Isis and Osiris, and also, "Life," on countless tombs, monuments, etc. Later the Coptic Christians took it up as a symbol for Christ. But it had been passed down through the Babylonians, Chaldean and the Greeks, all in pagan use.

Jesus was Jewish and could not have been crucified via a cross, as it strictly went against Jewish law. It was likely the Sadducee's (not the Pharisee's) who wanted him dead, and being temple priests they would have followed their laws.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by MatrixProphet
 


While you are correct that this was against the Jewish practice, it does not negate that this could have been the punishment carried out for Jesus. Firstly, it is very plausible that Jesus could have been betrayed into the hands of the Romans by certain of Jewish elite since some of them were given to hellenistic views (which is the paganistic views of the Egptians, Greeks, and Romans.. of which, Paul was Hellenistic). Also, it was not all that uncommon for Jewish to be tortured via the cross method since Rome was in control of that region (In the exact way that the Americans are in control of Iraq today.. they oversee the political swaying of the country).

So, while I agree that this would not have been a death penalty supported by those who were truly Jewish, to rule it out as a means of his death altogether is just as ignorant as saying that he rose from the dead after 3 days. However, it is pointless for any of to even speculate on this since we can not even conclusively validate the very existence of Jesus.



[edit on 16-2-2009 by justamomma]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   
I believe Jesus existed as a man, but also feel that you can interpet the Bible and the story of Jesus differently, the whole idea of Sun worship which I must say has alot of proof.

Also though, we shouldnt forget about other ancient Gods and beliefs, such as El (Saturn) and other ancient Astrotheoligical Gods, such as Allah.

El is an ancient deity that was the head of all other ancient Gods that have been recorded.

Either way, regardless of the God or Gods your religion belives in or is really worshiping, No matter what the religious practices are, you are worshipping something ancient, occult, and Astroligical.

Sun-day, the worship of the Sun
Satur-(n) day, the worship of Saturn

and almost all the other days of the week tie into other ancient gods.

Also, it is true that the hross of Christianity is the Zodiac cross. We are in the age of Picies, symbolized by the fish. We are moving into the age of Aquarius, with the "water pitcher" bringing in the New Age and the New World Order.

Remember if anyone asks you to give your heart to Jesus, remember it was the Mayans who gave there hearts to the Gods, literally, At the TOP of the pyramids.

But Saturn is a big one because it is such a huge part of society worlwide and also ties in with the sun, all the Astrotheoligical gods tie into each other, the Black Sun is also referring to Saturn. Black is the color of Saturn and is used in many ways, wedding rings represent the rings of Saturn. anyways NVM.



[edit to fix spelling on 16-2-2009 by ats__fan039]

[edit on 16-2-2009 by ats__fan039]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ats__fan039
 


Jesus was the son of Caesar and studied the vedas.

Aside from that he was no different than you and I. He just knew a couple tricks here and there. He was not special.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by justamomma
 



So, while I agree that this would not have been a death penalty supported by those who were truly Jewish, to rule it out as a means of his death altogether is just as ignorant as saying that he rose from the dead after 3 days. However, it is pointless for any of to even speculate on this since we can not even conclusively validate the very existence of Jesus.


Where your thinking would be off is; IF Jesus did live, and IF he was a ransom sacrifice, his death needed to fulfill sacrificial purity that was in line with Jewish law foretold in the OT. Now I know this is a bone of contention with you, but it is still regardless, many a person's view, that he came down from heaven to be a sacrificial lamb. IF this is indeed the case, then he could not have died on a cross to fulfill previous prophesy the way you are saying, and all other Christians.

The death would have been purposeful and with sanctity. However, I now, don't believe that - that was his purpose after all. I think he was used to separate the masses and to set mankind free from all religion, but not to be our saviour from sins, etc. as I always believed.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by MatrixProphet
reply to post by justamomma
 



So, while I agree that this would not have been a death penalty supported by those who were truly Jewish, to rule it out as a means of his death altogether is just as ignorant as saying that he rose from the dead after 3 days. However, it is pointless for any of to even speculate on this since we can not even conclusively validate the very existence of Jesus.


Where your thinking would be off is; IF Jesus did live, and IF he was a ransom sacrifice, his death needed to fulfill sacrificial purity that was in line with Jewish law foretold in the OT. Now I know this is a bone of contention with you, but it is still regardless, many a person's view, that he came down from heaven to be a sacrificial lamb. IF this is indeed the case, then he could not have died on a cross to fulfill previous prophesy the way you are saying, and all other Christians.

The death would have been purposeful and with sanctity. However, I now, don't believe that - that was his purpose after all. I think he was used to separate the masses and to set mankind free from all religion, but not to be our saviour from sins, etc. as I always believed.


Huh? You aren't putting assumptions into my mouth are you?
I am sincerly asking as I am unsure. I do not see Jesus as anything other than a myth... as I can not prove him to be otherwise. This, what you have said, still does not negate the fact that a man named Jesus (a common variation of a common name) who was jewish could have indeed been crucified. I do not state that he was or was not... I am just saying that to say it could not have happened is beside the point.

And NEVER did the Tanakh or the Jewish beliefs support the death of a man as a way of sanctifying all of the world, let alone our own people. In fact, quite the opposite... all one has to do is to study the sacrificial rites of the jewish to know that this was never a set up *we* condoned.. so, please, do not insinuate that I would think otherwise. *said sweetly, but firmly as I do not want to be associated with such barbaric behaviours*

I do understand that you did not directly imply this, but I just have to make it very clear. Never would I think that Jesus or any man for that matter be used as any type of sacrifice. That is strictly paganistic... which is why I *never* was able to buy into it.. even being raised in the christian religion. The holes were always quite clear to me.


Ezekiel 18 is the practical and *normal* instruction of G.d TO THE JEWISH, NOT MANKIND to receive redemption. This was never about mankind. This is why all the confusion.
It was not for everyone else and I do wish we could just go back to that. Let the pagans believe their way and let us have our knowledge w/out all the manipulations via speculations.

[edit on 17-2-2009 by justamomma]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by rangersdad
 


...yeah its called Big Brothers hand.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
I think Pope Leo X said it best: "What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us!" just keep shoveling all your hard earned cash into those churches,folks.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
pish?

'bad'

JD?

Jack Daniels, of course.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Your input is futile if your debate starts with evidence from a repeatedly translated book (not to mention many stories in it were passed down through word of mouth over the years before they made it into writing). This alone has to make us question its validity and so far nothing conclusive has ever validated the imperative claims. The bible is not “source material” yet the OP continues to think so in many threads. I wonder why people still respond to them.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 
I ask myself the same thing I think it has to do with how self righteous bible thumpers just rub people the wrong way.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinkerate
 


Yeah Mate it is actually the shape of a wobbly x.
nothing like a crucificion cross.
The so called similarity is taken from the molecular plan created by a human being so as to show in simplicity its structure.
If you really wanted to compare it to something maybe a starfish would be closer.
Thats really grabbing at straws so to speak.



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 02:35 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Okay, I'm only going to do this once. First, the fact that Laminin is formed by two crossing lines of protein molecules is indicative of what exactly? Would you say it must be the product of a creator or intelligent designer because of its shape? Since evolution clearly proves that only pure randomness, with no design artifacts present explains the fossil record, molecular biology and genetics, I'm afraid I have to see something more than a coincidence to believe. Like a theory that fits in with our understanding of the world and evidence to support the theory.

As for crosses being holy symbols, this was the result of a vicious roman emperor, Constantine, who claimed that he saw a cross in a vision, urging him on to greater conquest. You will note that many symbolic crosses emanating from that time also had swords emblazoned on them - "The Sword of Constantine". The bible contains no mention of crosses being holy or of any religious significance other than being the thing Jesus Christ was affixed to for crucifixion (common practice in Roman times). If Jesus had been beheaded on a guillotine, I suppose that we'd be worshiping it?

I'm sure this will have no impact on your thinking, but see if just for a moment you can catch yourself and realize that this means absolutely nothing.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join