A Very Simple Christian Conspiracy That Most Do Not Know

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rubicant13

Originally posted by adjensen
rcg.org = Restored Church of God = followers of failed prophet Herbert Armstrong.

Don't put too much faith in the claims of gullible prats who think that Armstrong was God's "sole voice on Earth" in his lifetime.


No offense, Adjensen, I respect you and I believe you know that. This discovery was not claimed by rcg. It was originally discovered by a pastor and historian in Sweden. It's just been retold on many sites such rcg... I just used that one to source a link from.

The problem is that groups such as these preach a different Christianity -- one that says we are saved by works, and works alone. Do you really believe that God cares whether you go to church on Saturday or Sunday? Or whether you enjoy celebrating the festival of Christmas? Or that you tithe and belong to the "true church"? Or that you have a cross or crucifix to remind you of the sacrifice that Christ made?

It's not the Christian God that would hang your salvation on works, such as those, but that is the God that these "true churches" worship.




posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Sounds like most christian churches to me.


Not me, and i have been to a ton of different ones in several denominations. Besides that, I doubt you've been to more than 5 different churches, let alone "most" of them.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:51 PM
link   
The first quote in the OP is correct when it says that the cross was not widely used during the time of Jesus. Crucifixion was reserved for the worst criminals. That is how much Jesus was hated for teaching the Truth. They murdered Him using the method which was only used on the most vile.

Whether the cross He was nailed to was shaped like a 'T' just a regular cross shape makes no difference; He was still crucified for the sins of the world.

Many Christians feel the need to sport a cross around their neck, on clothing, in their houses, and even in their churches. This is in direct violation of the 2nd commandment, and to some extent, the 1st commandment. It makes no sense to basically glorify the device of murder which was used to crucify our Lord.

If Jesus was alive today and He was put to death at the firing squad, would people walk around wearing miniature versions of M-16s around their necks?

If He was put to death with the electric chair, would churches have a replica of "Sparky" next to the pulpit?

And yes, oddly enough, the answer is most likely "yes". It's not the method by which He was put to death that means anything. It's the reasons why He was put to death which mean EVERYTHING.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


I think you misunderstood, all christian churches claim to follow that charismatic jesus dude, correct?



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   
From the reading I have done, it is true that the cross (as its visibly portrayed today) was a symbol used by pagans. But it was also a symbol in many other cultures, faiths and such.

What's important is what it means to the people that follow Christ. Sure, to many of us its just another symbol that means nothing.....but to some it symbolizes their beliefs.

We must respect that so that our own "crazy" beliefs will see the same respect in kind.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 02:27 AM
link   
I was not aware that the crucifix was not actually a symbol of Christianity. I was, however, very aware that a cross symbol was part of a variety of pagan faiths, including the cross of the zodiac and the ankh. I always just assumed that the cross (like resurrection, baptism, transubstantiation, the 10 commandments, healing the sick, and raising the dead) was just another pagan element which the Roman Catholic Church absorbed in it's attempt to dominate the entire world under Christian authority.

Depending on how deeply you dig into ancient faiths and mystery religions you can find a large majority of Christian doctrine already existed long before the Jews, or the Christians, decided to claim it as their own. The Hebrew people began collecting the writings which would become the Tanakh during the Babylonian captivity. So most of the old Bible stories weren't actually a part of recorded Jewish heritage until well into Babylon's existence. Which, of course, gave the pagan faiths more than 2000 years head-start on recording down nearly identical myths.

I think it's all just a repackaging.

~ Wandering Scribe



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:52 AM
link   
This is a funny controversy. It is true that the shape of the execution instrument typically used by Romans is poorly documented. No Roman field manual for the exactor mortis survives. It is entirely possible that there was no uniform, ecumen-wide regulation shape.

The question before us is where did the Christian idea come from that Jesus, in particular, died on something with the now-familiar shape, a horizontal piece on a vertical fixture, with the vertical extending above Jesus' head? Whether or not that is accurate, does the idea originate from outside the Christian movement?

All four Gospels agree that Jesus died with a titulus identifyng him as "King of the Jews." Mark and John dosn't say where the titulus was mounted, but Matthew and Luke place it above him. I believe the order of the Gospels to be such, then, that the first and last Gospels do not say where the titulus was, but the second and third do. (I don't know adj's current views on the order, but we have long agreed that John is last, so some earlier Gospels have the detail, and one doesn't).

The lack of uniformity or simple adoption of the detail argue against the importation of the idea of an overhead placard from somewhere else. There is no early record of disputation about the detail that I know of, either. If the titulus is envisioned to be above Jesus' head, then it is natural enough to imagine that it was held in place at a high end of the instrument, although other arrangments are possible.

While the Gospels allow wiggle room for the shape of the cross, the source for the now-familiar shape is plausibly some of the Christian Gospels, the shape in question being a simple amplification of the idea that a sign was placed above his head, itself an amplification that there was a placard at all.

Cross pieces are also a common human visualization of places where time and eternity meet. In visual art, a well placed intersection is an accessible solution to the problem of focusing the viewer's eye on Jesus' expression, despite the impact of his bodily disposition. Attributing the appearance of species-wide symbols, simple engineering solutions, or professional artistic craft elements in Christianity to fantastic "pagan borrowings" borders on the absurd.
-
edit on 21-1-2013 by eight bits because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Rubicant13
 


I've heard this before, but never understood why people made a big deal about such things. Does such minutiae affect your spirituality, or your understanding of life and purpose on Earth. Does the exact method of Jesus' death affect whether you understand the message of His sacrifice and of His rebirth? If the soil under his feet at the crucifixion (or staking) was black, and people understood it to be tan, would that branch of Christians be considered fooled, and on the wrong path? Personally, I don't think the Faith changes one bit, even if Jesus was hung by his ankles from a tree to bleed out - amd I never have understood why it matters to some people. Historians maybe, religious folk, well, it just simply doesn't make sense to give a damn about such minutiae.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by adjensen
 


I think you misunderstood, all christian churches claim to follow that charismatic jesus dude, correct?

No, they claim to follow God, incarnate in the person of Jesus.

How is that the same thing as a cult who claims that their non-divine preacher is "the sole voice of God in this age" and then turns up a crapload of wrong prophecies, demonstrating that the only voices he hears are the ones rattling around in his head?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Rubicant13
 


Here is something else to think about. Isn't it interesting that the "stauros" is only a single letter more than "tauros"? Could the "cross" actually serve as a substitute for the Mithros' "bull"? I base this speculation on the idea of the "correctness of names" described in Plato's Cratylus. If there is a connection, then we might also wonder about the Apostle Paul's supposed home of Tarsus.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   
_______________________

Interesting that Apostle Peter is regarded as
the first-pope by the Catholic Church, being that he was
crucified up side down (inverted cross)
Contrary to what most people have been lead to believe,
in Catholicism the inverted cross is not seen as satanic.
. . . holly-wood vs reality ? ? ? deception to say the least !

Apostle st. Peter

Cross of St. Peter


________________________



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Christianity IS Paganism.

The idea of a trinity - that three gods can actually be ONE. That is NOT a new idea.

The story of Noah's Ark - Stolen!

The story of the virgin birth and a "Son of God" - Stolen!

The story of the Wise Men and The Three Gifts - Stolen.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Sounds like most christian churches to me.


Not me, and i have been to a ton of different ones in several denominations. Besides that, I doubt you've been to more than 5 different churches, let alone "most" of them.


Oh? Do you see God in all religions, then? Or just in Christianity? Do you see world religion and myth as a single unit, like a grand cosmic symphony with a variety of instruments that share a heritage... a fundamental unity... and are guided by a transcendent Divine harmony?

Or do you see it as a kind of us-vs-them scenario, with a boogey-man devil or mere human wisdom lurking behind all religions except Christianity?

Forgive me for being blunt but it seems that typical Christians have selective, localized hearing. I'm sick of it. They only hear their particular instrument among the grand cosmic symphony of religions. Going to a ton of different Christian churches in several Christian denominations doesn't count as non-local hearing.

When you give me a straight answer I guess we'll see how typical you really are.

"No one, as far as I know, has yet tried to compose into a single picture the new perspectives that have been opened in the fields of comparative symbolism, religion, mythology, and philosophy by the scholarship of recent years. The richly rewarded archaeological researches of the past few decades; astonishing clarifications, simplifications, and coordinations achieved by intensive studies in the spheres of philology, ethnology, philosophy, art history, folklore, and religion; fresh insights in psychological research; and the many priceless contributions to our science by the scholars, monks, and literary men of Asia, have combined to suggest a new image of the fundamental unity of the spiritual history of mankind.

Without straining beyond the treasuries of evidence already on hand in these widely scattered departments of our subject, therefore, but simply gathering from them the membra disjuncta of a unitary mythological science, I attempt in the following pages the first sketch of a natural history of the gods and heroes, such as in its final form should include in its purview all divine beings--not regarding any as sacrosanct or beyond its scientific domain. For, as in the visible world of the vegetable and animal kingdoms, so also in the visionary world of the gods: there has been a history, an evolution, a series of mutations, governed by laws; and to show forth such laws is the proper aim of science."


-Joseph Campbell

edit on 27-1-2013 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueMule
 


You seem to have me mistaken for one of your children. I dont take orders from anyone on here.

Good day.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 12:09 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   
The idea that the cross is a conspiracy is foolishness. The cross DOES NOT come from Jesus being crucified, it actually comes from Paleo-Hebrew language. This is what Moses(Moshe) wrote the first 5 books(Torah) of the bible in. The "t" or cross meant covenant. So now it should make since as to why it's on so many bibles. Doesn't the bible have the Old Covenant and the Renewed Covenant? Yes it does. Didn't Jesus(Yeshua) come to "RENEW" the Old Covenant? YES! Now it all makes since.

Wether or not Jesus was crucified on a stake, a "T", or a cross is irrelevant.

It is also part of the Aleph Tav for those who know what that is.

So if you are wearing a cross it is safe to say it is a reminder of the covenant between Isreal and Yahweh.

Paleo-Hebrew dates back to 1000 BCE.



Reference

I hope this helps.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Star & a flag for the OP.

The Koine Greek terms used in the New Testament of the gibbet on which Jesus died are stauros (σταυρός) and xylon (ξύλον).

The Greek word generally translated “cross” is stau·ros′. It basically means “an upright pale or stake.” The Companion Bible points out: “[Stau·ros′] never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle . . . There is nothing in the Greek of the [New Testament] even to imply two pieces of timber.”
In several texts, Bible writers use another word for the instrument of Jesus’ death. It is the Greek word xy′lon. (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24) This word simply means “timber” or “a stick, club, or tree.”

Explaining why a simple stake was often used for executions, the book Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung (The Cross and the Crucifixion), by Hermann Fulda, states: “Trees were not everywhere available at the places chosen for public execution. So a simple beam was sunk into the ground. On this the outlaws, with hands raised upward and often also with their feet, were bound or nailed.”

The most convincing proof of all, however, comes from God’s Word. The apostle Paul says: “Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us, because it is written: ‘Accursed is every man hanged upon a stake [“a tree,” King James Version].’” (Galatians 3:13) Here Paul quotes Deuteronomy 21:22, 23, which clearly refers to a stake, not a cross.

The book The Non-Christian Cross, by J. D. Parsons, explains: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross.”

As to how a sign was affixed to the stake, someone said there was not room, sure there was.
I just did a quick Google image search for Christ on a Torture stake.

Torture Stake with sign

So here is the deal, there is enough evidence that at the very least throws the cross into serious question, and if it wasn't used at all, and is an import from paganism, that means one thing, idolatry.

A very slick way for Satan to trick sincere Christians into it, by them thinking they are honoring Jesus and his sacrifice. Remember Satan is ultra evil, he is also incredibly intelligent he can think centuries ahead of the common man and plan his moves like a chess player, as humans due to our short life spans we are thinking a few moves at most. Whereas Satan is always 30 moves ahead of human civilization and any spirituality it might develop towards God and how he can sabotage it, making it invalid, and yet allowing people to think and feel they are doing what God wants.

Do you think he has had success in this area?
edit on 28-1-2013 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Alrighty then...

Enough with the insults and personal back and forth. If you all can't discuss the issue like adults, then find something else to talk about, or log off.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33


So here is the deal, there is enough evidence that at the very least throws the cross into serious question, and if it wasn't used at all, and is an import from paganism, that means one thing, idolatry.




In order for it to be idolatry, the cross would have to be worshiped as a god itself, which clearly is not the case.





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join