My Conclusion...

originally posted by: Kais123

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Kais123

You have three major religions all praying to exactly the same God. But since each uses a different word for God we have nothing but war and killing.

maybe they all worship the devil...

something to think about!

Or maybe the devil doesn’t exist? (Which would render your thread rather pointless)

Something to think about!

a reply to: TerryDon79

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: TerryDon79 maybe he dosnt....


but many think he does exist....

a reply to: Kais123

So 3 things with horns?

Woooooooooooooooooow!

originally posted by: Kais123
a reply to: TerryDon79 maybe he dosnt....


but many think he does exist....

Many people think Santa Claus and the Easter bunny are real too.

a reply to: TerryDon79


dhul qarnain is the Islamic version


two horned king... both Baphomet and cerrunos have been known by this term

a reply to: TerryDon79i bet your one of them

a reply to: Kais123

Where?

Show me.

originally posted by: Kais123
a reply to: TerryDon79i bet your one of them

Nope. I don’t have a belief in non-substantiated beings.

Just like I don’t have a belief you came to a “conclusion”.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Kais123
As a Christian, I don't hold any brief for Islam.
I feel bound to point out, though (as a student of history), that "Baphomet" was never anything more than an historic mispronunciation of "Mahomet".The idea that Mahomet was being worshipped, under either proununciation, was a natural misunderstanding at the time.
"Baphomet", as an idol worshipped by the Templars, was a fantasy, a product of the imaginations of ruthless inquisitors driven on by a greedy French king, reinforced by the use of torture instruments.

I guess this thread is just an argument between 2 members.

But I read your interesting comment as well as the arguers'. Are you saying that Baphomet/Mahomet didn't exist until the Templars came along?

a reply to: KansasGirl i was wondering the same.....why is no one else replying?

a reply to: KansasGirl
The prophet Mohammed, sometimes pronounced Mahomet, existed, of course.
Christians in general were probably making the mistaken assumption that the prophet was an object of worship.
Enemies of the Templars were perhaps already claiming that they were secretly adopting the religion of the Muslims they were supposed to be fighting, and this would translate as "they worship Mahomet".

Then the King of France was desperate for money, the Templars based in France were wealthy, and various events in politics had placed the Pope under the king's control. So the king seized the Templars (and their money), and got the consent of the Pope by launching heresy/idolatry charges against them.
On the claim of idolatry, I have just checked the chapter on this crisis in Norman Cohn's "Europe's Inner Demons". He points out that no physical idols were actually found in the Templars' quarters. They do appear in confessions, under a large variety of descriptions, but it's easy to guess that they originated in the minds of the investigators, and got into the confessions by the use of instruments of torture.

In some of those confessions, the idol is called "Baphomet", which sounds like the mispronunciation of someone not familiar with the original.
Any image of "Baphomet" can only be an "artist's impression" created by the propagandists of that time and later, since no physical examples are known to have existed.That is what makes the claim that such-and-such "looks like Baphomet" so nonsensical.

In other words, the entire concept of "Baphomet" was created in the torture chambers of the Inquisition. He never was a genuine object of worship.

Can't believe I'm even reading through this tripe.

The savior was a Jew...

does that mean that God is also Jewish....Holy trinity and all that....

a reply to: olaru12


the holy trinity is
...


semiramis


nimrod


and

tammud

a reply to: CharlesT


whats wrong with it?


do you need help in understanding?

a reply to: DISRAELIjust a quick question....being the historian that you are ....what do you think of the annunaki?

a reply to: Kais123
As far as historians are concerned, the Annunaki were a group of Sumerian supreme deities, mainly worshipped as individual gods.
I would theorise that each of them was originally worshipped in a different region of the Sumerian world. That as the different regions gradually came together into one culture, it came to be accepted that all of them were gods, and that's how they developed into a group.
At least that seems to be how the various local Greek gods developed into a pantheon; twelve of the most important were selected (at least by poets) to be "the gods of Olympus", simply because twelve was a sacred number.
In both cultures, the idea of an "older generation of gods, now supplanted" may relate to newer gods being brought in by human invaders.

a reply to: Kais123

No! It's just bullsheat.

a reply to: DISRAELI the star or pentagram of Baphomet come from the time of king solomon.....which is older than the Templars...and king solomon was also into demonology.....so the shoe fits....sorry to say, but i rekon your just making excuses