Religions > Atheism > Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
29 May 2007 09:26:11 AM |
| Object: |
Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
http://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/10/07/jesus-is-not-a-mithras-redux
Jesus is Not a Mithras Redux
Mithraism, as it is germane to Christian historical discussion, was a
mystery religion adopted by the Romans in the 1st century A.D. (I am
careful with my words here, as Mithraism has a previous historical
incantation in ancient Persia, though its relationship to the Roman
tradition, in practice and philosophy, is unclear at this point.) Some
critics claim that Christianity borrowed from the traditions of
Mithraism as a means of attracting followers, though these allegedly
adopted Mithraic traditions were not actually authentic to Jesus. I
believe it is safe to say that, on the basis of historical scholarship
done by secular, Christian and Mithraic-oriented scholars, this claim
is thoroughly without serious basis.
History
According to Mithraic scholar Franz Cumont, the first mention of
Mithra was made in a treaty from 1400 B.C. (Other, more recent,
scholars place this date at around 700 B.C.) At this time and after,
Mithraic tradition indicated Mithra as a deity who gave orders and
guidance to the military, as well as dispensed justice to those who
broke political treaties. As the religion developed, the Mithraic
story grew richer. Mithra became known as the provider of rain,
bringing vegetation and health to the people. However, to the Persians
who held to this tradition, Mithra was not the supreme deity, but
subservient to another god, Varuna, who was specifically associated
with the culture's rice harvest. Some descriptions of Mithra have been
translated, "Lord of the Contract," "Upholder of Truth," "Peaceful,
benevolent protector," and "Not easily provoked." Even later mentions
of Mithra characterize him again as a warrior, though at some point
they seem to have reverted again to depicting him as a pacifist deity.
When Zoroastrian religion developed in Persia (estimated at around 440
B.C., according to Herodotus' The Histories), Mithra's previous
association with treaties developed into his role as a "mediator"
between the gods of good and evil, Ohrmazd and Ahriman, respectively.
He was considered part of a larger pantheon of seven deities that
served the gods of the upper spiritual echelon. In this Mithraic-
Zoroastrian incantation, Mithra's role in the cosmos also included
delivering the condemned to hell and the saved to heaven. By the first
century B.C., Mithra was still associated with these themes, in
addition to having some sort of relationship with the gods Apollos and
Hermes.
The Roman Mithraic tradition seems to only be linked to the Persian
Mithra by name, though in the Hellenistic and Roman traditions, he is
referred to as Mithras (the Greek masculine form of Mithra). The Roman
Mithraic story involves the heroic slaying of a sacred bull by
Mithras, perhaps an astrological allegory, though the Persian details,
treaty enforcement, agriculture, and escorting of souls, seem to no
longer apply. According to Roman tradition, Mithras' heroic slaying of
the bull gained him the favor of the sun god. Other than tracking the
evolution of the name of Mithras across the two traditions, scholars
in the 20th century have failed to establish a substantial link
between the two Mithraic traditions in terms of their actual beliefs.
Rather, the latest scholarship in regard to Mithras suggests that the
Romans founded their version of Mithraism in response to the
astrological discovery of the movement of the heavens (now referred to
as the precession of the equinoxes). Scholars who advocate the
astrological thesis suggest that the Persian name of Mithras was given
to the god who they believed orchestrated this movement (Perseus in
the Roman tradition) due to an alliance at the time with a leader from
Asia Minor named Mithridates and the influence of Mithraic Cilician
pirates.
Despite what seems to be an obvious lack of related details between
the Mithraic tradition and the origins of Christianity, critics
nonetheless allege that certain details of the Christian tradition
were adapted, if not outright "stolen" from Mithraism. I will examine
some of the more inflammatory claims below:
Like Jesus, Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th in a cave.
His birth was also attended by shepherds.
Many Christians are well aware that there is no Biblical basis for
setting the date of the birth of Jesus on December 25th. History shows
that this date was introduced as significant to Christ later by the
post-apostolic church, no doubt influenced by the multiplicity of
sacred festivals occurring at this time. According to Mithraic
tradition, Mithras was not born of a virgin in a cave. In fact,
Mithras was said to have been born, fully grown, from solid rock; the
event leaving a cavity behind. There was no mention of a virgin.
Interestingly, the story continues to describe Mithras being helped
out of the rock by shepherds, who offer him a pick from their flock.
Yet according to Mithraic tradition, Mithras was created prior to the
creation of mankind. Consequently, the Mithraic "shepherds" cannot be
legitimately compared to those of the Christian tradition. Lastly, the
earliest existing record of this narrative is from around 100 years
after the manuscripts of the New Testament, leaving no room for claims
that the Christian tradition copied the story and attributed it to
Jesus. (Note also that the later Persian Mithraic traditions recount
his conception through the incestual copulation of the god Ahura-Mazda
and his mother. The Christian virgin birth story is principally
concerned with the humanity of Mary and God's role in the creation of
Jesus through her. There is no parallel between this and the Mithraic
story.)
Mithras was also considered a great traveling teacher and master.
This particular attribute is probably one of the most common
identifiers of just about every spiritual leader in history. However,
there is no mention in Mithraic tradition of Mithras being an
itinerant teacher like Jesus. If this claim is to be taken seriously
as evidence that Christian tradition appropriated from Mithraic
tradition, one must also take into account the travels and teachings
of other spiritual figures like Buddha, Krishna, Muhammed, etc.
Mithras had 12 disciples.
The Persian Mithra was often associated with the god Varuna, such that
one might infer that they were considered a pair. However, in this
tradition Mithra is short 10 companions. In the Roman tradition,
Mithras was accompanied by two entities, created after his own image,
named Cautes and Catopatres. They have been said to represent day and
night or spring and fall or life and death. Mithras was also
associated with the snake, the dog, the lion, and the scorpion, likely
due to the astrological origin of the Roman tradition. Still, Mithras'
companions only add up to 6 at most, taking all into account. Some
claim that a Mithraic stone carving, which depicts the famous bull
scene with one vertical row of six images on each side, proves the "12
disciples" connection. However, most current Mithraic scholarship
attributes these to zodiac representations. In addition to
acknowledging that since the carving itself dates to well after the
time of Jesus, any connections to the Christian tradition of 12
disciples would have to implicate Mithraism as the copycat, not
Christianity. In the other direction, one would have to claim that
Christianity stole the number twelve from astrology- likely a much
more difficult case to make.
Mithras offered eternal life to his followers.
Like the "traveling teacher" connection, this claim no more implicates
Christianity as it does just about every religious tradition that
posits life after death. Incidentally, the only specific mention of a
Mithraic offer of eternal life to his followers exists in a piece of
writing dated to 200 A.D., which has been translated, "and us, too,
you saved by spilling the eternal blood." In Mithraic tradition, the
blood is not the blood of Mithras, but that of the bull he
slaughtered, and "saved" referred to being approved to ascend through
other levels toward immortality. It was clearly not the same type of
salvation that is taught in Christian theology.
Mithras performed miracles.
While both the Iranian Mithra and the Roman Mithras traditions recount
acts of great power done by Mithra(s), this is hardly an incriminating
fact. Like the teaching and offering of immortality, this is another
common attribute of any religious figure. To make this claim
worthwhile, one would have to show similarities in type of miracle
(i.e. Mithras walked on water, healed the blind, or raised the dead).
Mithras sacrificed himself for mankind.
Some Mithraic scholars have tried to depict Mithras and the bull he
had slain as one and the same, construing the story to represent that
Mithras gave his own life. However, the narrative in no way suggests
this. At best, Mithras could be considered heroic for his victory over
the bull, though more likely is the modern interpretation that the
bull slaying story corresponded to astrological themes. However, this
has no comparison to the Christian claim that Jesus died as atonement
for the sins of mankind.
Mithras was buried in a tomb, and after three days, He rose again.
In Prescription Against Heretics, Tertullian writes, "if my memory
still serves me, Mithra there, (in the kingdom of Satan), sets his
marks on the foreheads of his soldiers; celebrates also the oblation
of bread, and introduces an image of a resurrection, and before a
sword wreathes a crow." This is the only reference from which some
Mithraic scholars claim a correlation between Mithraic and Christian
traditions. Unfortunately, having been written after the New
Testament, there is no evidence that what it describes predates
Christianity. Nor is there really any compelling aspect to
Tertullian's description that would indicate that these practices were
authentic to Mithraism or even appropriately compared to Christian
tradition.
Mithras said, "He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood
so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved."
There is no evidence for this saying being attributed to Mithras.
Scholars have, however, found this saying attributed to Zarathustra,
though in a medieval document (remember that Zarathustra, the founding
prophet of Zoroastrianism, is thought to have lived some time around
2000 B.C.). Though followers of Mithras were known to have fellowship
meals, at which was eaten bread, water, wine and meat, such
circumstances were common to meals shared by many people in many
different contexts.
Conclusions
It should be emphasized that none of the alleged similarities between
Mithras and Jesus can be shown to apply to the Persian Mithra, but
only to the Roman Mithraic tradition, which did not really flourish
until after the time of the New Testament. That said, the alleged
connections are quite dubious, as I explained above. In fact, no
archeological evidence for this tradition can be argued to exist from
any earlier than A.D. 90. This seems to suggest that the re-emergence
of Mithras in the Roman context preserved the name of the Persian
deity, yet adopted a new set of traditions more closely linked to the
many mystery religions of the time. In any case, the overall Mithraic
tradition should actually be thought of as two distinct movements,
having little to do with one another beyond having a god of the same
name.
The driving force of these comparisons appears to be a deliberate
application of language resembling that used in Christian tradition to
traditions that never actually used that language in the first place.
For example, referring to the "birth" of Mithras to a "virgin" is
absurd given that, according to Mithraic tradition, he was not "born"
in the human sense at all, but came into being out of lifeless solid
rock. Perhaps one might claim that the lifeless solid rock, having
never before had an entity emerge from it, was "virgin-like," but that
would be an extreme stretch in language and meaning, and more akin to
an intentional characterization of Mithraic tradition in Christian
terms. Similarly, if Mithraic tradition could be shown to teach that
Mithras instructed his followers to gather together in a fellowship
meal, it would be misleading to refer to this as a Mithraic "last
supper." Even if Roman Mithraism did hold to traditions similar to
Christianity, it would be false to assume that simply because the two
traditions existed similarly and contemporaneously one must have
preceded or caused the other. Like liberal Biblical scholars that give
priority to Gnostic sources on Jesus, though they date long after the
canonical Gospels, those that desire to establish a link between
Mithras and Jesus must contend with the fact that the existing sources
for Roman Mithraism are all post-Christian and cannot be said to have
influenced Christian doctrine.
I do find it strange that these allegations persist despite the
overwhelming fact that the historicity of the character of Mithras is
incomparable to that of Jesus of Nazareth. Given that Mithras is
obviously a mythical character, and that no evidence exists to show
that a man name Mithras actually lived at some point in history and
had followers in the same sense as the Christian disciples, the notion
of Mithras actually participating in historical events and teaching
actual people is significantly questionable. On the other hand, there
is overwhelming evidence, attested to by multiple independent sources,
that Jesus was a historical figure that actually lived in first
century Palestine, assembled a group of followers, the teachings of
whom were recorded by multiple sources, and was actually put to death
by Roman authorities. Given the amount of historical knowledge that
exists about Jesus of Nazareth, the suggestion that the Christian
tradition "re-branded" Jesus with Mithraic characteristics implies an
unfathomably large conspiracy without a bit of evidence to back it up.
-
Some sources on Mithraism
Mysteries of Mithra by Franz Cumont
The Mysteries of Mithras: The Pagan Belief that Shaped the Christian
World by Caitlin Matthews and Payam Nabarz
The Roman Cult of Mithras: The God and His Mysteries by Manfred Clauss
The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries: Cosmology and Salvation in the
Ancient World, by David Ulansey
.
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
29 May 2007 11:22:29 AM |
|
|
"Sound of Strumpet" <> wrote in message
Jesus is Not a Mithras Redux
Mithraism, as it is germane to Christian historical discussion, was a
mystery religion adopted by the Romans in the 1st century A.D.
Yet Plutarch tells that pirates were practicing the rites of Mithras in the
Empire in 67BC. In Cilicia in fact.
Do we have any early church figure with a connection to Cilicia??
WOW, Saulus of Tarsus (Acts 22: 3), a Herodian (Romans 16: 11), who as a
Herodian was an Idumean, and not really a Jew. But Paul is famous in the
Dead Sea Scrolls as "THE LIAR", so why not lie about his origins.
(I am
careful with my words here, as Mithraism has a previous historical
incantation in ancient Persia, though its relationship to the Roman
tradition, in practice and philosophy, is unclear at this point.) Some
critics claim that Christianity borrowed from the traditions of
Mithraism as a means of attracting followers, though these allegedly
adopted Mithraic traditions were not actually authentic to Jesus. I
believe it is safe to say that, on the basis of historical scholarship
done by secular, Christian and Mithraic-oriented scholars, this claim
is thoroughly without serious basis.
Let's have a quick look at this statement -
The Roman pope has the title pope, which means Papa (Father).
The bible says - Matthew 23: 9 - And do not call anyone on earth 'father,'
for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
But who did have a head called father??
From the catho_lick encylopedia -
There were seven degrees of initiation into the mithraic mysteries. The
consecrated one (mystes) became in succession crow (corax), occult
(cryphius), soldier (miles), lion (leo), Persian (Perses), solar messenger
(heliodromos), and father (pater).
The fathers conducted the worship. The chief of the fathers, a sort of
pope, who always lived at Rome, was called "Pater Patrum" or Pater
Patratus." The members below the degree of pater called one another
"brother," and social distinctions were forgotten in Mithraic unity.
A sacred meal was celebrated of bread and haoma juice for which in the West
wine was substituted. This meal was supposed to give the participants
super-natural virtue.
WOW!! The bible says call no man Father, on this earth, but the head of the
Mithra worship was called Father!!
And the church got it from where??
Give us a fucking break with your drivel!!
At least have to guts to admit where it came from.
Time to snip the rest of the crap!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greywolf" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
29 May 2007 01:59:08 PM |
|
|
"Zadok" <nobler@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
news:9rY6i.61974$V75.44518@edtnps89...
"Sound of Strumpet" <> wrote in message
Jesus is Not a Mithras Redux
Mithraism, as it is germane to Christian historical discussion, was a
mystery religion adopted by the Romans in the 1st century A.D.
Yet Plutarch tells that pirates were practicing the rites of Mithras in
the
Empire in 67BC. In Cilicia in fact.
Do we have any early church figure with a connection to Cilicia??
WOW, Saulus of Tarsus (Acts 22: 3), a Herodian (Romans 16: 11), who as a
Herodian was an Idumean, and not really a Jew. But Paul is famous in the
Dead Sea Scrolls as "THE LIAR", so why not lie about his origins.
I'll read this post in it's entirety later. For now, I'd like to know what
Dead Sea Scroll straight out points the the self-proclaimed 'apostle' Paul
(and no one else) as 'THE LIAR'?
Greywolf
<politely snipped>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Linda Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
29 May 2007 09:39:58 PM |
|
|
On May 29, 2:59 pm, "Greywolf" <greyw...@cybrzn.com> wrote:
"Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
news:9rY6i.61974$V75.44518@edtnps89...
"Sound of Strumpet" <> wrote in message
Jesus is Not a Mithras Redux
Mithraism, as it is germane to Christian historical discussion, was a
mystery religion adopted by the Romans in the 1st century A.D.
Yet Plutarch tells that pirates were practicing the rites of Mithras in
the
Empire in 67BC. In Cilicia in fact.
Do we have any early church figure with a connection to Cilicia??
WOW, Saulus of Tarsus (Acts 22: 3), a Herodian (Romans 16: 11), who as a
Herodian was an Idumean, and not really a Jew. But Paul is famous in the
Dead Sea Scrolls as "THE LIAR", so why not lie about his origins.
I'll read this post in it's entirety later. For now, I'd like to know what
Dead Sea Scroll straight out points the the self-proclaimed 'apostle' Paul
(and no one else) as 'THE LIAR'?
Greywolf
<politely snipped>
It is from the 'Habbakuk Commentary'; see [**************] area
below. It does not name Saul/Paul of Tarsus specifically as The Liar.
It is speculation that it speaks of Paul; however, it sounds right to
me when you compare it with Paul's own writings, which include such
statements to Paul's 'followers' as "being crafty, I caught you with
guile" (II Cor. 12:6), although I don't know if Michael Baigent and
Richard Leigh cited that verse in their book excerpted below.
From:
http://www.mostmerciful.com/scrolls.htm
THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND
THE THREE PERSONALITIES
1. The Teacher of Righteousness
2. The Wicked Priest
3. The Liar
THE COMMUNITY OF ESSENES...
Before the birth of Jesus Christ there lived a secluded
Jewish sect, on the shores of the Dead Sea in Palestine. The sect
lived an ascetic communal life. The adherents were known as the
Essenes. They referred to themselves as the 'Sons of Light'. They
placed great emphasis for the coming of an 'anointed one' - a Messiah,
in their Holy Land. Essenes were known for wearing white garments and
practicing the art of body healing. Some scholars are of the opinion
that a man sitting near the empty tomb of Jesus "wearing a white
robe" (Mark 16:5), or two men "in dazzling apparel" (Luke 24:4), or
"two angels in white" in the spiritualized forth Gospel of John,
belonged to this sect. It is also suggested that an unknown man who
requested Pilate for the body of Jesus and took it with him could be a
healer from this group.
Notwithstanding the veracity of such opinions, writers
of the chronicles and scholars do agree that the greatest known
discovery of manuscripts in our times - the Dead Sea Scrolls, belonged
to the community of Essenes. The recovered manuscripts reflect the
dualistic theology (the on going struggle between the forces of Light
and of Darkness), upheld by the Essenes. No doubt, it is one of the
most exiting archeological finds. These Scrolls contain Books from the
Old Testaments that were written more than a thousand years before the
oldest known text of the Torah. These documents (the biblical texts
and the commentaries) were written during one of the most crucial
period of the Jewish history. These were the times of turbulence for
the Jews of the Holy Land. The anointed one was relentlessly
persecuted by the Pharisees. The Romans tried this man and issued a
death sentence although he posed no threat to their might and glory.
Jews thought they had silenced the voice of Messiah but their acts
gave rise to a new sect of Judaism called - Christianity. The voice
Jesus became immortal.
Envisaging a foreign threat the Essenes living on the
shores of the Dead Sea hid the jars containing their precious
manuscripts in the mountain Caves, located in a valley known as
Qumran. In all about 400 manuscripts have been discovered from the
caves, surrounding the Dead Sea. The scholars have dated these
manuscripts of the Dead Sea Scrolls, ranging from 10 B.C. to 68 A.D.
The Scrolls have proved valuable tools in the reconstruction of
history of the advent of early Christianity. It records the power
struggle between a righteous, an evil and a liar, the hint of this
conflict is to be found in the Book of Acts .
From the jars discovered at Qumran (Cave Number 1) scholars
have discovered an important commentary on the Book of Habakkuk
('Habakkuk Pesher'). The commentary records the defiling of the God's
sanctuary (cf. Acts 21: 28-29), and details of a historical dispute
between the leaders of the early Christians (cf. Acts 21:17-26). In
addition to the 'Habakkuk Commentary' the reference to this individual
who was being accused of falsity and preaching his own doctrine is
also found in the commentary to the Psalm 37 within the Qumran texts.
THE DEAD SEA SCROLL DECEPTION....
Below are the excerpts from the above book. It is a book that tells
you;
"WHY A HANDFUL OF RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS CONSPIRED TO SUPPRESS THE
REVOLUTIONARY CONTENTS OF THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS."
"From the Acts of the Apostles, from Josephus and from early Christian
historians, there emerges a coherent, if still incomplete, portrait of
James,' the Lord's brother'. He appears as an exemplar of
'righteousness' - so much so that 'the Just', or 'the Righteous', is
appended as a sobriquet to his name. He is the acknowledged leader of
a 'sectarian' religious community whose members are 'zealous for the
Law'. He must contend with two quite separate and distinct
adversaries. One of these is Paul, an outsider who, having first
persecuted the community, then converts and is admitted into it, only
to turn renegade, prevaricate and quarrel with his superiors, hijack
the image of Jesus and begin preaching his own doctrine - a doctrine
which draws on that of the community, but distorts it. James's second
adversary is from outside the community - the high priest Ananas, head
of the Sadducee priesthood. Ananas is a notoriously corrupt and widely
hated man. He has also betrayed both the God and the people of Israel
by collaborating with the Roman administration and their Herodian
puppet-kings. James publicly challenges Ananas and eventually meets
his death at the hands of Ananas' minions; but Ananas will shortly be
assassinated in turn. All of this takes place against a backdrop of
increasing social and political unrest and the impending invasion of a
foreign army.
With this scenario in mind, Eisenman turned to the Dead Sea
Scrolls, and particularly the 'Habakkuk Commentary'. When the
fragmentary details of the Qumran texts had been assembled into a
coherent sequence, what emerged was something extraordinarily similar
to the chronicle of Acts, Josephus and early Christian historians. The
scrolls told their own story, at the centre of which was a single
protagonist, the 'Teacher of Righteousness'- an exemplar of the same
virtues associated with James. Like James, the 'Teacher' was the
acknowledged leader of a 'sectarian' religious community whose members
were 'zealous for the Law'. And like James, the 'Teacher' had to
contend with two quite separate and distinct adversaries.
One of these was dubbed the 'Liar' an outsider who was admitted
to the community, then turned renegade, quarrelled with the 'Teacher'
and hijacked part of the community's doctrine and membership.
According to the 'Habakkuk Commentary', the 'Liar' 'did not listen to
the word received by the Teacher of the Righteousness from the mouth
of God'.22 Instead, he appealed to 'the unfaithful of the New Covenant
in that they have not believed in the Covenant of God and have
profaned His holy name'.23 The text states explicitly that 'the
Liar . . . flouted the Law in the midst of their whole congregation'.
24 He 'led many astray' and raised 'a congregation on deceit'.25 He
himself is said to be 'pregnant with [works] of deceit'.26 These, of
course, are precisely the transgressions of which Paul is accused in
Acts - transgressions which lead, at the end of Acts, to the attempt
on his life. And Eisenman stresses Paul's striking hypersensitivity to
charges of prevarication and perjury.27 In 1 Timothy 2:7, for example,
he asserts indignantly, as if defending himself, that 'I am telling
the truth and not lie'. In II Corinthians 11:31, he swears that: 'The
God and Father of the Lord Jesus . . . knows that I am not lying.'
These are but two instances; Paul's letters reveal an almost obsessive
desire to exculpate himself from implied accusations of
falsity." (Pp. 194-195, The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception by Michael
Baigent and Richard Leigh, Summit Books, New York, N.Y., 1991, ISBN:
0671734547)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sayid Abu Khamr al-Murtad" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
26 Jun 2007 04:53:05 PM |
|
|
On May 29, 12:22 pm, "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote:
The Roman pope has the title pope, which means Papa (Father).
The bible says - Matthew 23: 9 - And do not call anyone on earth 'father,'
for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
[...]
WOW!! The bible says call no man Father, on this earth, but the head of the
Mithra worship was called Father!!
And the church got it from where??
Notice that you referred to "the Bible". Well, what the Catholic
Church considers to be "the Bible" includes 1 Timothy 5:1, which
commands the faithful to not be disprespectful towards a Presbyter,
but rather to address him as father. That is a chief source of the
Catholic and Orthodox churches' tendency to call Presbyter's "father".
As for calling the Pope "father," note that he is himself a presbyter
in the Catholic Church. Furthermore, consider Matthew 16:18-19, and
compare it to Isaiah 22:20-22 (the obvious OT parallel). Just as
Eliakim, a sort of vicar or prime minister under the king from the
Davidic line, was a father to Jerusalem and the house of Judah, so too
the Pope (in the chair of Peter), a sort of vicar or prime minister
under the final and eternal King from the Davidic line, is a father to
the members of the Church. In short, that is another reason for
calling the Pope "father" in the Catholic Church (because he is
understood as holding a NT equivalent of the title given to Eliakim).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Linda Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
29 May 2007 09:08:36 PM |
|
|
On May 29, 12:22 pm, "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote:
"Sound of Strumpet" <> wrote in message
Jesus is Not a Mithras Redux
Mithraism, as it is germane to Christian historical discussion, was a
mystery religion adopted by the Romans in the 1st century A.D.
Yet Plutarch tells that pirates were practicing the rites of Mithras in the
Empire in 67BC. In Cilicia in fact.
Do we have any early church figure with a connection to Cilicia??
WOW, Saulus of Tarsus (Acts 22: 3), a Herodian (Romans 16: 11), who as a
Herodian was an Idumean, and not really a Jew. But Paul is famous in the
Dead Sea Scrolls as "THE LIAR", so why not lie about his origins.
(I am
careful with my words here, as Mithraism has a previous historical
incantation in ancient Persia, though its relationship to the Roman
tradition, in practice and philosophy, is unclear at this point.) Some
critics claim that Christianity borrowed from the traditions of
Mithraism as a means of attracting followers, though these allegedly
adopted Mithraic traditions were not actually authentic to Jesus. I
believe it is safe to say that, on the basis of historical scholarship
done by secular, Christian and Mithraic-oriented scholars, this claim
is thoroughly without serious basis.
Let's have a quick look at this statement -
The Roman pope has the title pope, which means Papa (Father).
The bible says - Matthew 23: 9 - And do not call anyone on earth 'father,'
for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
But who did have a head called father??
From the catho_lick encylopedia -
There were seven degrees of initiation into the mithraic mysteries. The
consecrated one (mystes) became in succession crow (corax), occult
(cryphius), soldier (miles), lion (leo), Persian (Perses), solar messenger
(heliodromos), and father (pater).
The fathers conducted the worship. The chief of the fathers, a sort of
pope, who always lived at Rome, was called "Pater Patrum" or Pater
Patratus." The members below the degree of pater called one another
"brother," and social distinctions were forgotten in Mithraic unity.
A sacred meal was celebrated of bread and haoma juice for which in the West
wine was substituted. This meal was supposed to give the participants
super-natural virtue.
WOW!! The bible says call no man Father, on this earth, but the head of the
Mithra worship was called Father!!
And the church got it from where??
Give us a fucking break with your drivel!!
At least have to guts to admit where it came from.
Time to snip the rest of the crap!!
Other than the fact that the Pope is called Poppa/Father, which is
common knowledge, "have the guts" to cite your sources or else your
statements mean absolutely nothing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
29 May 2007 09:43:52 PM |
|
|
Linda Lee <lindagirl444@juno.com> wrote in
news:1180490916.817686.81710@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:
On May 29, 12:22 pm, "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote:
"Sound of Strumpet" <> wrote in message
Jesus is Not a Mithras Redux
Mithraism, as it is germane to Christian historical discussion, was a
mystery religion adopted by the Romans in the 1st century A.D.
Yet Plutarch tells that pirates were practicing the rites of Mithras in
the Empire in 67BC. In Cilicia in fact.
Do we have any early church figure with a connection to Cilicia??
WOW, Saulus of Tarsus (Acts 22: 3), a Herodian (Romans 16: 11), who as
a Herodian was an Idumean, and not really a Jew. But Paul is famous in
the Dead Sea Scrolls as "THE LIAR", so why not lie about his origins.
(I am
careful with my words here, as Mithraism has a previous historical
incantation in ancient Persia, though its relationship to the Roman
tradition, in practice and philosophy, is unclear at this point.)
Some critics claim that Christianity borrowed from the traditions of
Mithraism as a means of attracting followers, though these allegedly
adopted Mithraic traditions were not actually authentic to Jesus. I
believe it is safe to say that, on the basis of historical
scholarship done by secular, Christian and Mithraic-oriented
scholars, this claim is thoroughly without serious basis.
Let's have a quick look at this statement -
The Roman pope has the title pope, which means Papa (Father).
The bible says - Matthew 23: 9 - And do not call anyone on earth
'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
But who did have a head called father??
From the catho_lick encylopedia -
There were seven degrees of initiation into the mithraic mysteries.
The
consecrated one (mystes) became in succession crow (corax), occult
(cryphius), soldier (miles), lion (leo), Persian (Perses), solar
messenger (heliodromos), and father (pater).
The fathers conducted the worship. The chief of the fathers, a sort of
pope, who always lived at Rome, was called "Pater Patrum" or Pater
Patratus." The members below the degree of pater called one another
"brother," and social distinctions were forgotten in Mithraic unity.
A sacred meal was celebrated of bread and haoma juice for which in the
West
wine was substituted. This meal was supposed to give the participants
super-natural virtue.
WOW!! The bible says call no man Father, on this earth, but the head of
the Mithra worship was called Father!!
And the church got it from where??
Give us a fucking break with your drivel!!
At least have to guts to admit where it came from.
Time to snip the rest of the crap!!
Other than the fact that the Pope is called Poppa/Father, which is
common knowledge, "have the guts" to cite your sources or else your
statements mean absolutely nothing.
Appears that he cited the Bible and the Catholic Encyclodepia. Try reading
what he wrote this time.
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
30 May 2007 07:02:45 AM |
|
|
"Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th" <> wrote in message
mean absolutely nothing.
Appears that he cited the Bible and the Catholic Encyclodepia. Try reading
what he wrote this time.
Klazmon.
Linda Lee has trouble with sources.
Her mind is closed, so no matter what sources you quote, she'll deny them,
with nothing to back up what she says.
Smile.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Linda Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
18 Jun 2007 02:00:17 AM |
|
|
On May 30, 8:02 am, "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote:
"Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th" <> wrote in message
mean absolutely nothing.
Appears that he cited the Bible and the Catholic Encyclodepia. Try reading
what he wrote this time.
Klazmon.
LindaLeehas trouble with sources.
Her mind is closed, so no matter what sources you quote, she'll deny them,
with nothing to back up what she says.
Smile.
On May 30, 8:02 am, "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote:
"Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th" <> wrote in message
mean absolutely nothing.
Appears that he cited the Bible and the Catholic Encyclodepia. Try reading
what he wrote this time.
Klazmon.
LindaLeehas trouble with sources.
Her mind is closed, so no matter what sources you quote, she'll deny them,
with nothing to back up what she says.
Smile.
Turns out there were only twenty sites concerning Mithra on the
Catholic Encyclopedia site, and I found what you quoted and what duke
posted from it in reply:
FROM: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10402a.htm (There is more on
Mithraism there if anyone is interested.)
"RELATION TO CHRISTIANITY
A similarity between Mithra and Christ struck even early observers,
such as Justin, Tertullian, and other Fathers, and in recent times has
been urged to prove that Christianity is but an adaptation of
Mithraism, or at most the outcome of the same religious ideas and
aspirations (e.g. Robertson, "Pagan Christs", 1903). Against this
erroneous and unscientific procedure, which is not endorsed by the
greatest living authority on Mithraism, the following considerations
must be brought forward. (1) Our knowledge regarding Mithraism is very
imperfect; some 600 brief inscriptions, mostly dedicatory, some 300
often fragmentary, exiguous, almost identical monuments, a few casual
references in the Fathers or Acts of the Martyrs, and a brief polemic
against Mithraism which the Armenian Eznig about 450 probably copied
from Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428) who lived when Mithraism was
almost a thing of the past -- these are our only sources, unless we
include the Avesta in which Mithra is indeed mentioned, but which
cannot be an authority for Roman Mithraism with which Christianity is
compared. Our knowledge is mostly ingenious guess-work; of the real
inner working of Mithraism and the sense in which it was understood by
those who professed it at the advent of Christianity, we know nothing.
(2) Some apparent similarities exist; but in a number of details it is
quite probable that Mithraism was the borrower from Christianity.
Tertullian about 200 could say: "hesterni sumus et omnia vestra
implevimus" ("we are but of yesterday, yet your whole world is full of
us"). It is not unnatural to suppose that areligion which filled the
whole world, should have been copied at least in some details by
another religion which was quite popular during the third century.
Moreover the resemblances pointed out are superficial and external.
Similarity in words and names is nothing; it is the sense that
matters. During these centuries Christianity was coining its own
technical terms, and naturally took names, terms, and expressions
current in that day; and so did Mithraism. But under identical terms
each system thought its own thoughts. Mithra is called a mediator; and
so is Christ; but Mithra originally only in a cosmogonic or
astronomical sense; Christ, being God and man, is by nature the
Mediator between God and man. And so in similar instances. Mithraism
had a Eucharist, but the idea of a sacred banquet is as old as the
human race and existed at all ages and amongst all peoples. Mithra
saved the world by sacrificing a bull; Christ by sacrificing Himself.
It is hardly possible to conceive a more radical difference than that
between Mithra taurochtonos and Christ crucified. Christ was born of a
Virgin; there is nothing to prove that the same was believed of Mithra
born from the rock. ### Christ was born in a cave; ### and Mithraists
worshipped in a cave, but Mithra was born under a tree near a river.
Much as been made of the presence of adoring shepherds; but their
existence on sculptures has not been proven, and considering that man
had not yet appeared, it is an anachronism to suppose their presence.
(3) Christ was an historical personage, recently born in a well known
town of Judea, and crucified under a Roman governor, whose name
figured in the ordinary official lists. Mithra was an abstraction, a
personification not even of the sun but of the diffused daylight; his
incarnation, if such it may be called, was supposed to have happened
before the creation of the human race, before all history. The small
Mithraic congregations were like masonic lodges for a few and for men
only and even those mostly of one class, the military; a religion that
excludes the half of the human race bears no comparison to the
religion of Christ. Mithraism was all comprehensive and tolerant of
every other cult, the Pater Patrum himself was an adept in a number of
other religions; Christianity was essential exclusive, condemning
every other religion in the world, alone and unique in its majesty."
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions. That could mean
1.) they copied each other 2.) all areas of the world received some
revelation from God or 3.) the 'Devil' incorporated some of the truth
into pagan religions. Personally, I believe all peoples received some
revelation from God. You ought to try to find the book 'World
Religions' by John Bowker. It's an eye-opener.
And I'll be the first to admit that most religions have error in them
as well, in the case of Christianity, the inclusion of Paul's
alternate gospel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Terry" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
24 Jun 2007 03:51:55 AM |
|
|
"Linda Lee" <lindagirl444@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1182150017.363782.301200@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On May 30, 8:02 am, "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote:
"Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th" <> wrote in message
mean absolutely nothing.
Appears that he cited the Bible and the Catholic Encyclodepia. Try
reading
what he wrote this time.
Klazmon.
LindaLeehas trouble with sources.
Her mind is closed, so no matter what sources you quote, she'll deny
them,
with nothing to back up what she says.
Smile.
On May 30, 8:02 am, "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote:
"Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th" <> wrote in message
mean absolutely nothing.
Appears that he cited the Bible and the Catholic Encyclodepia. Try
reading
what he wrote this time.
Klazmon.
LindaLeehas trouble with sources.
Her mind is closed, so no matter what sources you quote, she'll deny
them,
with nothing to back up what she says.
Smile.
Turns out there were only twenty sites concerning Mithra on the
Catholic Encyclopedia site, and I found what you quoted and what duke
posted from it in reply:
FROM: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10402a.htm (There is more on
Mithraism there if anyone is interested.)
"RELATION TO CHRISTIANITY
A similarity between Mithra and Christ struck even early observers,
such as Justin, Tertullian, and other Fathers, and in recent times has
been urged to prove that Christianity is but an adaptation of
Mithraism, or at most the outcome of the same religious ideas and
aspirations (e.g. Robertson, "Pagan Christs", 1903). Against this
erroneous and unscientific procedure, which is not endorsed by the
greatest living authority on Mithraism, the following considerations
must be brought forward. (1) Our knowledge regarding Mithraism is very
imperfect; some 600 brief inscriptions, mostly dedicatory, some 300
often fragmentary, exiguous, almost identical monuments, a few casual
references in the Fathers or Acts of the Martyrs, and a brief polemic
against Mithraism which the Armenian Eznig about 450 probably copied
from Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428) who lived when Mithraism was
almost a thing of the past -- these are our only sources, unless we
include the Avesta in which Mithra is indeed mentioned, but which
cannot be an authority for Roman Mithraism with which Christianity is
compared. Our knowledge is mostly ingenious guess-work; of the real
inner working of Mithraism and the sense in which it was understood by
those who professed it at the advent of Christianity, we know nothing.
(2) Some apparent similarities exist; but in a number of details it is
quite probable that Mithraism was the borrower from Christianity.
Tertullian about 200 could say: "hesterni sumus et omnia vestra
implevimus" ("we are but of yesterday, yet your whole world is full of
us"). It is not unnatural to suppose that areligion which filled the
whole world, should have been copied at least in some details by
another religion which was quite popular during the third century.
Moreover the resemblances pointed out are superficial and external.
Similarity in words and names is nothing; it is the sense that
matters. During these centuries Christianity was coining its own
technical terms, and naturally took names, terms, and expressions
current in that day; and so did Mithraism. But under identical terms
each system thought its own thoughts. Mithra is called a mediator; and
so is Christ; but Mithra originally only in a cosmogonic or
astronomical sense; Christ, being God and man, is by nature the
Mediator between God and man. And so in similar instances. Mithraism
had a Eucharist, but the idea of a sacred banquet is as old as the
human race and existed at all ages and amongst all peoples. Mithra
saved the world by sacrificing a bull; Christ by sacrificing Himself.
It is hardly possible to conceive a more radical difference than that
between Mithra taurochtonos and Christ crucified. Christ was born of a
Virgin; there is nothing to prove that the same was believed of Mithra
born from the rock. ### Christ was born in a cave; ### and Mithraists
worshipped in a cave, but Mithra was born under a tree near a river.
Much as been made of the presence of adoring shepherds; but their
existence on sculptures has not been proven, and considering that man
had not yet appeared, it is an anachronism to suppose their presence.
(3) Christ was an historical personage, recently born in a well known
town of Judea, and crucified under a Roman governor, whose name
figured in the ordinary official lists. Mithra was an abstraction, a
personification not even of the sun but of the diffused daylight; his
incarnation, if such it may be called, was supposed to have happened
before the creation of the human race, before all history. The small
Mithraic congregations were like masonic lodges for a few and for men
only and even those mostly of one class, the military; a religion that
excludes the half of the human race bears no comparison to the
religion of Christ. Mithraism was all comprehensive and tolerant of
every other cult, the Pater Patrum himself was an adept in a number of
other religions; Christianity was essential exclusive, condemning
every other religion in the world, alone and unique in its majesty."
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions. That could mean
1.) they copied each other 2.) all areas of the world received some
revelation from God or 3.) the 'Devil' incorporated some of the truth
into pagan religions. Personally, I believe all peoples received some
revelation from God. You ought to try to find the book 'World
Religions' by John Bowker. It's an eye-opener.
And I'll be the first to admit that most religions have error in them
as well, in the case of Christianity, the inclusion of Paul's
alternate gospel.
While one may find merit in speculating as to why there is such an intrigant
connection
between Roman Christianity and Roman Mithraism, including that the Vatican
sits upon the site of a major Mithras temple, we should not loose site of
the fact that Roman Christianity developed around the people and the culture
of Roman Mithraism. Many of the so called early fathers who championed the
western version of Christianity were pagan worshipers before they converted
to Christianity, so it can be rightly assumed that they would overlay their
previous belief system onto a merging Roman Christianity.
PeterT
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Phipps" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
24 Jun 2007 04:12:58 AM |
|
|
On Jun 24, 4:51 pm, "Peter Terry" <momba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
While one may find merit in speculating as to why there is such an intrigant
connection
between Roman Christianity and Roman Mithraism, including that the Vatican
sits upon the site of a major Mithras temple, we should not loose site of
the fact that Roman Christianity developed around the people and the culture
of Roman Mithraism. Many of the so called early fathers who championed the
western version of Christianity were pagan worshipers before they converted
to Christianity, so it can be rightly assumed that they would overlay their
previous belief system onto a merging Roman Christianity.
Indeed. I found this on the web.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=359
In America:
90% of adults believe in God
51% of adults believe in ghosts
31% of adults believe in astrology
27% of adults believe in reincarnation
There's a lot of overlap to this day between pagan and Christian
beliefs.
Martin
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
24 Jun 2007 10:17:57 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 08:51:55 GMT, "Peter Terry" <mombassa@yahoo.com>
wrote:
While one may find merit in speculating as to why there is such an intrigant
connection
between Roman Christianity and Roman Mithraism, including that the Vatican
sits upon the site of a major Mithras temple, we should not loose site of
the fact that Roman Christianity developed around the people and the culture
of Roman Mithraism. Many of the so called early fathers who championed the
western version of Christianity were pagan worshipers before they converted to
You misspelled "invented"
Christianity, so it can be rightly assumed that they would overlay their
previous belief system onto a merging Roman Christianity.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Phipps" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
24 Jun 2007 04:06:06 AM |
|
|
On Jun 18, 3:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Terry" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
25 Jun 2007 03:30:23 AM |
|
|
"Martin Phipps" <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182675966.015093.67660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 3:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Pity that you have no means to support this.
PeterT
Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Phipps" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
25 Jun 2007 05:42:29 AM |
|
|
On Jun 25, 4:30 pm, "Peter Terry" <momba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182675966.015093.67660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...> On Jun 18, =
3:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Pity that you have no means to support this.
You've got it backwards.
It turns out that the Bible is 100% fiction, including the new
testament.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/lying.htm
"For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory,
why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" (St. Paul, Romans 3.7)
"How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and
for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived." (Bishop Eusebius,
the official propagandist for Constantine, 12th Book of Evangelical
Preparation)
"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events
which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to
posterity." (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2).
"Do you see the advantage of deceit? ...
For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a
mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be
called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and
skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up
for the defects of the mind ...
And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits
by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course
has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."
(John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of
Constantinople, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1)
'Clearly the Christians have used ... myths ... in fabricating the
story of Jesus' birth ... It is clear to me that the writings of the
Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well-enough
constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction.'
- Celsus (On The True Doctrine, c178 AD)
'Only lies have our fathers handed down to us, emptiness in which
there is nothing of any avail!' - Jeremiah 16.19
"Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of
our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his
faith; especially since - as already it has been often proved - these
things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long
while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews,
not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of
reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the
names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to
follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written
their lies and conceits according to them." - Faustus, the Manichean
bishop
'The Church forgery mill did not limit itself to mere writings but
for
centuries cranked out thousands of phony "relics" of its "Lord,"
"Apostles" and "Saints" ... There were at least 26 'authentic' burial
shrouds scattered throughout the abbeys of Europe, of which the Shroud
of Turin is just one ... At one point, a number of churches claimed
the one foreskin of Jesus, and there were enough splinters of the
"True Cross" that Calvin said the amount of wood would make "a full
load for a good ship." ' (Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy)
"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to
be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."
- Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the tireless zealot for papal authority
- he was the founder of the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits)
"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake
of the good and for the Christian church ... a lie out of necessity, a
useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he
would accept them."
- Martin Luther (Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed.,
Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossm=FCthigen von Hessen mit Bucer,
vol. I.)
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they
should believe a lie." - 2 Thessalonians 2.11
'The forgery of pious documents of every imaginable character was
among the most constant and zealous activities of the holy
propagandists of the Christian Faith, from the beginning to the
critical era when forgeries were no longer possible or profitable.' -
Joseph Wheless (1930)
"Unsigned works are a peculiar Christian phenomenon, in works with a
dogmatic, apologetic, and propagandistic aim - in other words, works
already suspect, and thus made even more so by an author's anonymity."
- Richard Carrier
"In reality, the Neronian persecution never occurred. It is a fiction
of the Church, invented for its greater glory." (Arthur Drews, The
Legend of St Peter, p63)
"It is usual for the sacred historian to conform himself to the
generally accepted opinion of the masses in his time.' - St Jerome
(P.L., XXVI, 98; XXIV, 855).
'There is nothing so easy as by sheer volubility to deceive a common
crowd or an uneducated congregation.' - St. Jerome (Epistle. lii, 8;
p=2E 93.)
"There are actually some 200 gospels, epistles and other books
concerning the life of Jesus Christ. Writing such material was a
popular literary form, particularly in the 2nd century. The pious
fantasies competed with Greek romantic fiction. Political
considerations in the late 2nd century led to the selection of just
four approved gospels and the rejection of others. After three
centuries of wrangling 23 other books were accepted by the Church as
divinely inspired. The rest were declared 'pious frauds'. In truth,
the whole lot belongs to a genre of literary FICTION." -
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
We all know that Jehovah is derived from Yahweh. I
read on wikipedia some speculation that Yahweh is
based on the Sumerian god Ea / Enki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahu
"According to some, Yam was also called Ya'a or Yaw.
Damaged text in KTU 1.2 iv has been interpreted by
Mark S. Smith as describing a renaming of Yam from an
original name Yaw. The resemblance of the latter to
the Tetragrammaton YHWH led to speculation over a
possible connection between Yam and God of the Hebrew
Bible. However even if the reading is correct many
scholars argue the names have different roots and
reject the idea that they are related. Another
suggested reading of the name is Ya'a and it has also
been suggested as an early form of the divine name
Yah, Yahu. Earlier archaeologists like Theophilus G.
Pinches[1] quoted the research of Hommel, Professor of
Semitic languages at Munich, who suggested "that this
god Ya is another form of the name Ea...". By this
theory Ya'a thus appears to have been a God of the
waters, both salt (Yam) and fresh (Nahar), in some
ways similar to the Mesopotamian God Ea.[2] This view
has been supported in more recent times by
archaeologists like Jean Bottero[3] and others,[4]
although this is disputed by other scholars.[5][6]"
In Sumerian mythology, Enki was the creator of
mankind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enki
"In Sumerian myth, Enki lay asleep in the depths of
the primeval ocean, unable to hear the lament of the
gods as they complained about the difficulty of
cultivating wheat and making bread. Eventually the
primeval sea, Nammu brought the gods' tears to Enki.
Enki, as the god of wisdom, was expected to devise a
solution, so he solicited Nammu and the birth-goddess
Ninmah to use clay to form the first men, who would
toil and farm so that the gods could relax. [7]
[=2E..]
"Another myth, "Enki and Adapa", tells of how humanity
loses the chance at immortality. Adapa U-an (Berossus'
Oannes), who is Abgallu (Ab =3D Water, Gal =3D Great, Lu =3D
Man) (Akkadian Apkallu), Enki's advisor, to the first
king of Eridu, Allulim, inadvertently breaks the wings
of the South Wind, Ninlil (See Lilith) (Nin =3D Lady,
Lil =3D Air), daughter of Anu (the Heavens) and wife to
Enlil, king of the gods. In terror at the thought of
their retribution, Adapa seeks the advice of Enki.
Enki advises that Adapa make a deep and sincere
atonement, but advises Adapa to eat nothing given to
him by the gods, as he will probably be given the food
of death, out of their anger at his deeds. Adapa takes
Enki's advice, but the gods, so impressed by the
sincerity of Adapa's sorrow and grief as to what he
did, offered instead the fruit of immortality. Adapa
remembering Enki's words, refuses, and so misses out
on the chance of eternal life."
So Enki created man and one of his creations was named
Adapa and Adapa angered the gods and ended up losing
his chance at eternal life.
So who is Satan? "Satan" is a Hebrew word meaning
"adversary".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan
So who was the adversary of Yam? The adversary of Yam
was Baal ("Lord") Hadad.
"Of all the gods, Yam holds special hostility against
Baal Hadad over the divine assembly. Yam is a deity of
the sea and his palace is in the abyss associated with
the depths, or Biblical tehwom, of the oceans. (This
is not to be confused with the abode of Mot, the ruler
of the netherworlds.) In Ugaritic texts, Yam's special
enemy Hadad is also known as the "king of heaven" and
the "first born son" of El, whom ancient Greeks
identified with their god Kronos, just as Baal was
identified with Zeus, Yam with Poseidon and Mot with
Hades. Yam wished to become the Lord god in his place.
In turns the two beings kill each other, yet Hadad is
resurrected and Yam also returns. Some authors have
suggested that these tales reflect the experience of
seasonal cycles in the Levant."
Thus, we can see that Yehweh can be associated with
both the Sumerian god Enki and the Greek god Poseidon
while Hadad can be associated not only with the Greek
god Zeus (and the Roman god Jupiter) but also the
Akkadian god Adad, the Anatolian god Teshub, the
Egyptian god Set and the Sumerian god Ishkur. In
Sumerian mythology, Ishkur was sometimes refered to as
the son of Anu and brother of Enki and sometimes
refered to as the brother of Ishtar and a descendent
of both Enki and his brother Enlil. (See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adad )
That Ishkur was referred to as the son of Anu may be a
mistake based on the fact that he was considered one
of the Anunnaku, the race of beings descended from Anu
collectively known as the sons of Anu. (See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anu )
It is worth pointing out at this point that Anu was
known to the Hebrews as El (See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El ) and that the Annuaki
correspond to the Hebrew Elohim (See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim). The Islamic
name Allah is believed to be derived from the name El.
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah ).
Historically then El (the creator of the universe)
and Yahweh (the creator of mankind) were not the same
god. Judeo-Christian tradition combines the two gods
into one. It would appear as though Genesis chapter
one originally spoke about El and Genesis chapter two
originally spoke about Yehweh.
If El, Yahweh and Hadad were all mythological then the next question
is whether of not Jesus was real. It turns out he wasn't. (See
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com ). Jesus was invented in the first
century AD as a renaming of the five centuries old combination of the
Egyptian god Osiris, who could raise people from the dead, and the
Greek god Dionysus who could turn water into wine. (See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osiris-Dionysus ).
The myth of a god rising from the dead was borrowed not only from
Greek mythology (Adonis rose from the dead) but from Egyptian (Osiris)
and Sumerian mythology (Dumuzi/Tammuz). Even Norse mythology had a
god who rose from the dead, namely Balder. And these gods were all
either the sons, grandsons or great grandsons of the god of their
respective religions, namely Zeus, Amon-Ra, Anu or Odin,
respectively. Adonis was also the daughter of Venus/Aphrodite who was
worshipped in her day much the same way that Mary is worshipped by
Catholics.
Dumuzi/Tammuz was known as the "shepherd king" and may actually have
been a real person (if the "pre flood" Sumerian records are reliable
in this regard). The Sumerian Legend has him married to the "Queen of
Heaven" Ishtar/Inanna. (Similarly, Osiris was married to Isis.) The
Sumerian legend has Ishtar rising from the dead but the gods required
somebody to go to the underworld in her place so Dumuzi took her
place. It was said that Dumuzi rose every spring and returned to the
underworld every winter: this then was the origin of the Christian
festival Easter.
Thousands of years ago the Christian
god was just a god amongst many. (See http://www.crystalinks.com/sumergods=
..html
or http://www.usfca.edu/westciv/Sumerian.html or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Sumerian_gods or
http://www.geocities.com/garyweb65/sumgods.html or
http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.3.1 or
look up the word "Elohim" on wikipedia.) Thousands
of years ago, God was known as "Anu" or the "Sky God" of Sumerian
mythology. We know this because the Bible claims Abraham came from
Ur
which was located in Sumer. (See http://www.earthhistory.org.uk/ )
According to http://www.stevesdinner.plus.com/swd17.htm ,
"Orthodox tradition represents Abraham as a member of a Semitic tribe
from Ur. He probably spoke Akkadian, and the Akkadian counterparts of
the Sumerian gods Enki, An, Enlil, Utu, Nanna, and Inanna would have
been known to Abraham as Ea, Anu, Bel, Shamash, Sin, and Ishtar.
Abraham's tribe left Ur and travelled to Harran in southeastern
Turkey."
[Note: "Bel" is a Sumerian word meaning "Lord" which in this case
refers to Ea's brother.]
There's also the similarity between Sumerian mythology and the Bible:
in Sumerian mythology, the first man was named Adapa!
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adapa ) Later the world was
destroyed by Anu in a great flood from which there was only one
survivor who survived by building a boat that carried him, his family
and all their animals! (See http://www.flood-myth.com/ )
These similarities are pointed out on http://www.historel.net/english/orien=
t/03mesop.htm
which is a theist site that doesn't seem to mind admitting the
similarity between the Bible and other mythology! Yet it still
refers
to "God" as if he actually existed!
The Bible also makes reference to the ancient Hebrew goddess Astarte
and refers to her as the "Queen of Heaven":
"The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the
women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to
pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to
anger." - Jeremiah 7:18
"But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own
mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out
drink
offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings,
and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of
Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw
no evil. But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of
heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all
things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine. And
when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink
offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour
out
drink offerings unto her, without our men?" - Jeremiah 44:17-19
"We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense
to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye
will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows." -
Jeremiah 44:25
The name Astarte is easily associated with that of the Sumerian
goddess Ishtar who was also known as the "Queen of Heaven". (See
http://www.dhushara.com/book/orsin/origsin.htm
http://www.cmy.on.ca/newletters/aug2004.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I=
shtar
and http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/ishtar.html )
Besides mentioning that Abraham came from Ur in Sumer, the Bible also
mentions the city of Babylon and the "Tower of Babel" that was
supposedly built there. The Babylonians were hated by the Hebrews
and
to this day "to babble" means to speak nonsense. The Garden of Eden
was also located in Sumer according to Genesis 2:10-14:
"And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it
was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is
Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where
there is gold; And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium
and the onyx stone. And the name of the second river is Gihon: the
same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. And the name
of
the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east
of
Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates."
The Euphrates river ran through Sumer, which is now Iraq.
It is worth noting that http://www.earthhistory.org.uk/
is actually a theist site! They refer to Anu as " the one God" but
claim that "Ea" and "Bel" were just other names for the same god.
This contradicts the fact that Anu, Ea and Bel were worshipped
separately in Sumer as three distinct Gods. (Anu was the god of the
sky, Bel was the god of wind and Ea was the god of water. Sumerian
mythology claimed that humans were created by Ea.)
According to http://www.crystalinks.com/sumergods.html
"Enki unraveled the secrets of life and death. His emblem was two
serpents ... entwined on a staff - the basis for the winged caduceus
symbol used by modern Western medicine." As Ea was the god of
knowledge, was the guardian of the "Tree of Life" in Sumerian
mythology and he was symbolized by a snake, it stands to reason that
the snake in the myth of the garden of Eden represented Ea. The
Hebrew word "Baal" meant "Lord" and thus "Baal" could have refered to
any god who was known as "Bel" kn the Sumerian panthenon. The
Hebrews
were presumably told by their god to kill all followers of "Baal":
"While the Israelites were camped at Acacia, some of the men defiled
themselves by sleeping with the local Moabite women. These women
invited them to attend sacrifices to their gods, and soon the
Israelites were feasting with them and worshiping the gods of Moab.
Before long Israel was joining in the worship of Baal of Peor,
causing
the LORD's anger to blaze against his people. The LORD issued the
following command to Moses: "Seize all the ringleaders and execute
them before the LORD in broad daylight, so his fierce anger will turn
away from the people of Israel." So Moses ordered Israel's judges to
execute everyone who had joined in worshiping Baal of Peor. Just
then
one of the Israelite men brought a Midianite woman into the camp,
right before the eyes of Moses and all the people, as they were
weeping at the entrance of the Tabernacle. When Phinehas son of
Eleazar and grandson of Aaron the priest saw this, he jumped up and
left the assembly. Then he took a spear and rushed after the man
into
his tent. Phinehas thrust the spear all the way through the man's
body
and into the woman's stomach. So the plague against the Israelites
was stopped, but not before 24,000 people had died." - Numbers 25:1-9
Incidentally, the myth of Moses was probably inspired by the legend
of
the historical pharoah Ahmose. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmose_I
)=2E
What is interesting is that theists today are willing to accept that
their god was the god An of Sumer but they don't see why this should
be a challenge to faith. ( http://www.christianblog.com/blog/thomas/abram-=
was-from-sumer-after-all/
) An was the most powerful god in Sumerian mythology and hence it is
understandable that Abraham would choose him as the "one true god"
and
dismiss all the others but then the question would be if Anu (God)
exists then what about all the other gods.
So God is just a myth created by man to explain the world around him
and give him comfort. If that's not good enough for you, consider
the
fact that God had been used in the past to explain everything from
storms to floods to earthquakes to volcanic eruptions but that we now
have scientific explanations for all of these calamities and thus
don't need to use any gods (let alone God) to explain them. The fact
is that scientists can perform measurements today that agree with the
predictions of quantum theory to ten digit precision and accuracy.
The so called "God of the gaps" has become so infinitessimally small
that we can feel confident that it doesn't exist at all.
Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Linda Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
27 Jun 2007 12:41:07 PM |
|
|
On Jun 25, 6:42 am, Martin Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 25, 4:30 pm, "Peter Terry" <momba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182675966.015093.67660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...> On Jun 18,=
3:00 pm,LindaLee<lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Pity that you have no means to support this.
You've got it backwards.
It turns out that the Bible is 100% fiction, including the new
testament.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/lying.htm
"For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory,
why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" (St. Paul, Romans 3.7)
Outside of Paul's writings, you'll see no one in the NT proclaiming
their belief is a "lie', or "guile", or "pretence". Paul's writings
corrupted the teachings of the true apostles chosen during the
Messiah's lifetime, and it is Paul's false gospel that Eusebius relies
upon when he decides he must deceive in order to gain followers.
"How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and
for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived." (Bishop Eusebius,
the official propagandist for Constantine, 12th Book of Evangelical
Preparation)
"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events
which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to
posterity." (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2).
"Do you see the advantage of deceit? ...
For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a
mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be
called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and
skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up
for the defects of the mind ...
And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits
by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course
has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."
(John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of
Constantinople, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1)
'Clearly the Christians have used ... myths ... in fabricating the
story of Jesus' birth ... It is clear to me that the writings of the
Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well-enough
constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction.'
- Celsus (On The True Doctrine, c178 AD)
'Only lies have our fathers handed down to us, emptiness in which
there is nothing of any avail!' - Jeremiah 16.19
"Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of
our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his
faith; especially since - as already it has been often proved - these
things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long
while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews,
not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of
reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the
names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to
follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written
their lies and conceits according to them." - Faustus, the Manichean
bishop
'The Church forgery mill did not limit itself to mere writings but
for
centuries cranked out thousands of phony "relics" of its "Lord,"
"Apostles" and "Saints" ... There were at least 26 'authentic' burial
shrouds scattered throughout the abbeys of Europe, of which the Shroud
of Turin is just one ... At one point, a number of churches claimed
the one foreskin of Jesus, and there were enough splinters of the
"True Cross" that Calvin said the amount of wood would make "a full
load for a good ship." ' (Acharya S, The Christ Conspiracy)
"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to
be white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."
- Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the tireless zealot for papal authority
- he was the founder of the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits)
"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake
of the good and for the Christian church ... a lie out of necessity, a
useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he
would accept them."
- Martin Luther (Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed.,
Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossm=FCthigen von Hessen mit Bucer,
vol. I.)
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they
should believe a lie." - 2 Thessalonians 2.11
'The forgery of pious documents of every imaginable character was
among the most constant and zealous activities of the holy
propagandists of the Christian Faith, from the beginning to the
critical era when forgeries were no longer possible or profitable.' -
Joseph Wheless (1930)
"Unsigned works are a peculiar Christian phenomenon, in works with a
dogmatic, apologetic, and propagandistic aim - in other words, works
already suspect, and thus made even more so by an author's anonymity."
- Richard Carrier
"In reality, the Neronian persecution never occurred. It is a fiction
of the Church, invented for its greater glory." (Arthur Drews, The
Legend of St Peter, p63)
"It is usual for the sacred historian to conform himself to the
generally accepted opinion of the masses in his time.' - St Jerome
(P.L., XXVI, 98; XXIV, 855).
'There is nothing so easy as by sheer volubility to deceive a common
crowd or an uneducated congregation.' - St. Jerome (Epistle. lii, 8;
p. 93.)
"There are actually some 200 gospels, epistles and other books
concerning the life of Jesus Christ. Writing such material was a
popular literary form, particularly in the 2nd century. The pious
fantasies competed with Greek romantic fiction. Political
considerations in the late 2nd century led to the selection of just
four approved gospels and the rejection of others. After three
centuries of wrangling 23 other books were accepted by the Church as
divinely inspired. The rest were declared 'pious frauds'. In truth,
the whole lot belongs to a genre of literary FICTION." -http://www.jesusn=
everexisted.com/
We all know that Jehovah is derived from Yahweh. I
read on wikipedia some speculation that Yahweh is
based on the Sumerian god Ea / Enki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahu
"According to some, Yam was also called Ya'a or Yaw.
Damaged text in KTU 1.2 iv has been interpreted by
Mark S. Smith as describing a renaming of Yam from an
original name Yaw. The resemblance of the latter to
the Tetragrammaton YHWH led to speculation over a
possible connection between Yam and God of the Hebrew
Bible. However even if the reading is correct many
scholars argue the names have different roots and
reject the idea that they are related. Another
suggested reading of the name is Ya'a and it has also
been suggested as an early form of the divine name
Yah, Yahu. Earlier archaeologists like Theophilus G.
Pinches[1] quoted the research of Hommel, Professor of
Semitic languages at Munich, who suggested "that this
god Ya is another form of the name Ea...". By this
theory Ya'a thus appears to have been a God of the
waters, both salt (Yam) and fresh (Nahar), in some
ways similar to the Mesopotamian God Ea.[2] This view
has been supported in more recent times by
archaeologists like Jean Bottero[3] and others,[4]
although this is disputed by other scholars.[5][6]"
In Sumerian mythology, Enki was the creator of
mankind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enki
"In Sumerian myth, Enki lay asleep in the depths of
the primeval ocean, unable to hear the lament of the
gods as they complained about the difficulty of
cultivating wheat and making bread. Eventually the
primeval sea, Nammu brought the gods' tears to Enki.
Enki, as the god of wisdom, was expected to devise a
solution, so he solicited Nammu and the birth-goddess
Ninmah to use clay to form the first men, who would
toil and farm so that the gods could relax. [7]
[...]
"Another myth, "Enki and Adapa", tells of how humanity
loses the chance at immortality. Adapa U-an (Berossus'
Oannes), who is Abgallu (Ab =3D Water, Gal =3D Great, Lu =3D
Man) (Akkadian Apkallu), Enki's advisor, to the first
king of Eridu, Allulim, inadvertently breaks the wings
of the South Wind, Ninlil (See Lilith) (Nin =3D Lady,
Lil =3D Air), daughter of Anu (the Heavens) and wife to
Enlil, king of the gods. In terror at the thought of
their retribution, Adapa seeks the advice of Enki.
Enki advises that Adapa make a deep and sincere
atonement, but advises Adapa to eat nothing given to
him by the gods, as he will probably be given the food
of death, out of their anger at his deeds. Adapa takes
Enki's advice, but the gods, so impressed by the
sincerity of Adapa's sorrow and grief as to what he
did, offered instead the fruit of immortality. Adapa
remembering Enki's words, refuses, and so misses out
on the chance of eternal life."
So Enki created man and one of his creations was named
Adapa and Adapa angered the gods and ended up losing
his chance at eternal life.
So who is Satan? "Satan" is a Hebrew word meaning
"adversary".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan
So who was the adversary of Yam? The adversary of Yam
was Baal ("Lord") Hadad.
"Of all the gods, Yam holds special hostility against
Baal Hadad over the divine assembly. Yam is a deity of
the sea and his palace is in the abyss associated with
the depths, or Biblical tehwom, of the oceans. (This
is not to be confused with the abode of Mot, the ruler
of the netherworlds.) In Ugaritic texts, Yam's special
enemy Hadad is also known as the "king of heaven" and
the "first born son" of El, whom ancient Greeks
identified with their god Kronos, just as Baal was
identified with Zeus, Yam with Poseidon and Mot with
Hades. Yam wished to become the Lord god in his place.
In turns the two beings kill each other, yet Hadad is
resurrected and Yam also returns. Some authors have
suggested that these tales reflect the experience of
seasonal cycles in the Levant."
Thus, we can see that Yehweh can be associated with
both the Sumerian god Enki and the Greek god Poseidon
while Hadad can be associated not only with the Greek
god Zeus (and the Roman god Jupiter) but also the
Akkadian god Adad, the Anatolian god Teshub, the
Egyptian god Set and the ...
read more =BB
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
25 Jun 2007 09:04:50 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:30:23 GMT, "Peter Terry" <mombassa@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"Martin Phipps" <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182675966.015093.67660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 3:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Pity that you have no means to support this.
That religion is bunk? No objective evidence that any god has ever
objectively existed.
Feel free to post any that you may have.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Terry" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
26 Jun 2007 06:16:39 AM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:f0t0839ninidekp42eq2u7tcr5h7afvhod@4ax.com...
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:30:23 GMT, "Peter Terry" <mombassa@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"Martin Phipps" <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182675966.015093.67660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 3:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Pity that you have no means to support this.
That religion is bunk? No objective evidence that any god has ever
objectively existed.
Feel free to post any that you may have.
I happen to agree with you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
25 Jun 2007 11:40:42 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:30:23 GMT, "Peter Terry" <mombassa@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"Martin Phipps" <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182675966.015093.67660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 3:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Pity that you have no means to support this.
You've kind of got that ***** backwards, don't you, Skippy?
PeterT
Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter Terry" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Is Not A Copy Of Mithras: Another Atheist Myth Debunked |
25 Jun 2007 07:52:59 PM |
|
|
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:qrrv739ivb1tl7us3ab81fvmmi4vfar96m@4ax.com...
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:30:23 GMT, "Peter Terry" <mombassa@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"Martin Phipps" <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182675966.015093.67660@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 3:00 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
Zadok, what you don't seem to understand is that there are
similarities in most all of the world's religions.
The biggest similarity being that every single one of them is bunk.
Pity that you have no means to support this.
You've kind of got that ***** backwards, don't you, Skippy?
How do you figure that Sepo??
PeterT
Martin
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
