Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Iran on the Brink
#21
Patrick.................Enough G-d Dammit!

Its not racism, you blithering Hill Billy Moron. Get your head out of your ass! I'm getting tired of this crap! Gah
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Is Like Herpes, "She Wont Go Away" - Anna Paulina
Reply
#22
(08-04-2018, 10:41 PM)Ron Lambert Wrote: The Catholic Church is a part of the Christian church, and always has been. But long ago it was infiltrated and taken over by a pagan-influenced invasion of people hungry for power, who created the dictatorial Papacy, that has victimized Catholics themselves as much as anyone else.

It is an interesting thesis which I'm mostly in agreement with, but given the importance of the issue, I shall be picky.

Care to clarify the highlighted words? 

Would it not be simpler to state that power itself corrupts regardless of the theology and no paganism is needed to state this?

I have some problems with invasion as well... again, it is a universal phenomenon that any successful growing movement attracts people willing to share in the success, thus a Baal priest circa 400 AD may decide that a carrier move to a Catholic bishop is a good idea.  Invasion? Not quite, but all right. But surely nothing to do with this priest being previously a pagan, merely being a smart politician!
Reply
#23
Many of the teachings that became the official doctrines of the early church (fifth century A.D.) were purely pagan--such as the view that the soul is naturally immortal, that the flesh is inherently evil, that there is an ever-burning hell in which God punishes people forever, and that the pagan festivals should be adopted by the church and called Christian festivals (like Christmas, Easter, observance of Sunday as a rest day) etc. Since only about five percent of the population could read, it was fairly easy for a concerted effort to deceive people to succeed. The argument for doing this was that it would make it easier for pagans to be "converted" to Christianity. This was the thinking behind the Papacy preserving the statues of the pagan god Jupiter and renaming them statues of Peter, the fisherman (which still stand in the Vatican today). Those who knew better and refused to be dragged down into this pagan compromise were forced to flee into the Piedmont mountains, and became those known in history as the Waldenses. The Waldenses, by the way, kept the seventh-day Sabbath for over a thousand years. During that time, the mainstream "Catholic" church martyred an estimated two million Christians who refused to submit to the supreme authority and doctrines of the Papacy. Many of the records of those inquisitions and executions have been preserved, proudly. In almost all of them, one of the charges for which the martyrs were killed was "Judaizing," a codeword that meant keeping the seventh-day Sabbath. Refusing to keep Sunday was seen as a direct rejection of the authority of the Papacy.

The invasion simply consisted of influential church leaders who were pagans who became Christians--at least in name. The bane of all denominations has always been those pastors and clerics who were not really converted. Satan has used such people to try to hijack every church community throughout the ages. Jesus promised that "the gates of hell" will not prevail against the church. (Matt. 16:18) His promise applies even if the gates of hell are IN the church!

The day may come when the moral fall of many churches is so complete, that Jesus will call all His faithful people out of those churches. But that has not happened yet. The Holy Spirit still manifestly ministers in most churches.
Reply
#24
No problem with any of this, but do notice one thing:


The Catholic church retained unreasonable wish for power for centuries after the initial "converts" were gone. 

Thus, it is perhaps prudent to separate the paganism injection in the early days from the power abuse that was most noticeable a millennium later.
Reply
#25
(08-05-2018, 08:55 PM)Palladin Wrote: ...Jump to the conclusion Trump is a hard hearted, unkind, un educated (outside real estate) racist? We have enough evidence to make a reasonable conclusion already now. Are you alluding to the border patrolman who shot the girl in the head? I think he's both a hard core, soul less killer and a pissant coward. I hope he never sleeps decent again until he repents....

You have no evidence to show Trump is a racist. On the contrary, there is plenty to prove he is a well-educated businessman who is totally un-bigoted. Unlike you, and most Democrats who project their own racism onto others, he has put his money where his heart is and lifted many gifted minorities into his successful world, as well as help many who just needed a little help to prosper and be safe. While Obama and the Clintons targeted those who needed help as mere pawns to be played for their votes, Trump has shown Christian charity and a good heart to help for the sake of those who just needed some help.

We already covered the woman shot in the back (not the face) who was accidentally shot in a fire fight started by illegals. It is sad, but condemns no one, and not Trump or anyone on the Right. The Border agents didn't pull the trigger because they were evil - but because they were under attack.

You are on the wrong side. Again.
Reply
#26
(08-06-2018, 10:44 PM)WmLambert Wrote:
(08-05-2018, 08:55 PM)Palladin Wrote: ...Jump to the conclusion Trump is a hard hearted, unkind, un educated (outside real estate) racist? 

You have no evidence to show Trump is a racist. On the contrary, there is plenty to prove he is a well-educated businessman ...

Well, there is no reason why a well-educated (is he?) businessman cannot be a racist or worse, examples are plenty.  

It is irrelevant really if Trump is a racist or not.. this is not a crime in itself or a disqualification from holding an office and everyone on Earth has some biases (and Trump likely fewer than most).   

As a businessman involved in construction business in New York, Trump is undoubtedly a mafia-connected, so any claim about him being racist toward Catholics is likely untrue.  Again, his mafia connections are irrelevant. 

The issue is that Trump is an international criminal who committed a number of capital offenses already and will commit more.

And just having some redeeming features -- like being an entertaining twit -- does not work as a good defense;Hermann Göring also had a plenty of redeeming features.  But to come of this...    perhaps, the Göring discounted outcome is appropriate.
Sodomia delenda est

Reply
#27
(08-07-2018, 01:19 PM)mv Wrote: ...As a businessman involved in construction business in New York, Trump is undoubtedly a mafia-connected, so any claim about him being racist toward Catholics is likely untrue.  Again, his mafia connections are irrelevant. 

The issue is that Trump is an international criminal who committed a number of capital offenses already and will commit more.

And just having some redeeming features -- like being an entertaining twit -- does not work as a good defense;Hermann Göring also had a plenty of redeeming features.  But to come of this...    perhaps, the Göring discounted outcome is appropriate.

You are purposefully clueless.

Being involved in Construction with my family (My oldest son was a Project Manager at the Freedom Tower in New York) I know the mafia is less of a fixture than Progressives who think their connections will allow them to wink-and-nod, and to get away with sub-standard construction practice. It's just an extension of the same wink-and-nod from politics. When I was in Vegas, local Black politicians would come to the front door of the Minority-run construction company looking for contributions. One guy had a chart of how much must be given, The threat was political obstruction. Not mafia - Democrats!

Because of Trump's personal ethics, he has always done things right to benefit the people. That is his reputation in business, so your incorrect and unsubstantiated assumptions are not only clueless, but diametrically-opposed from reality. If anything, you should support him as one of the few businessmen who do things right. Ask yourself why the Wollman skating rink in New York wasted millions of tax-payer dollars and years of futility while the mayor ran the project? Trump stepped in and fixed it under time and under budget within four months. No mafia in sight.

BTW, Trump has no capital offenses. Unlike Obama, who didn't respond when his red line was violated, Trump did respond, to protect the Syrians against future WMD. Also unlike the Clintons, who have entire cemeteries filled with their political opposition, not to mention the Haitian people. Beware of projection. Almost anything alleged against Trump links back to the accusers.
Reply
#28
Ron,

Tons of "Christian ideas" are pagan in origin. Literal Hellfire is Plato's idea( I think he got it from Egypt), the simple idea people are "going to heaven" is a pagan thought, not a Jewish/Christian idea. Not a single sentence in the bible about that and yet it's a mainstay of the faith. In fact, the bible has it exactly the opposite, heaven comes to earth.

There are a ton of these type things.

Lots our views of God are flawed. In particular western Christianity is not close to what Jesus and Paul preached. You don't know it but we all accepted the most flawed ideas of Catholic doctrine, i.e. eternal punishment( annihilation or hell doesn't matter), penal substitution which posits God was estranged from us whereas the bible has it the other way around, we are estranged from God, etc.
Reply
#29
(08-08-2018, 12:19 PM)Palladin Wrote: Ron,

Tons of "Christian ideas" are pagan in origin. Literal Hellfire is Plato's idea( I think he got it from Egypt), the simple idea people are "going to heaven" is a pagan thought, not a Jewish/Christian idea. Not a single sentence in the bible about that and yet it's a mainstay of the faith. In fact, the bible has it exactly the opposite, heaven comes to earth.

There are a ton of these type things.

Lots our views of God are flawed. In particular western Christianity is not close to what Jesus and Paul preached. You don't know it but we all accepted the most flawed ideas of Catholic doctrine, i.e. eternal punishment( annihilation or hell doesn't matter), penal substitution which posits God was estranged from us whereas the bible has it the other way around, we are estranged from God, etc.

As I have mentioned several times, the Old Testament Bible, was written by believers, who do so as a teaching tool, and history lesson that even the unwashed masses could understand.  And that is where the term 'allegory' comes.  Write stories that are loosely based on some historic event, which teaches morality, and some basic history based on those morals.  

This is where the moral interpretation of the bible, written by humans, was not meant to be taken in its literal sense.  Its the concept of the Creator, and the universal rules of morality, which matter.  For example Jonah wasn't swallowed by a whale(great fish).  He was almost certainly swallowed by a terrible moral uncertainty, or dilemma.  The bible is filled with these stories, and were not really meant to be taken literally.  It was meant so as to be clearly understood by even the simplest of the simple.  

But the presence of our Savior, that is a multi-witnessed historic event, is impossible to change into anything but fact. Some things may be less than fact, but overall, it is historical in nature.

One other thing: many directives, and laws, in the OT are exactly the same thing, almost word for word, what were written well before the bible was written.  And they appear in the archaeological record, written in cuneiform in Mesopotamian antiquity, while the tribes of Israel were goat herders in the hills, centuries before they came down into the Jordan River valley.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Is Like Herpes, "She Wont Go Away" - Anna Paulina
Reply
#30
Agree generally although I don't have a strong feel for how much stuff is metaphor and isn't. I am open to the possibility on any particular storyline.

Here's something I learned after I took some OT theology courses. The basic laws/culture/religious zeitgeist( such as animal sacrifices) of ancient Israel existed before ancient Israel. As you know.

The way I understand it is God worked within the existing culture "including myths" on ancient Israel, God didn't create that culture. His goal ultimately was to "fix humanity" so to speak and I believe He succeeded in Christ.


It was actually a big relief to me when I came to see it this way. Mythical stuff no longer needed either explanation or defending. Anti scientific ancient thinking no loner needs it, etc.


Things like HaShem being "in the clouds" all the time was how the neighbors of Israel saw their high gods, always in the clouds. Leviathan, Behemoth, etc. Everyone over there feared those things so God wisely IMO inspired use of them in the polemical writings, it was ancient folks that it was penned for originally, not us.
Reply
#31
Palladin, the judaic/hebraic culture and religion before Christ and back to the escape from Egypt was completely pagan. They had cults and idols just identical to the Roman's, the Greak's or the Assyrian's. They just decided at some point that they had only one god to mark their identity. It was the god identifying the jewish nation.
It has been a very long way to reach the puritan monotheism judaism we know today. Christianism and pre-christianist monasteries (Qumram) helped a great deal into forming the judaic religion during, before and later the time of Christ.
Reply
#32
Fred,

Well, it stands to reason Jews originally worshipped various gods since they were in Egypt for centuries and had not had time to develop a deep understanding of YHWH just in the Abraham, Isaac and Jacob days.

Moses for example did not know who YHWH was when He approached Moses, Moses asked God, "Who do I tell them you are"?

Having said that, I don't think it worked out from polytheism to "Judaism" over a long era myself. Whether the crossing of the sea is metaphor or fact, the Jews at that point I believe formally were worshipping YHWH alone unless they became apostates to other deities.

A point rarely considered in the "history of religions" view is the God of the Jews was transcendent and the gods of all the nations were not, they were what's called "in continuity" with creation. i.e. a god was like a king, he/she was more powerful than we were, but, the deity was not superior to the people morally, did not instruct the people to be good, in fact instructed them to be cruel and evil in some cases.

That's why it was common back then for people to assume a king could become a deity, that was the next logical step the way pagans thought. Hierarchy was big in pagan religions, absent was quality or transcendence.

BTW, modern monotheism has nothing to do with the ancient Jewish view of their God. Nothing at all, it's a post enlightenment idea, the ancient Jews and this is demonstrable in the OT text believed there were 2 separate/equal YHWH's. 1 they could see, 1 invisible. The shema( Hear o Israel, YHWH our God is ONE) was not taken to mean 1 as a number, but as a metaphor for unity of purpose compared to the fighting among the pagan gods for pre eminence.




The ancient Hebrew word for 1 in that text is echad and it isn't the best word for 1 as a number. It's got a plural connotation of unity:

http://www.bible.ca/trinity/trinity-onen...-echad.htm
Reply
#33
(08-08-2018, 06:15 PM)Palladin Wrote: ...modern monotheism has nothing to do with the ancient Jewish view of their God. Nothing at all, it's a post enlightenment idea, the ancient Jews and this is demonstrable in the OT text believed there were 2 separate/equal YHWH's. 1 they could see, 1 invisible. The shema( Hear o Israel, YHWH our God is ONE) was not taken to mean 1 as a number, but as a metaphor for unity of purpose compared to the fighting among the pagan gods for pre eminence.

For anyone who has actually studied the history of religion, Judaism is marked as one of the first religions to have a male Godhead. Earlier beliefs revolved around the fecundity of the female. The Earth Mother and all that...

The masculine religion was fortified by the benefit to males in general.
Reply
#34
One thing about male dominated religions, as well as monotheistic ones, the oldest major religion to incorporate both would be Zoroastrianism. This site places its rise as 10,000-7,000 BC, but I would probably go with the later, or somewhere in between. We need to remember that before the rise of agriculture, women had pretty much equal status to men. While the men were out hunting and "bringing home the bacon" the women were at the home/camp/headquarters, taking care of things, including raising the children. They were also the chief 'gatherers' of subsistence. It wasn't until men settled down to grow crops, and their need to remain at home, that they began taking the lead. And that would be when male deities developed.

And Zorastrianism seems to be the oldest known example of this. And because of this, it directly influenced the other ones. The Jews picked up a great deal of their religious thought from the Zorastrian Persians, who freed them from Babylon. That's where so many things entered the Old Testament.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton Is Like Herpes, "She Wont Go Away" - Anna Paulina
Reply
#35
Don't forget the Egyptian sun-god, Ra. He was masculine, and there was a faction that held he was the supreme god.

Psalms 110:1 has long been used by Christians as a proof-text for the divinity of Jesus: "The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." Jesus quoted this in Matt. 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:43, and followed it up with a question about who this second Lord was. This was also quoted by Peter in his sermon on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:35), and by the author of Hebrews (Heb. 1:13).

Most Christians today also believe that the Holy Spirit is a distinct Person, resulting in a Divine Trinity. Some Christians in the New Testament insisted on being rebaptized into this "new light" about the Holy Spirit (see Acts 19:2-6).

Probably the best effort by Christian theologians at explaining how three Persons can be "One" is that they are one in purpose, as Palladin suggested, as a contrast to the pagan gods who were depicted as often squabbling. (Good suggestion, Palladin.) I knew a guy who suggested that God the Father sort of divided Himself into a Son and Holy Spirit. But he took a lot of heat for daring to liken God to an amoeba. Most of us feel it is usually best not to speculate in that area. Jesus said: "God is Spirit" (John 4:24). But we do not even know what spirit is. Jesus went on to say that those who worship God must worship Him "in spirit and in truth." Which was like saying God is Goodness and Truth and Life. In a spiritual sense, those things are all part of the same thing. So that probably comes the closest to expressing the relation between the members of the Trinity. The Father is Goodness, the Son is Truth, and the Holy Spirit is Life.
Reply
#36
Ron,

Check out that video, Dr Heiser shows how there are 2 obvious YHWH's in the OT text.
Reply
#37
(08-07-2018, 02:12 PM)WmLambert Wrote: You are purposefully clueless.

Being involved in Construction with my family (My oldest son was a Project Manager at the Freedom Tower in New York) I know the mafia is less of a fixture than Progressives ....Not mafia - Democrats!

Indeed. The Democrats. Just like Trump's son-in-law's father, this would connect all the dots you may need.

However, I did say I do not mind Trump's connections with mafia and Democrats and Republicans at al.. these are not capital offenses.

Quote:Because of Trump's personal ethics, he has always done things right to benefit the people.

BTW, Trump has no capital offenses. Unlike Obama, who didn't respond when his red line was violated, Trump did respond, to protect the Syrians against future WMD.

Now, you are funny. There is one and only one country on this planet that produces and routinely uses WMD. You know which one too.

But I was not referring to the missile attack on Syria -- that's a minor crime, worth a few years in jail perhaps.

Now, Genocide is a bit more serious, you know what happened to some good businessmen in Nuremberg? And Trump is conducting genocide in at least three countries.

The latest installment of Trump's personal ethics is the murder of about 50 children in Yemen.

You can see some footage
here. Unlike the chemical weapons stages crap, this is real.

And this is daily.

Hillary was getting orgasms from the footage of Gaddafi murder ... would it be wrong to think that Trump likes kids better ? S6
Sodomia delenda est

Reply
#38
(08-09-2018, 04:36 PM)mv Wrote: ...There is one and only one country on this planet that produces and routinely uses WMD.  You know which one too.

Yes, and when they crossed the red line we sent missiles at their stockpiles of chemical agents. The USA does not use WMD, however, Russia is accused of using isotopes to assassinate spies.

Do you routinely watch Australian news stations, or did this just pop up when searching the web for anything that you can use as propaganda?
Reply
#39
No, Wm, no need to be funny. The only country that produces and routinely uses WMD is the United States of America.

And yes, they also like accuse others of doing bad things... wonder just why they are doing the latter?

As for Australian link : relatively free media. And this creates a bit of a problem for you : accuse the Australian BBC of lying -- or be just like those
poor Hanses in 1945 who said they knew nothing.

You know what? Some of them really knew nothing. In the age of internet, you have no such excuse. S6

BBC UK:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-45128367
RT:
https://www.rt.com/news/435512-yemen-chi...ifications
CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/09/middleeas...index.html
NBC:
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/saudi-led-...5637059897

.......

So, yes, Trump murdered those kids all right. It is the US army that directing genocide in Yemen, and it is Trump who is in charge.

Are you applauding or condemning? Or just keeping your head in the sand?
Sodomia delenda est

Reply
#40
Yes William, the USA uses WMD. Good grief dude.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  North Korea on brink of first nuclear blast, warn Americans Gunnen4u 15 4,310 05-10-2005, 02:07 PM
Last Post: Ron Lambert

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)