When Jesus..........

[OZman]

He spoke as a human being, an Ebionite/Nazarene, and definitely not as God incarnate as the Roman church would have us believe.

 

[Disir]

Ok, so Jesus is divine and not human and divine.

I use to believe in the trinity, but I no longer do. Jesus is very introspective as he likes to spend much time in meditation and prayer, which he teaches to his disciples. So Jesus is human.

In the years before the introduction of the Christian religion, Roman inhabitants of the empire worshipped the god Mithra for close to well over 400 years. Mithraism was regarded as the primary closing religion of the Roman Empire, and later eventually becoming the principal ranked competing rival to Christianity after its uprising.



The first written mention of Mitra dates back around 3,500 years in the Hindu Vedas, and then assumingly spread to Persia and reached west throughout the entire length of the Roman border to Scotland. It is still regarded as one of the most universal religions and greatest mystery cults in the Western World. Its mysteries that spread by the Romans likewise had a large significant importance on the development of early Christianity during its first four centuries.



Both Roman Mithraism, like Iranian Mithraism were cults of loyalty toward its king. Many prominent Roman figures were among its initiates, and were encouraged by various Roman emperors, such as Commodus, Aurelian, Diocletian, Galerius and Licinius.



In 307, a temple was even dedicated to Mithra and he officially became the "Protector of the Empire". The birthday of Mithra furthermore occurred during the Winter Solstice that celebrated the Natalis Solis Invicti onDecember 25th. This large celebration was known for signaling the birth of a young Sun god who sprang from a rock or a cave in the form of a newborn infant.



His triumph and ascension was celebrated at Easter, and as being the god of light, he also preformed the usual assortment of miracles; such as raising the dead, healing the sick, and casting out devils. Before returning to heaven, he celebrated a last supper with his 12 disciples on the zodiac. In memory of this, his worshippers partook in a sacramental meal of bread marked with a cross. It was called mizd, Latin missa, Greek maza, English mass.

In 313 CE, the official birthday of Jesus in alignment with Mithra also became December 25th. In the year 375 CE, Pope Julius I likewise declared the Nativity of the birth of Jesus as December 25th to align followers of the Sun god Mithra. This event became the very motivation as to why Jesus received his official birth anniversary on December 25th in accordance of the ancient pagan resurrecting solar godman in the Roman Empire, as before that, no one knew of his historical birth. St. Augustine even went as far as declaring that the priests of Mithra worshipped the same deity as he did.



Paul equally attested to knowing nothing about Jesus' birth, ministry and healings, which was alarming, as the origins of Christianity itself derive from Paul, and not Jesus. Paul doesn't even quote anything that Jesus is alleged to have said, nor did any of Jesus' original twelve disciples write of his teaching.



Afterwards, St. Augustine wrote that Christians ought not to celebrate Jesus' birth, like the heathens do on account of the Sun, but rather on account of god who made the Sun. The early Jesus was regarded so much a Sun god himself to the ancients, that the term Jesus of Nazareth (Nazaroth) in Hebrew is actually the twelve signs of the zodiac. No city by this name existed during this time. A church council further declared that it would be wrong to celebrate the birthday of Jesus as though he were a King Pharaoh.



Eventually though, this festival of "Christmas" became a civic holiday by the emperor Justinian where the events became so customary that it begun marking the beginning of the ceremonial year for Christians. The use of giving gifts, holly, mistletoe, yule logs, fruitcake, ringing bells, candles, wassail bowls, and decorating a tree however all derived from early pagan customs.



Many European countries still call this celebration "Yuletide" (or wheel of the Sun) A harvesting festival celebrated at the end of the year. None of which derive from Christian origins.

The Vatican / RCC still worships the sun god and the demon god they worship Mary comes from the early temple worship of the goddess Diana I am told. The apparitions and messages from the demon are all a lie to deceive the people who do not realize the truth about the Catholic organization. Same demon - mary demon - and is also referred to as "Queen of heaven". It is all of the occult and has nothing to do with the early church, Guno, because the Romans slaughtered the early Christians and would not permit the Bible to be read - the entire religion is based on the worship of Lucifer and demons. It has nothing to do with Christianity. In closing during the inquistions who did the Romans murder again? The Christians and the Jews. In the Holocaust who was friendly with Hitler and the Nazis and even assisted Nazis in their escape to Argentina? The Vatican and namely the Jesuits assisted the Nazis. It is evil at its roots. Nothing Christian about it. I have great sympathy for the people who were born into the Roman Catholic Church - I was also born into a family that was staunch Roman Catholics - by God's grace I never accepted it and refused to take it seriously even as a young child I rejected it and saw through it. By the Grace of God I was not deceived by Lucifer. To God be the Glory.

The Romans didn't slaughter the early Christians. In fact, it was the Spanish Inquisition. OK. It's all deranged. Have you thought about taking a small break?

Excuse me, Disir, but yes they did. Nero had Rome set on fire and then blamed it on the protestant Christians in order to destroy them. The Christians were fed to the lions by the Romans. What history books are you reading anyhow?

I have a Jewish friend who wrote about the Inquisition and would strongly disagree with you as it was indeed the Catholic Church that approved the tortures, the murders, burning people at the stake, burying them alive,( nailing the tongues of Christians to the roofs of the mouths you will find on internet - the stories too ) and again with the Holocaust there were millions of born again Christians who went to their deaths with the Jews rather than to save their own lives.

Have I ever thought of taking a small break? Would a soldier on the front lines take a small break? God forbid, Disir! God forbid!

Nero didn't set Rome on fire. Most of the structures were wooden. They were prone to fire. Since Nero's palace was burned as well it is unlikely that he started the fire. He wasn't even in Rome when it started. There were very few actual Christian Martyrs. Recent excavations in the Colosseum show what has been suspected-that it didn't happen. The accounts were written about a century afterward. Nor would there have ever been any way to differentiate between Catholics and Protestants at that time.

How about backing up that claim with a ? Here are a few that argues with this statement.
Did Nero really fiddle while Rome burned Ask HISTORY History Q A
also
Colosseum Christian Martyrs



You have lost your mind.

Why is it, when people post 'you have lost your mind,' they never back up their theories, with any evidence?[/QUOTE]
____________________________________________________________________
The first link supports what I just said. Blaming is not the same as actually persecuting.
History Travel Arts Science People Places Smithsonian

 

[shart_attack]

Why is it, when people post 'you have lost your mind,' they never back up their theories, with any evidence?

There is a very interesting, informative article about Emperor Nero in the September 2014 issue of National Geographic.

Anyone here who hasn't read it should get a copy.

 

[MaxGrit]

Ok, Max. I put the author's information up so that no one would feel like it was a trick question gotcha moment and as a heads up to the rest of the atheists that it wasn't the intention of this thread for a trick question gotcha moment. The author presents the information in as neutral a way as possible. Acknowledgement does not equal support or opposition. He covers the councils, the politics, and some of the violence. He is not my only source. I have a myriad of books that are written by Christians of all denominations, Rabbis and atheists. Many are for history and many are for conflict resolution.

My answer is what God said is the best way to approach the issue.

 

[Disir]

Why is it, when people post 'you have lost your mind,' they never back up their theories, with any evidence?

There is a very interesting, informative article about Emperor Nero in the September 2014 issue of National Geographic.

Anyone here who hasn't read it should get a copy.

And at the site:
In addition to the Gymnasium Neronis, the young emperor’s public building works included an amphitheater, a meat market, and a proposed canal that would connect Naples to Rome’s seaport at Ostia so as to bypass the unpredictable sea currents and ensure safe passage of the city’s food supply. Such undertakings cost money, which Roman emperors typically procured by raiding other countries. But Nero’s warless reign foreclosed this option. (Indeed, he had liberated Greece, declaring that the Greeks’ cultural contributions excused them from having to pay taxes to the empire.) Instead he elected to soak the rich with property taxes—and in the case of his great shipping canal, to seize their land altogether. The Senate refused to let him do so. Nero did what he could to circumvent the senators—“He would create these fake cases to bring some rich guy to trial and extract some heavy fine from him,” says Beste—but Nero was fast making enemies. One of them was his mother, Agrippina, who resented her loss of influence and therefore may have schemed to install her stepson, Britannicus, as the rightful heir to the throne. Another was his adviser Seneca, who was allegedly involved in a plot to kill Nero. By A.D. 65, mother, stepbrother, and consigliere had all been killed.
Rethinking Nero



That's why he was demonized.

 

[shart_attack]

Why is it, when people post 'you have lost your mind,' they never back up their theories, with any evidence?

There is a very interesting, informative article about Emperor Nero in the September 2014 issue of National Geographic.

Anyone here who hasn't read it should get a copy.

And at the site: In addition to the Gymnasium Neronis, the young emperor’s public building works included an amphitheater, a meat market, and a proposed canal that would connect Naples to Rome’s seaport at Ostia so as to bypass the unpredictable sea currents and ensure safe passage of the city’s food supply. Such undertakings cost money, which Roman emperors typically procured by raiding other countries. But Nero’s warless reign foreclosed this option. (Indeed, he had liberated Greece, declaring that the Greeks’ cultural contributions excused them from having to pay taxes to the empire.) Instead he elected to soak the rich with property taxes—and in the case of his great shipping canal, to seize their land altogether. The Senate refused to let him do so. Nero did what he could to circumvent the senators—“He would create these fake cases to bring some rich guy to trial and extract some heavy fine from him,” says Beste—but Nero was fast making enemies. One of them was his mother, Agrippina, who resented her loss of influence and therefore may have schemed to install her stepson, Britannicus, as the rightful heir to the throne. Another was his adviser Seneca, who was allegedly involved in a plot to kill Nero. By A.D. 65, mother, stepbrother, and consigliere had all been killed.
Rethinking Nero

That's why he was demonized.

Either way, I'm still pretty sure I wouldn't have wanted to have been a Christian in Nero's Rome.

 

[Disir]

Why is it, when people post 'you have lost your mind,' they never back up their theories, with any evidence?

There is a very interesting, informative article about Emperor Nero in the September 2014 issue of National Geographic.

Anyone here who hasn't read it should get a copy.

And at the site: In addition to the Gymnasium Neronis, the young emperor’s public building works included an amphitheater, a meat market, and a proposed canal that would connect Naples to Rome’s seaport at Ostia so as to bypass the unpredictable sea currents and ensure safe passage of the city’s food supply. Such undertakings cost money, which Roman emperors typically procured by raiding other countries. But Nero’s warless reign foreclosed this option. (Indeed, he had liberated Greece, declaring that the Greeks’ cultural contributions excused them from having to pay taxes to the empire.) Instead he elected to soak the rich with property taxes—and in the case of his great shipping canal, to seize their land altogether. The Senate refused to let him do so. Nero did what he could to circumvent the senators—“He would create these fake cases to bring some rich guy to trial and extract some heavy fine from him,” says Beste—but Nero was fast making enemies. One of them was his mother, Agrippina, who resented her loss of influence and therefore may have schemed to install her stepson, Britannicus, as the rightful heir to the throne. Another was his adviser Seneca, who was allegedly involved in a plot to kill Nero. By A.D. 65, mother, stepbrother, and consigliere had all been killed.
Rethinking Nero

That's why he was demonized.

Either way, I'm still pretty sure I wouldn't have wanted to have been a Christian in Nero's Rome.

Fast food and bars.

Why would anyone want to go back to that time period? Or any other? History is a lot like my version of camping. I love the outdoor world: hiking etc. Then I want a motel room with air-conditioning, hot showers and cable near take away food.

 

[MaxGrit]

Satan, in his pride, thought he could become like God. Satan was made insane by sin, a finite creature that thinks he's equal to the infinite Creator.

Isaiah 14

When the Lord has given you rest from your pain and turmoil and the hard service with which you were made to serve, you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:

“How the oppressor has ceased,
the insolent fury ceased!
The Lord has broken the staff of the wicked,
the scepter of rulers,
that struck the peoples in wrath
with unceasing blows,
that ruled the nations in anger
with unrelenting persecution.
The whole earth is at rest and quiet;
they break forth into singing.
The cypresses rejoice at you,
the cedars of Lebanon, saying,
‘Since you were laid low,
no woodcutter comes up against us.’
Sheol beneath is stirred up
to meet you when you come;
it rouses the shades to greet you,
all who were leaders of the earth;
it raises from their thrones
all who were kings of the nations.
All of them will answer
and say to you:
‘You too have become as weak as we!
You have become like us!’
Your pomp is brought down to Sheol,
the sound of your harps;
maggots are laid as a bed beneath you,
and worms are your covers.
“How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!
You said in your heart,
‘I will ascend to heaven;
above the stars of God
I will set my throne on high;
I will sit on the mount of assembly
in the far reaches of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.’
But you are brought down to Sheol,
to the far reaches of the pit.
Those who see you will stare at you
and ponder over you:
‘Is this the man who made the earth tremble,
who shook kingdoms,
who made the world like a desert
and overthrew its cities,
who did not let his prisoners go home?’
All the kings of the nations lie in glory,
each in his own tomb;
but you are cast out, away from your grave,
like a loathed branch,
clothed with the slain, those pierced by the sword,
who go down to the stones of the pit,
like a dead body trampled underfoot.
You will not be joined with them in burial,
because you have destroyed your land,
you have slain your people.
“May the offspring of evildoers
nevermore be named!
Prepare slaughter for his sons
because of the guilt of their fathers,
lest they rise and possess the earth,
and fill the face of the world with cities.”

It says "the King of Babylon" and says nothing about Satan.
​

King of Babylon is a title of Satan, the insane slanderer. Satan has insanity of the highest degree, enough that he slandered God. Satan was made insane by sin.

That is only an interpretation, loosely based on scripture. It is not scripture itself. It is far more likely that this passage was referring to a mortal being, even as some translations of that passage refer to the King of Babylon as "Lucifer". This passage is the only place in the entire Bible that such a name can be found, and there is absolutely no Biblical proof that the names "Lucifer" and "Satan" are mentioning the same being. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that "Satan has insanity of the highest degree", or that "Satan was made insane by sin".​

The Bible doesn't say a lot of things because it's not God's catalog of all truths.

Satan had another name before he went insane from sin; afterwards he is known as Slanderer (Satan).

This is a very brief description describing the angel known as Day Star, also known as Slanderer, or Satan (stars represent angels in Bible):

“How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!
You said in your heart,
‘I will ascend to heaven;
above the stars of God
I will set my throne on high;
I will sit on the mount of assembly
in the far reaches of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.’
But you are brought down to Sheol,
to the far reaches of the pit.

 

[shart_attack]

Ok, Max. I put the author's information up so that no one would feel like it was a trick question gotcha moment and as a heads up to the rest of the atheists that it wasn't the intention of this thread for a trick question gotcha moment. The author presents the information in as neutral a way as possible. Acknowledgement does not equal support or opposition. He covers the councils, the politics, and some of the violence. He is not my only source. I have a myriad of books that are written by Christians of all denominations, Rabbis and atheists. Many are for history and many are for conflict resolution.

My answer is what God said is the best way to approach the issue.

You have no answers, because the only scriptures with which you're even remotely familiar are about the devil.

And as Ashy has shown us in this thread, you're not very skilled at even understanding those.

It's like reading Beavis and Butthead Go to Seminary, reading your posts.

 

[MaxGrit]

The saints will have some insight to what I meant and might understand the message behind my answer. I kept my reply consistent with the mysteries which are revealed by the Holy Spirit as the teacher of truth.

No other people will be able to truly understand the truth that lies in the Bible, no matter how much knowledge they obtain. No amount of rationalization and pontification on theological theories, done by their own effort, will reveal to them the truth.

 

[MaxGrit]

This part of the reply was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
+++++
They seek God by their own effort, in their ivory towers of knowledge and learning, amassing knowledge without comprehension.
+++++