Why did Christians build Churches over existing Pagan temples?

[waltky]

I dunno...

... so' dey'd have a ready-made basement?

 

[Penelope]

They have the wrong Jesus. Funny , the HS said he did not have sex with that woman,
as far as I know the RCC agrees, her hymen was said to be intact, and just the Holy Spirit hovering over her made her with child.

it would be interesting to know his blood type

Whose? Many were named Jesus in those days, Jesus Barabbas, the revolutionary who was set free.

oh ---the one they claimed was a "thief"-----watta joke----unless he stole something from a roman pig----he wouldn't have been crucified. Romans crucified for two reasons-----sedition against rome and to entertain the vestal sluts when
there were no lions around to eat little children, Jesus of Nazareth was crucified for his violent action against the ROMAN SHIT in the temple courtyard-----not for claiming to be a king ----silly lie. Barabbas could very well have been a rebel against the filth of rome------probably a nice guy ---not a common thief as your catechism whore claimed. Jesus was a fairly common name as was Mary-----practically the Jane Smith of the time. Joseph was common too.

No, Pilate did it to pacify the jews , according to the scriptures. He didn't want to, he found no problem with Jesus and his hands were clean. PS: the vestal virgins were not sluts they were virgins. They were in Rome, not Jerusalem.

The story in the NT that Pilate "DID IT TO PACIFY THE JEWS"---is bullshit------in the course of his ten year stint
as prelate of Judea---Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-----In fact---rome recalled him because his
typical roman filth and barbarity was getting out of hand. The Vestal sluts -----were sluts----try reading a bit more about that
gaggle of whores-------of course they were not in Jerusalem---the people of Jerusalem did not tolerate the money changer shit----why would they tolerate a gaggle of roman whores. The vestal sluts were better entertained in rome-----they got
off on watching men kill each other and seeking children eaten by lions

Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-

Back it up with your link???

 

[aris2chat]

Your right the famous Jewish women are harlots. No ifs ands or buts about it.

Actually it was the HS who impregnated Mary according to the NT.

how much did she charge for turning that trick?

It was a privilege for her to oblige the HS. Perpetual virginity and total loyalty to God. She was not an adulteress.

she was not married-----only a married girl can commit adultery-----so those idiot stories about "JAMES" a putative
brother of 'jesus' are lies too? ----Mary was a VIRGIN forever?. poor mary

Yes, she never married or had sexual relations with any human man, according to RC and EO theology. That is why she is a virgin. Those were Joseph kids from his first marriage according to the church.

oh----so they are not really the brothers of Jesus----someone lied

why should his brothers not be really his brothers?

Not reasonable to think Mary did not have a sex life after Jesus.

 

[HaShev]

Not reasonable to think Mary did not have a sex life after Jesus.

Why? Did his thorns scratch her cervix?
€:-o

 

[zaangalewa]

... the HS impregnated Mary ...

This sounds in my language completly unacceptable. I guess this sounds in the most languages of the world unacceptable. So I think you don't have any feeling for this what you call "HS". You are not a Catholic. Why do you try to say so, Antisemite?

Zaan-----'holy ghost' is catholic lingo for that which is called
in Hebrew approx... "Shechina" I do not know the etymology of the word-----but it is usually defined as something
like "a divine presence"------it does not get incarnate or even
appear to be incarnate (like angels which are something like
holograms <??> ) I do not know how catholics conceptualize the "holy ghost" The fact that it is part of the trinity confuses me.

And what kind of answer do you expect from me now?

 

[irosie91]

it would be interesting to know his blood type

Whose? Many were named Jesus in those days, Jesus Barabbas, the revolutionary who was set free.

oh ---the one they claimed was a "thief"-----watta joke----unless he stole something from a roman pig----he wouldn't have been crucified. Romans crucified for two reasons-----sedition against rome and to entertain the vestal sluts when
there were no lions around to eat little children, Jesus of Nazareth was crucified for his violent action against the ROMAN SHIT in the temple courtyard-----not for claiming to be a king ----silly lie. Barabbas could very well have been a rebel against the filth of rome------probably a nice guy ---not a common thief as your catechism whore claimed. Jesus was a fairly common name as was Mary-----practically the Jane Smith of the time. Joseph was common too.

No, Pilate did it to pacify the jews , according to the scriptures. He didn't want to, he found no problem with Jesus and his hands were clean. PS: the vestal virgins were not sluts they were virgins. They were in Rome, not Jerusalem.

The story in the NT that Pilate "DID IT TO PACIFY THE JEWS"---is bullshit------in the course of his ten year stint
as prelate of Judea---Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-----In fact---rome recalled him because his
typical roman filth and barbarity was getting out of hand. The Vestal sluts -----were sluts----try reading a bit more about that
gaggle of whores-------of course they were not in Jerusalem---the people of Jerusalem did not tolerate the money changer shit----why would they tolerate a gaggle of roman whores. The vestal sluts were better entertained in rome-----they got
off on watching men kill each other and seeking children eaten by lions

Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-

Back it up with your link???

common knowledge. The reality MIGHT show up if you google PONTIUS PILATE. "saint" Constantine also
crucified people----but then gave it up-----the vestal sluts
had to content themselves with "getting off" by watching lions eat children. Later on in the HOLY roman empire----the sluts
"got off" watching children being slowly burned to death

 

[Penelope]

Whose? Many were named Jesus in those days, Jesus Barabbas, the revolutionary who was set free.

oh ---the one they claimed was a "thief"-----watta joke----unless he stole something from a roman pig----he wouldn't have been crucified. Romans crucified for two reasons-----sedition against rome and to entertain the vestal sluts when
there were no lions around to eat little children, Jesus of Nazareth was crucified for his violent action against the ROMAN SHIT in the temple courtyard-----not for claiming to be a king ----silly lie. Barabbas could very well have been a rebel against the filth of rome------probably a nice guy ---not a common thief as your catechism whore claimed. Jesus was a fairly common name as was Mary-----practically the Jane Smith of the time. Joseph was common too.

No, Pilate did it to pacify the jews , according to the scriptures. He didn't want to, he found no problem with Jesus and his hands were clean. PS: the vestal virgins were not sluts they were virgins. They were in Rome, not Jerusalem.

The story in the NT that Pilate "DID IT TO PACIFY THE JEWS"---is bullshit------in the course of his ten year stint
as prelate of Judea---Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-----In fact---rome recalled him because his
typical roman filth and barbarity was getting out of hand. The Vestal sluts -----were sluts----try reading a bit more about that
gaggle of whores-------of course they were not in Jerusalem---the people of Jerusalem did not tolerate the money changer shit----why would they tolerate a gaggle of roman whores. The vestal sluts were better entertained in rome-----they got
off on watching men kill each other and seeking children eaten by lions

Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-

Back it up with your link???

common knowledge. The reality MIGHT show up if you google PONTIUS PILATE. "saint" Constantine also
crucified people----but then gave it up-----the vestal sluts
had to content themselves with "getting off" by watching lions eat children. Later on in the HOLY roman empire----the sluts
"got off" watching children being slowly burned to death

Lie, they never fed humans to lions, but they had some men fight lions from what I read. Your jewish writings on the Romans are full of malarkey.

 

[irosie91]

oh ---the one they claimed was a "thief"-----watta joke----unless he stole something from a roman pig----he wouldn't have been crucified. Romans crucified for two reasons-----sedition against rome and to entertain the vestal sluts when
there were no lions around to eat little children, Jesus of Nazareth was crucified for his violent action against the ROMAN SHIT in the temple courtyard-----not for claiming to be a king ----silly lie. Barabbas could very well have been a rebel against the filth of rome------probably a nice guy ---not a common thief as your catechism whore claimed. Jesus was a fairly common name as was Mary-----practically the Jane Smith of the time. Joseph was common too.

No, Pilate did it to pacify the jews , according to the scriptures. He didn't want to, he found no problem with Jesus and his hands were clean. PS: the vestal virgins were not sluts they were virgins. They were in Rome, not Jerusalem.

The story in the NT that Pilate "DID IT TO PACIFY THE JEWS"---is bullshit------in the course of his ten year stint
as prelate of Judea---Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-----In fact---rome recalled him because his
typical roman filth and barbarity was getting out of hand. The Vestal sluts -----were sluts----try reading a bit more about that
gaggle of whores-------of course they were not in Jerusalem---the people of Jerusalem did not tolerate the money changer shit----why would they tolerate a gaggle of roman whores. The vestal sluts were better entertained in rome-----they got
off on watching men kill each other and seeking children eaten by lions

Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-

Back it up with your link???

common knowledge. The reality MIGHT show up if you google PONTIUS PILATE. "saint" Constantine also
crucified people----but then gave it up-----the vestal sluts
had to content themselves with "getting off" by watching lions eat children. Later on in the HOLY roman empire----the sluts
"got off" watching children being slowly burned to death

Lie, they never fed humans to lions, but they had some men fight lions from what I read. Your jewish writings on the Romans are full of malarkey.

nope----"men" did not "fight" lions-----In fact ----a "man" would have no chance fighting a lion. Your "kiss roman
ass" catechism whore lied again. The lions were starved
and then let loose on women and children so the vestal
"virgins" could "get off"------Men fought men---to the death---
another pathway to orgasm for the vestal "virgins"

 

[frigidweirdo]

the vatican was built upon pagan religious site and used pagan imagery , what was the purpose of this
The Vatican is partly built over a temple of Cybele. The Mithraic meetings were held in underground chambers

why so many pagan statues at the vatican?

They built the devil on top of a fertility god.

Christmas is the festival for the longest day. Easter is Spring Festival.

They got people over to their side by hardly changing what people knew already.

 

[Penelope]

No, Pilate did it to pacify the jews , according to the scriptures. He didn't want to, he found no problem with Jesus and his hands were clean. PS: the vestal virgins were not sluts they were virgins. They were in Rome, not Jerusalem.

The story in the NT that Pilate "DID IT TO PACIFY THE JEWS"---is bullshit------in the course of his ten year stint
as prelate of Judea---Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-----In fact---rome recalled him because his
typical roman filth and barbarity was getting out of hand. The Vestal sluts -----were sluts----try reading a bit more about that
gaggle of whores-------of course they were not in Jerusalem---the people of Jerusalem did not tolerate the money changer shit----why would they tolerate a gaggle of roman whores. The vestal sluts were better entertained in rome-----they got
off on watching men kill each other and seeking children eaten by lions

Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-

Back it up with your link???

common knowledge. The reality MIGHT show up if you google PONTIUS PILATE. "saint" Constantine also
crucified people----but then gave it up-----the vestal sluts
had to content themselves with "getting off" by watching lions eat children. Later on in the HOLY roman empire----the sluts
"got off" watching children being slowly burned to death

Lie, they never fed humans to lions, but they had some men fight lions from what I read. Your jewish writings on the Romans are full of malarkey.

nope----"men" did not "fight" lions-----In fact ----a "man" would have no chance fighting a lion. Your "kiss roman
ass" catechism whore lied again. The lions were starved
and then let loose on women and children so the vestal
"virgins" could "get off"------Men fought men---to the death---
another pathway to orgasm for the vestal "virgins"

Another asinine statement, no the Romans did not kill women and children , those are Jewish lies.

 

[irosie91]

The story in the NT that Pilate "DID IT TO PACIFY THE JEWS"---is bullshit------in the course of his ten year stint
as prelate of Judea---Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-----In fact---rome recalled him because his
typical roman filth and barbarity was getting out of hand. The Vestal sluts -----were sluts----try reading a bit more about that
gaggle of whores-------of course they were not in Jerusalem---the people of Jerusalem did not tolerate the money changer shit----why would they tolerate a gaggle of roman whores. The vestal sluts were better entertained in rome-----they got
off on watching men kill each other and seeking children eaten by lions

Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000
innocent people-

Back it up with your link???

common knowledge. The reality MIGHT show up if you google PONTIUS PILATE. "saint" Constantine also
crucified people----but then gave it up-----the vestal sluts
had to content themselves with "getting off" by watching lions eat children. Later on in the HOLY roman empire----the sluts
"got off" watching children being slowly burned to death

Lie, they never fed humans to lions, but they had some men fight lions from what I read. Your jewish writings on the Romans are full of malarkey.

nope----"men" did not "fight" lions-----In fact ----a "man" would have no chance fighting a lion. Your "kiss roman
ass" catechism whore lied again. The lions were starved
and then let loose on women and children so the vestal
"virgins" could "get off"------Men fought men---to the death---
another pathway to orgasm for the vestal "virgins"

Another asinine statement, no the Romans did not kill women and children , those are Jewish lies.

wrong again----they certainly DID kill women and children----both in prechristian rome and THEN in the "holy" Roman empire-----first, second, and third reichs. My own cousins---
two little girls were transported from Catholic 'holy' roman
Empire, Austria------to Catholic 'holy' roman Empire Poland ---the City of Auschwitz where holy roman empire soldiers grabbed them by the ankles and smashed their heads against a brick wall----HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE. ----but that is 20th century stuff-----in the BC era-----they wrecked death and destruction in both Africa and Europe in their EMPIRE BUILDING and ENSLAVEMENTS. Roman law rendered
the killing of a child by its father ENTIRELY LEGAL. Unwanted children and children with birth defects were discarded regularly. For a person who claims to be a health care provider you know very little about issues of import to---health care providers. You CERTAINLY know virtually nothing about your own culture. You are even ignorant of classical
literature. -----the romans did not invent the idea of killing new-borns-----the greeks did it before them ---remember
"THE THEBAN PLAYS"?? or did you skip that too? Greek law also allowed the killing of a child by its father.------

 

[Penelope]

I don't believe non of what you say. I know the Jewish hatred of Rome and Greek as well,

 

[irosie91]

I don't believe non of what you say. I know the Jewish hatred of Rome and Greek as well,

Have you ever met a jew who hated Rome and Greece? The issues about jews in reference to GREECE and ROME----are
ancient. Greeks actually got along fine with jews and jews have admired the greek philosophers -----since there were greek philosophers. There are streets in Israel NAMED for some of the greek philosophers and lots of stories about them (even in my "intro" to Hebrew textbook----when I was 15.) Interestingly---Greeks in the USA happily rub shoulders with
Israelis in the USA------it's a CUISINE thing----and music.
Historically jews resisted the imposition of the Greek
religions-----but not so adamantly as they resisted the filth
of Rome. I do not recall any places named for TITUS---
in Israel. Antiochus was a greek king------no Antiochus
gardens either.. Then again there is no park named in
memory of your pal ADOLF either (leader of the third "holy
roman empire")

 

[Penelope]

I don't believe non of what you say. I know the Jewish hatred of Rome and Greek as well,

Have you ever met a jew who hated Rome and Greece? The issues about jews in reference to GREECE and ROME----are
ancient. Greeks actually got along fine with jews and jews have admired the greek philosophers -----since there were greek philosophers. There are streets in Israel NAMED for some of the greek philosophers and lots of stories about them (even in my "intro" to Hebrew textbook----when I was 15.) Interestingly---Greeks in the USA happily rub shoulders with
Israelis in the USA------it's a CUISINE thing----and music.
Historically jews resisted the imposition of the Greek
religions-----but not so adamantly as they resisted the filth
of Rome. I do not recall any places named for TITUS---
in Israel. Antiochus was a greek king------no Antiochus
gardens either.. Then again there is no park named in
memory of your pal ADOLF either (leader of the third "holy
roman empire")

Only the wealthy jews or those taken in slavery got along with the Romans, Alexanders. I doubt they have jewish names on the streets in Rome either. Jews fought with Greeks in Alexanderia, and the zealots in Judea.
Judeans also fought the Isralites, and then even the Samaritans. Vespasian and Titus tried to make peace but the zealots would not have peace and even set fire to their own temple.

 

[LittleNipper]

Actually the cross was the sign of death & destruction, thus the mark of the beast which has the power of death and destruction.
The crossed out cross (8raystar known as the Evening Star) was the symbol of birth and life, so it's only fitting the openly claimed son of baal choose his father's sun cross.
But the cross with the sickly man on it was Mithraic. Rome brought Mithraism and it's temples to Tarsus where it was popular. Soldiers like Lucius made it popular in Rome by bringing back the Mithraic myths on books. The Bacilica with the cross and altar and relics kept from the Mithraic temple is called Basilica of San Clemente look it up. I stated a fact and you changed the point with the snide remark. What is the purpose of that, deflecting a bad day?

He was not crucified or death. That is a later christians addition to mix Mithras with Jesus as the same.

Agree the NT says slew & hanged
source;
Acts 5:30 "Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree" Acts 10:39 "whom they slew and hanged on a tree" Acts 13:29 "they took him down from the tree" 1 Peter 2:24 "who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree" Galatians 3:13 "Christ... being made a curse upon us... Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree" also read Deuteronomy 21:22.
The Yeshu son of Mary figure of 100bc was stpned & hanged pn Passover
But the Galilean 5ax revolter 6bc figure and his 2 sons were crucified & the
Ad era river Jordan w/ apostles martyred figure was also crucified.
You know my position, You can't crucify or kill a fictitious character without a pen and Rome merely used the Canaanite Dying god mythology of Athtar the fierce, whereby the son (called Morning Star) dies to surpass his father Baal on the throne.
So they borrowed the Baal death scene and father became masked with the son as one in the same mythology whereby the son in martyrdom becomes higher then the previous mythology growing old and out of favor. Dagon the father of Baal became replaced by Baal through his death scenecand now the son morning star
-Rev 22:16 in impersonating the scene surpasses his father Baal on the throne and becomes higher then the father as the father did with Dag0n (the fishman god).

Sources:

1)they never say the father's name.
2)Baal's son is the morning star-rev 22:16
3)Ishtar(easter) son was the morning star.
4)they are imitating the dying god mythology of the Canaanites whereby the son called morning star surpasses his father Baal on the throne by dying and bringing attention to himself as the new mask for Baal.
5)the crucifixion scene is written from plagiarizing the Baal passion play.
Source:the predated Assyrian (700bc) Marduk-Bel Tablets housed now in the Brittish Museum.
6)He's this god's only Begotten son and Yhwh's begotten was David in Psalms, so Jesus can't be YHWH's only begotten son.
We do know however, that Baal's only son is the Morning Star
(Jesus claimed to be Rev 22:16)
=Jesus is claimed the son of Baal.
David claimed to be the begotten son of Shalem thus naming his 2 sons after Shalem.

Question: "Why are both Jesus and Satan referred to as the morning star?"

Answer: The first reference to the morning star as an individual is in Isaiah 14:12: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (NIV). The KJV and NKJV both translate “morning star” as “Lucifer, son of the morning.” It is clear from the rest of the passage that Isaiah is referring to Satan’s fall from heaven (Luke 10:18). So in this case, the morning star refers to Satan. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus unmistakably identifies Himself as the morning star. Why are both Jesus and Satan described as the “morning star”?

It is interesting to note that the concept of the “morning star” is not the only concept that is applied to both Jesus and Satan. In Revelation 5:5, Jesus is referred to as the Lion of the tribe of Judah. In 1 Peter 5:8, Satan is compared to a lion, seeking someone to devour. The point is this, both Jesus and Satan, to a certain extent, have similarities to lions. Jesus is similar to a lion in that He is the King, He is royal and majestic. Satan is similar to a lion in that he seeks to devour other creatures. That is where the similarities between Jesus, Satan, and lions end, however. Jesus and Satan are like lions in very different ways.

The idea of a “bright morning star” is a star that outshines all the others. Satan, as perhaps the most beautiful creation of God, probably the most powerful of all the angels, was a bright morning star. Jesus, as God incarnate, the Lord of the universe, is THE bright and morning star. Jesus is the most holy and powerful “light” in all the universe. So, while both Jesus and Satan can be described as “bright morning stars,” in no sense is this equating Jesus and Satan. Satan is a created being. His light only exists to the extent that God created it. Jesus is the light of the world (John 9:5). Only Jesus’ light is self-existent. Satan may be a bright morning star, but he is only a poor imitation of the one true bright morning star, Jesus Christ, the light of the world.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!
EXCUSES EXCUSES!
You Satanists are so bad at lying for your beast.
Everytime you guys are shown your mistake you never apologize for lying to people with false info that you know is
fallacious=willingly & knowingly doing
evil. With no Teshuva you always repeat the sin over and over and ignore the corrected information pretending it doesn't exist thus hiding and making excuses. This is the 3rd Time I answered this purposeful misdirection by you, all times unrefuted.

Facts:
they used symbols to describe emulations and resemblances.
Venus was used to symbolize
the 2 arch malakhs thus Morning Star being the fallen arc of the planet made the perfect symbol to Lucifers fall-(Rev 22:16, Ezekiel 28) and Evening Star(Shalem) the rising arc of the planet became Symbolism for Michael the rising arch malakh-Dan 12:1-4.

Jesus is claimed to be the Nemesis of the one named in the Holy City. But also note Morning Star is Baal's son.
Note; they never name this Father who is one in the same Jesus. That's the mystery easily solved. Research the Assyrian Bel Tablet in the Brittish Museum circa 700bc. The story of Baal's death and resurrection EXACTLY plagerized and used for the Jesus scene thus one in the same mythology given a mask and new name.
Thus:
“... from my Father (Baal). To the one who conquers(DESTROYS) I will also give the morning star(LUCIFER).” -- Revelation 2:28
· Revelation 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify these things in the churches.
· I am the bright and Morning Star (lucifer)

[See Lucifer here etymology of "": "[ the morning star, a fallen rebel archangel, THE Devil, fr. OE. fr. Latin, the morning star, fr. Lucifer light-bearing, fr. luc light + -fer -ferous--more at LIGHT]" (Webster's, p.677)

Even Baal's wife Isis is another cultures Ishtar (easter) whocs son is the Morning Star symboled as a fish (because Grandpa idol Dagon was the fishman god). It's why the Pope wears the fishman god ring, fishead hat called Mitre and scales on his Robe. They were selling the mystery Babylon religions to the Jews through a created image of a half Jewish man.
So now you have the number of his name
Baal Jesus=666 in ASCll numerology used to secret numbers from names. Father and son are one in the same myth.
Research -google search:
The Canaanite dying god mythology
morning star son of baal.
Then research Shalem the Evening Star.
Then research how City of YeruShalem becomes the city of peace (Shalom).
When "the Night" removes "the Day" there will be peace.

Rome created a satanic mockery impersonation of the Temple and the Kohanim just as Levay satanist's are mocking Christianity and emulating the RCC rituals with satanic twists.
That's why they create canibalism bread wine sacriment, incest birth story where the son impregnates his mother, they call him scarab (dung beetle), lucifer (morning star) ,
cursed (on cross), chose the curse of death not blessing of life, breaks all ten commands, call him the forbiden swine
(IE-Sous=the swine).
The lineage the Nt gives Jesus is through all the Biblical Harlots and their use of the mother Harlot Mary of 100bc is probably why the other christ cults deemed Rome's adoption as the Harlot church. Otherwise Rome was purposely taunting the flocks by setting up a total mockery idol as representing all the forbidden things.
Anyway because they use the half Roman Yeshu son of Mary who was born out of wedlock that figure would not be allowed in the Temple according to Deut..

Sources:
Matthew mentions four sinful harlot women of the bible conveniently and coincidentally in the Joseph genealogy:
1) (Genesis 38:12-19) Tamar who was the one who disguised herself as a harlot to seduce her father-in-law Judah.
2) (Joshua 2:1) Rahab who was a harlot living in the city of Jericho. And note wasn’t even of Jewish lineage, she was a Canaanite. The creators of the legend/image icon in trying to create his lineage and plagiarizing the OT goofed this one big time.
3) (Ruth 3:1-14) Ruth who was the one through her mother-in-law Naomi's request, came secretly to where Boaz was sleeping and spent the night with him. Later Ruth and Boaz were married.
4) (2 Samuel 11:2-5) Bathsheba was the controversial one who became pregnant by King David while she was still married to Uriah.

In Matthew 1:19 he states Joseph didn't want to expose her to public disgrace, so he had a mind to divorce her (Mary) quietly (as to not get her stoned).

Deut. 23:2 disqualifies Jesus from entering the Temple let alone leading it.
Plus there's a little known rule about n0t listening to political prisoners that prevents following any of the captured christs and even Paul.

John 8:12-56
12 Yeshua spoke to them again: “I am the light of the world; whoever follows me will never walk in darkness but will have the light which gives life.” 13 So the P’rushim said to him, “Now you’re testifying on your own behalf; your testimony is not valid.” 14 Yeshua answered them, “Even if I do testify on my own behalf, my testimony is indeed valid; because I know where I came from and where I’m going; but you do not know where I came from or where I’m going. 15 You judge by merely human standards. As for me, I pass judgment on no one; 16 but if I were indeed to pass judgment, my judgment would be valid; because it is not I alone who judge, but I and the One who sent me. 17 And even in your Torah it is written that the testimony of two people is valid. 18 I myself testify on my own behalf, and so does the Father who sent me.”

19 They said to him, “Where is this ‘father’ of yours?” Yeshua answered, “You know neither me nor my Father; if you knew me, you would know my Father too.” 20 He said these things when he was teaching in the Temple treasury room; yet no one arrested him, because his time had not yet come.

21 Again he told them, “I am going away, and you will look for me, but you will die in your sin — where I am going, you cannot come.” 22 The Judeans said, “Is he going to commit suicide? Is that what he means when he says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?” 23 Yeshua said to them, “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world. 24 This is why I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not trust that I AM [who I say I am], you will die in your sins.”

25 At this, they said to him, “You? Who are you?” Yeshua answered, “Just what I’ve been telling you from the start. 26 There are many things I could say about you, and many judgments I could make. However, the One who sent me is true; so I say in the world only what I have heard from him.” 27 They did not understand that he was talking to them about the Father. 28 So Yeshua said, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM [who I say I am], and that of myself I do nothing, but say only what the Father has taught me. 29 Also, the One who sent me is still with me; he did not leave me to myself, because I always do what pleases him.”

30 Many people who heard him say these things trusted in him. 31 So Yeshua said to the Judeans who had trusted him, “If you obey what I say, then you are really my talmidim, 32 you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” 33 They answered, “We are the seed of Avraham and have never been slaves to anyone; so what do you mean by saying, ‘You will be set free’?” 34 Yeshua answered them, “Yes, indeed! I tell you that everyone who practices sin is a slave of sin. 35 Now a slave does not remain with a family forever, but a son does remain with it forever. 36 So if the Son frees you, you will really be free! 37 I know you are the seed of Avraham. Yet you are out to kill me, because what I am saying makes no headway in you. 38 I say what my Father has shown me; you do what your father has told you!”

39 They answered him, “Our father is Avraham.” Yeshua replied, “If you are children of Avraham, then do the things Avraham did! 40 As it is, you are out to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Avraham did nothing like that! 41 You are doing the things your father does.” “We’re not illegitimate children!” they said to him. “We have only one Father — God!” 42 Yeshua replied to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me; because I came out from God; and now I have arrived here. I did not come on my own; he sent me. 43 Why don’t you understand what I’m saying? Because you can’t bear to listen to my message. 44 You belong to your father, Satan, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. From the start he was a murderer, and he has never stood by the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he is speaking in character; because he is a liar — indeed, the inventor of the lie! 45 But as for me, because I tell the truth you don’t believe me. 46 Which one of you can show me where I’m wrong? If I’m telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God listens to what God says; the reason you don’t listen is that you don’t belong to God.”

48 The Judeans answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying you are from Shomron and have a demon?” 49 Yeshua replied, “Me? I have no demon. I am honoring my Father. But you dishonor me. 50 I am not seeking praise for myself. There is One who is seeking it, and he is the judge. 51 Yes, indeed! I tell you that whoever obeys my teaching will never see death.”

52 The Judeans said to him, “Now we know for sure that you have a demon! Avraham died, and so did the prophets; yet you say, ‘Whoever obeys my teaching will never taste death.’ 53 Avraham avinu died; you aren’t greater than he, are you? And the prophets also died. Who do you think you are?” 54 Yeshua answered, “If I praise myself, my praise counts for nothing. The One who is praising me is my Father, the very one about whom you keep saying, ‘He is our God.’ 55 Now you have not known him, but I do know him; indeed, if I were to say that I don’t know him, I would be a liar like you! But I do know him, and I obey his word. 56 Avraham, your father, was glad that he would see my day; then he saw it and was overjoyed.”

 

[HaShev]

Why are you replying with missinformation, & evidence of sun worship & babble?
quote:>>John 8:12-56
12 Yeshua spoke to them again: “I am the *light of the world*; whoever follows me will never walk in darkness but will have the *light which gives life*.”=*SUN*

FACT there is no christ figure named Yeshua, so why do you make IESous Yeshua?
There was a Y'shu and his Rabbi mentor was Y'hoshua but they were in the 100bc era.
=missinformation and trying to make your character fallaciously more like YHWH and palatable to Jews, but we aren't gullible and buying ot like you guys do.

I told you the Nazarenes taught physical light worship as they thought their god was that mystical light rays between the sun & earth.

The Hanotzrim cult taught PHYSICAL LUCIFEROUS LIGHT concepts and thus used physical light references not spiritual light including the church iconographs of luciferous light eminating from their lucifer character or morning stars heart thus like the verse;
“So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed. You will do well to be attentive to this *as to a lamp shining in a dark place*, until the day dawns and the morning star (LUCIFER)rises in your "hearts.” -- 2 Peter 1:19
[See Lucifer here etymology of "": "[ the morning star, a fallen rebel archangel, THE Devil, fr. OE. fr. Latin, the morning star, fr. Lucifer light-bearing, fr. luc light + -fer -ferous--*more at LIGHT*]"
(Webster's, p.677)


Sources: John's surviving followers a group called the Mandeans ( sect of the Sabians).
They still teach the same physical light teaches and the NT emulates these same luciferian descriptions.
The Nazarenes taught their god to be the ray of mystical light between the sun and earth, they also account that phosporus light coming to Paul & Constantine claiming to be Jesus.
This mythology and perception of reality is known as Luciferianism- the Nazarenes were Luciferians-the followers of Nazarenes=Luciferianism

Scrolls:
The portions of light & darkness 4Q186

More stuff on sons of day besides the Bible can be found in the scrolls:
The master addressing the
'Sons of Dawn' ('sons of the pit'-I guess similar to the term sons of peridtion)
is in (4Q298)
it's an address to all sons of Dawn to return to the path of Life.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Christianity, no different than Islam..

Yea, cos the odds of you being blown up by a Muslim is only like about 2 million times more and all.

 

[HaShev]

Christianity, no different than Islam..

Yea, cos the odds of you being blown up by a Muslim is only like about 2 million times more and all.

Yet ironically more military personel died coming back home through violent street crimes committed mostly by people wearing cross necklaces and cross tatoos.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Christianity, no different than Islam..

Yea, cos the odds of you being blown up by a Muslim is only like about 2 million times more and all.

Yet ironically more military personel died coming back home through violent street crimes committed mostly by people wearing cross necklaces and cross tatoos.

That's just a load of sh**.

 

[HaShev]

It's a verifiable fact, look it up.
A fact thst politicians themselves have mentioned on TV.
One guy particularly survived a few sniper attacks etc then came back home to be guned down on the mean inner city streets.
For some living in high crime areas, war torn regions are safer. Go figure.