Christianity is Pagan

[oneGOD]

(a) ATTIS of Phyrgia:
1) Was born to a virgin named Nana.
2) Was regerded as the only begotten son and savior.
3) He was bled to death on March 24th at the foot of a pine tree, and his votaries believed that his blood had renewed the fertitlity of earth and thus brought a new life to humanity.
4) He rose from the dead.

(b) ADONIS of Syria:
1) Was born to a virgin.
2) Believed to be the only savior.
3) Suffered death for the redemption of mankind.
4) He rose from the dead in spring.

(c) DIONYSIUS or BACCHUS of Greece:
1) Was termed the only begotten son of Jupitor.
2) Was born to a virgin mother on December 25th.
3) Was called the redeemer and savior.
4) He called himself the Alpha and the Omega.
5) The story of his passion was celebrated every year, and it similarly consisted in death, descent into hell and resurrection.

(d) MITHRA the persian sun god:
1) Was born to a virgin on Ddecember 25th.
2) Christmas and Easter were celebrated, exact dates.
3) They had seven sacrements, the most important of which were baptism , confirmation, and Eucharistic supper at which the communion partook of the divine nature of MITHRA under the species of BLOOD and WINE.

In AD 38, the Church of Antioch was founded by James, Peter and Thomas in Antioch, Asia Minor. In AD 64, Pistic Christianity began growing by leaps and bounds when Nero began throwing Christians to the lions in the arena. Roman courts offered Christians an out: they could denounce their religion and go free. The Pistics refused and died for it.

The Church of Antioch left the first council in disgust. As a consequence, it was persecuted as far away as Malabar, India. The new church was virtually Christian in name only. Those I believe were the true followers of Jesus.



One can only wonder how The God of the OT suddenly decided to come down to earth and die for humanity to be saved. One can only wonder, why is it only after Jesus Christians pray in the name of three persons in one divine being while this new concept never appeared in the OT and no prophet what so ever prayed in the name of these three persons. Even the only reference to Jesus saying:pray in the name of the father , the son, and the holy spirit" is discovered to be a forgery. Not once since Jesus was alive did he ask us to pray in the name of these persons.

Jesus was indeed prophecised in the OT, but he was never prophecised as a servant of God, just like any other prophet. Matthew on the other hand to make the OT and the NT compatible misquotes the OT.

"Out of Egypt I have called my son,"
Matthew claims that the flight of Jesus' family to Egypt is a fulfilment of Hosea 11:1. But Hosea 11:1 is not a prophecy at all, as is clear when the entire verse is quoted ("When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt."). It is a reference to the Hebrew exodus from Egypt and has nothing to do with Jesus. Matthew tries to hide this fact by quoting only the last part of the verse.

Hosea 11:1 :" When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.2:As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images"


Matthew quotes Jeremiah 31:15, claiming that it was a prophecy of King Herod's alleged slaughter of the children in and around Bethlehem after the birth of Jesus. But this verse refers to the Babylonian captivity, as is clear by reading the next two verses (16 and 17), and, thus, has nothing to do with Herod's massacre.

Jeremiah 31:15 "Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.
16:Thus saith the LORD; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the LORD; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy.17: And there is hope in thine end, saith the LORD, that thy children shall come again to their own border."


Matthew 27:9 "Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value"

This is not a quote from Jeremiah, but a misquote of Zechariah (11:12-13).

Zech.11"12:So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prized at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD"

Matthew attributes this quote to Jeremiah, but Jeremiah has no verse that is even similar to the words given in Matthew. Matthew confused Jeremiah with Zechariah.
This is a mistake done on the part of Matthew, showing no divine inspiration for such a person.


That's just some examples of false prophecies that were used to deceive the jews into believing that Jesus divine nature was prophecised in the bible.

[Believer]

Peace OneGOD,

This has been discussed many times on this site, Christianity is not pagan at all. Your sources for this infornation are quite questionable also.
The Christian faith is derived from Judaism, and what we believe about Jesus is fully backed up in the old scriptures.

Here is a cool prophecy about the Son of God being put to death.
http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic.php?t=3290


Also, Jesus teaches us to be more righteous than the pagans.

43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor[8] and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies[9] and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

So unless you can love your enemies as yourself, you are no different than the pagans

Also, Christianity was not compatable with the Roman empire, or any of it's pagan religions or mystery cults.


And you should be the last to accuse any religion of paganism, every time you pray to your god you bow towards a pagan shrine housing an accursed pagan sacred stone.

Zech.11"12:So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prized at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD"

What ever the case, this is a clear prophecy about Jesus Christ....God with 30 pieces of silver priced at His head given to the temple tresury!!!


Here's another interesting little prophecy from Zechariah:

Zechariah 12:10
And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.

They will look at God who was pierced?
Sounds like the believers of Jesus mourning over His pierced body on the cross.

Now observe this selection from Pslam 22:

14 I am poured out like water,
and all my bones are out of joint.
My heart has turned to wax;
it has melted away within me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me in the dust of death.
16 Dogs have surrounded me;
a band of evil men has encircled me,
they have pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I can count all my bones;
people stare and gloat over me.
18 They divide my garments among them
and cast lots for my clothing.


All of his bones are out of joint.....as in a crucifixion!
His body is laid in the dust of the earth!
His HANDS and FEET have been pierced!!
He can count all of his bones, none have broke.
Evil men gloat over him.
SOME CAST LOTS FOR HIS CLOTHING!

This is definitely about Jesus Christ also.
Jesus's crucifixion is certainly not a borrowed pagan belief.

And that picture of Hercules looks like two pillars rather than a cross.
Where did that come from anyways>

[Believer]

truth is..the christian scholars themselves admit they do not have the original scriptures. and hebrew and greek are dead languages.

The Qumran scrolls are quite accurate with the oldest scriptures dated from the 2nd century BC. Almost all of the Old Testament scriptures were found among the Qumran scrolls.

The most archaic of the the Gospels have been dated to around 50-60 AD, which is pretty good.

These ancient scriptures were translated and compared to Bibles that were copied and rewritten since the Vulgate and were found to be amazingly uncorrupted through the centuries. Only a few minor mistranslations were found.

Some liberal Bible scholars say different things and not all Bible scholars are Christian.

[oneGOD]

Well, first of all, none of them are questionable for the simple reason that those pagan religions existed around the time of Jesus, before him, and after him. We do not deny that Jesus was prophecised in the OT. Some of them are true and some are false just like I indicated above.

So basically, the idea of redemption, crucifiction, son of god, all are not new or unique at all. It's what you added to the Jewish faith that made your religion Pagan.

Also, Jesus teaches us to be more righteous than the pagans.

Of ourse he does, but it's the people after him that corrupted his message.

Also, Christianity was not compatable with the Roman empire, or any of it's pagan religions or mystery cults.

Indeed they were, look at the refernce to the Pagan religions above. Everything you do as a christian or in better term "triniterian" is derived from those pagans.

And you should be the last to accuse any religion of paganism, every time you pray to your god you bow towards a pagan shrine housing an accursed pagan sacred stone.

And why don't you read the OT and see that alot of prophets kissed stuff and made alters and shrines?

What ever the case,

LOL I just showed you that Matthew misquoted the OT and made a mistake and you say whatever the case? You just can't admit he made a mistake right?....lol

Take a look at this:

That is DIONYSIUS and the story behind him is :
(c) DIONYSIUS or BACCHUS of Greece:
1) Was termed the only begotten son of Jupitor.
2) Was born to a virgin mother on December 25th.
3) Was called the redeemer and savior.
4) He called himself the Alpha and the Omega.
5) The story of his passion was celebrated every year, and it similarly consisted in death, descent into hell and resurrection.

Kinda amazing..huh?

And of course you can't answer the other false prophecies that I indicated above.

Want some more?




You have corrupted the Jewish religion, made God into three and made up things that were not known to the Jewish people. You say you follow the God of Abraham but as a matter of fact you followed him but gave him a son. You made God look so weak dying and suffering.

The Qumran scrolls are quite accurate with the oldest scriptures dated from the 2nd century BC. Almost all of the Old Testament scriptures were found among the Qumran scrolls.

The QUmran scrolls are OT scrolls. One thing your beloved christians scholars fail to tell you that they are not similar in text to the OT in hand nowadays, they do have the same meaning but the text isn't the same. So as we can see this proves that if those scrolls were the word of God then the current OT isn't the word of God and vice versa. My point here is that if the word of God is not copied word to word then whatever you copied is false, and the Qumran scrolls demonstrate that.

These ancient scriptures were translated and compared to Bibles that were copied and rewritten since the Vulgate and were found to be amazingly uncorrupted through the centuries. Only a few minor mistranslations were found

Again, your christian scholars fail to tell you the truth about your NT scripture.Here is how your oldest scriptures look like:

The Schofeild Bible's (1998 ed) footnote for this passage gives us the answer: "Verses 9-20 are not found in the two most ancient mss., the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. . ." They are claimed to be very relieble, but are they?

Sinaticus and Vaticanus disagree with about 90-95% of all known manuscripts, and they even disagree among themselves. Both have a long history of corruption and obscurity.

Omissions of Sinaticus and Vaticanus
Vaticanus omits:
a.) Everything from Genesis 1:1 to 46:28.
b.) Psalms 106-139
c.) All of First Timothy
d.) All of second Timothy
e.) All Titus
f.) All of Revelation
g.) All of Hebrews after Chapter 9:14 to the end of the book
h.) Our Lord's agony and blood like sweat in the Garden of Gethsemane. Luke 22:43- 44
i.) Our Lord's prayer for his adversaries. Luke 23:34 "Father forgive them; for they know not what they do."
j.) Mark 16:9-20. There is a significant blank space in the manuscript where this passage would have gone, testifying for it's inclusion in the Bible.
k.) The story of the women taken in adultery John 7:53 - John 8:11"
l.) Heb 9:15 to the end of the book.
m.) 2 Kings 2:5-7, 10-13


Vaticanus adds the Apocrypha to the OT.


Sinaticus omits:
a.) John 5:4, 8:1-11
b.) Matthew 16:2-3
c.) Romans 16:24
d.) Mark 16:9-20 Again, there is a significant blank space where these verses should have gone.
e.) Acts 8:37
f.) 1 John 5:7


Sinaticus adds: The Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas to the NT and the Apocypha to the OT.


Corrections of Sinaticus and Vaticanus


Sinaticus was corrected at least 15,000 times by multiple correctors. Most of these corrections were made in the seventh century, but some of these corrections were made as late as the twelfth century. (Sure sounds like the "oldest" reading, doesn't it?) The writing quality is very poor; many times words or whole phrases are repeated in succession. The original writing is completely written over in parts, and the original writer even corrected some of his mistakes. Vaticanus also shows very sloppy penmanship

That is aside from the mistransalted verses, such as PSALM 22. I have checked the Arabic bible and it doesn't even say it the way your sources say it. Wanna know how to translate Psalm22?

Here is what your accurate KJV say:
For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
Well other sources translated accurately doesn't even come close:
For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.
1917 Jewish Publication Society Bible
Many dogs surround me; a pack of evildoers closes in on me. So wasted are my hands and feet
NAB
This Psalm is about David when his son rebelled against him. For centuries the Jews knew that and suddenly the whole passsage is not about David.

However, clear proof is presented above that Christianity is not a unique religion. Everything has been borrowed. Whenever the first conference was made, tha Roman pagan emperor wanted to combine all Roman religions into one, and he did, that's why the real Christians left the council in DISGUST. That is why all Hebrew bible, Aramaic Bibles were all burned and only translated copies from the original were kept. They were also chosen from 22,000 documents.

I call this:

DENIAL

[Vision]

(c) DIONYSIUS or BACCHUS of Greece:
1) Was termed the only begotten son of Jupitor.
2) Was born to a virgin mother on December 25th.
3) Was called the redeemer and savior.
4) He called himself the Alpha and the Omega.
...........

Could you give links to supporting evidence for this material. Such as reference to historical books, other then muslim web sites.

That is why all Hebrew bible, Aramaic Bibles were all burned and only translated copies from the original were kept.

Again please provide independent reference sources (links) as to when and how ALL the bibles of the world were collected and burned (seems like a huge task to undertake to me), other then Islamic web sites.

[Alpha]

LOL, the funny thing is, everything "oneGOD" said was just made up. There are all these different stories on Christ to support the fact that he was not crucified for our sins, and there is no proof to all those stories whatsoever. If you say Christianity is a pagan religion, then I will just say that the Allah of Islam is the pagan moon god and we can go back and forth. But you seem to not have a conscience seeing that the one true God would reveal His truth before anything else. And why do you keep mentioning that Christians worship 3 gods? Again, you just keep showing your ignorance.

From: http://www.carm.org/islam/obj_trinity.htm> "As the Trinitarian doctrine maintains, each of the persons of the Godhead is distinct, yet they are all each, by nature, God. The same idea can be presented in the above examples. With time, for example, the past is not the same as the present, which is not the same as the future. Each is simultaneous (according to some time theoriests). Yet, they are not three 'times,' but one. That is, they all share the same nature: time.
With space, height is distinct from width, which is not the same as depth, which is is not the same as height. Yet, they are not three 'spaces,' but one. That is, they all share the same nature: space.
With matter, solid is not the same as liquid, which is not the same as gas, which is not the same as solid. Yet, they are not three 'matters,' but one. That is, they all share the same nature: matter.
Note that there are three sets of threes. In other words, there is a trinity of trinities. If we were to look at the universe and notice these qualities within it, is it really so difficult to imagine that God can be a Trinity of persons? Furthermore, is it fair to say that this "trinity of trinities" are the fingerprints of God upon His creation? I think so."

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Rom. 1:20).

LOL I just showed you that Matthew misquoted the OT and made a mistake and you say whatever the case? You just can't admit he made a mistake right?....lol

Many people have different opinions on the matter. The truth is, you do not know the reason why Jeremiah's name is in there. For example, this can be a reason which can get rid of the idea of corruption:

From Coffman Commentaries: "Jeremiah" was the name of a larger grouping of the Hebrew Scriptures which contained both Jeremiah and Zechariah, along with other books including all the minor prophets. Thus, Matthew is guilty of no error in the use of the term "Jeremiah." An equivalent case today would be a quotation credited to "Romans" or to the "New Testament." Some commentators believe that Matthew quoted from some of the traditional sayings of Jeremiah, since it is not said that Jeremiah wrote the saying but that he spoke it.

From New John Gill Exposition: There is indeed an account of his buying his uncle Hanameel's son's field, in (Jeremiah 32:7-12)

Instead of making blind statements AGAINST a religion on matters you don't know of and no one knows of, why don't you just use the common sense which God gave you. This includes God's truth is to be first revealed then the false revelations come. That is theology 101 right there.

truth is..the christian scholars themselves admit they do not have the original scriptures. and hebrew and greek are dead languages.

If you are a Muslim, then Christians do not have to prove to you that the doctrine of Christianity before Muhammed is the same doctrine we have today. If it is not the same, then why did Muhammed have to "correct" Christianity in the first place?

Also, we do have the original scriptures: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorg.html

[oneGOD]

LOL, the funny thing is, everything "oneGOD" said was just made up. There are all these different stories on Christ to support the fact that he was not crucified for our sins, and there is no proof to all those stories whatsoever

The fact that you ignore to think it may be true is that they might have thought they crucified him. Nothing is made up, those religions existed at the time of christ, the time before christ, and the time after christ. You see the similarities, you know something is up, no one can just ignore it.

I just showed you the crucified DIONYSIUS and many other examples, you CAN NOT deny the similarities at all. GO look through it again and you'll see eventhough I doubt it.

If you say Christianity is a pagan religion, then I will just say that the Allah of Islam is the pagan moon god and we can go back and forth

You can not say that for the simple fact that the Quran put down all those pagan gods of arabia including the moon god. Muhammad when he entered Mecca destroyed all the idols. One more fact that you choose to ignore is that you like to forget why Muhammad left Mecca in the first place, is it not he bashed on all of their gods? YES. Then how can Muhammad be a moon god worshipper. On the other hand, when we look at the amazing similarities of the new introduced concepts into the Jewish faith, we will completely understand why the Jews rejected the christian faith and regard it as pagan.

And why do you keep mentioning that Christians worship 3 gods?

I don't believe I said that, I said three persons of god.

Jeremiah" was the name of a larger grouping of the Hebrew Scriptures which contained both Jeremiah and Zechariah

That is not true, because the canon was done many years ahead of Jesus, and each book was distinct. for example, the QUmran scrolls maintained al of these books and distinguished them.

Instead of making blind statements AGAINST a religion on matters you don't know of and no one knows of, why don't you just use the common sense which God gave you. This includes God's truth is to be first revealed then the false revelations come. That is theology 101 right there.

AS a matter of fact, common sense says that when someone read the OT and then read what people after Jesus did you will find no connection, apart of mistranslated verses which have been shown on so many occasions one can see that most of the ten commandments have been broken including "NO IMAGES OF GOD" which can be seen in every church these days. We see how Jesus says :" follow the law" and then we see others saying: no don't follow the law. We see how Jesus is called the servant of God and then we see how others say that God (Jesus) made himself so weak on earth just to save us. totally two contridictory doctrines. The mighty God of the OT is the servant God who was bashed by the disbelievers who he killed over and over in the OT. That's the common sense you refuse to look for, common sense tells you that a dying cruficied god is not unique, common sense tells you that christmas and easter were celebrated, common sense tells you that eating whine and bread is not new, and common sense tells you that those introduced conepts which never existed in the OT should not even exist. It is simply man made.

If you are a Muslim, then Christians do not have to prove to you that the doctrine of Christianity before Muhammed is the same doctrine we have today. If it is not the same, then why did Muhammed have to "correct" Christianity in the first place?

Here is your answer:
[3:79] Never would a human being whom GOD blessed with the scripture and prophethood say to the people, "Idolize me beside GOD." Instead, (he would say), "Devote yourselves absolutely to your Lord alone," according to the scripture you preach and the teachings you learn.

[5:116] GOD will say, "O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, `Make me and my mother idols beside GOD?' " He will say, "Be You glorified. I could not utter what was not right. Had I said it, You already would have known it. You know my thoughts, and I do not know Your thoughts. You know all the secrets.

Also, we do have the original scriptures:

I will repeat myself again:

Again, your christian scholars fail to tell you the truth about your NT scripture.Here is how your oldest scriptures look like:

Quote:
The Schofeild Bible's (1998 ed) footnote for this passage gives us the answer: "Verses 9-20 are not found in the two most ancient mss., the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. . ." They are claimed to be very relieble, but are they?

Sinaticus and Vaticanus disagree with about 90-95% of all known manuscripts, and they even disagree among themselves. Both have a long history of corruption and obscurity.

Omissions of Sinaticus and Vaticanus
Vaticanus omits:
a.) Everything from Genesis 1:1 to 46:28.
b.) Psalms 106-139
c.) All of First Timothy
d.) All of second Timothy
e.) All Titus
f.) All of Revelation
g.) All of Hebrews after Chapter 9:14 to the end of the book
h.) Our Lord's agony and blood like sweat in the Garden of Gethsemane. Luke 22:43- 44
i.) Our Lord's prayer for his adversaries. Luke 23:34 "Father forgive them; for they know not what they do."
j.) Mark 16:9-20. There is a significant blank space in the manuscript where this passage would have gone, testifying for it's inclusion in the Bible.
k.) The story of the women taken in adultery John 7:53 - John 8:11"
l.) Heb 9:15 to the end of the book.
m.) 2 Kings 2:5-7, 10-13


Vaticanus adds the Apocrypha to the OT.


Sinaticus omits:
a.) John 5:4, 8:1-11
b.) Matthew 16:2-3
c.) Romans 16:24
d.) Mark 16:9-20 Again, there is a significant blank space where these verses should have gone.
e.) Acts 8:37
f.) 1 John 5:7


Sinaticus adds: The Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas to the NT and the Apocypha to the OT.


Corrections of Sinaticus and Vaticanus


Sinaticus was corrected at least 15,000 times by multiple correctors. Most of these corrections were made in the seventh century, but some of these corrections were made as late as the twelfth century. (Sure sounds like the "oldest" reading, doesn't it?) The writing quality is very poor; many times words or whole phrases are repeated in succession. The original writing is completely written over in parts, and the original writer even corrected some of his mistakes. Vaticanus also shows very sloppy penmanship

Hebrew bible, Aramaic Bibles were all burned and only translated copies from the original were kept. They were also chosen from 22,000 documents.

and these two references are already mentioned in your link. Besides, you know only have a translation, that's about it.

[Believer]

Peace OneGOD,

So basically, the idea of redemption, crucifiction, son of god, all are not new or unique at all. It's what you added to the Jewish faith that made your religion Pagan.

No, you're so ingnorant man!
Redemption by God is prophecisied about by all of the prophets!!
You need to read through Isaiah, Zechariah, Psalms, Micah, Malachi, Zephaniah, Jeremiah, etc.
"Son of God" is mentioned in Wisdom 2
http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic.php?t=3290

Of ourse he does, but it's the people after him that corrupted his message.

What are you talking about???
Jesus wants us to love our enemies and be more righteous than the pagans, this came from the uncorrupted Gospel we have today.

Muslims don't love their enemies or follow the Jesus of the Gospel's teachings, so you're no different than the pagans.

Indeed they were, look at the refernce to the Pagan religions above. Everything you do as a christian or in better term "triniterian" is derived from those pagans.

Apparently you don't even understand the Trinity.
In the Bible there are three Persons that all possess the nature and power of God. This is the Father (LORD), the Holy Spirit (Spirit of the LORD), and Jesus Christ.
The first two are revealed well back in the Old Testament.
Jesus Christ controlled weather and forgave other's sins.
It's obvious that Jesus is more than a man. He also said "I and the Father are one"

And why don't you read the OT and see that alot of prophets kissed stuff and made alters and shrines?

Not pagan shrines or pagan stones.
You cover this up with a fancy myth about Abraham and Ishmael, well I don't buy your elaborate myths.

LOL I just showed you that Matthew misquoted the OT and made a mistake and you say whatever the case? You just can't admit he made a mistake right?....lol

So, that doesn't mean anything.
The prophecy is what's important.
Since you're severely spiritually mislead, you overlook what is important.

What is that a picture off? Jesus Christ? Anyways, anyone could make something like that.

As for Dionysius, Jupiter has many sons.
Prophecies tell about a "Redeemer and Savior"
External things like a date is not relevant.
Cite me a manuscript to support this "Alpha and Omega" and the last argument.
You might not find any written records of the Dionysius mystery cult because it's a mystery cult, Their beliefs are not written down, they're passed down orally in secret meetings.
No reason to suggest that Christianity influenced these obscure cults with beliefs based on the hearsay of the day.

You have corrupted the Jewish religion, made God into three and made up things that were not known to the Jewish people. You say you follow the God of Abraham but as a matter of fact you followed him but gave him a son. You made God look so weak dying and suffering.

Man, shut up! You should have learned a few things from this site by now.
Christianity is the FULFILLMENT of Judaism.
Read the Gospels and see how many prophecies Jesus fulfilled.
You are quite spiritually mislead.

The QUmran scrolls are OT scrolls. One thing your beloved christians scholars fail to tell you that they are not similar in text to the OT in hand nowadays, they do have the same meaning but the text isn't the same. So as we can see this proves that if those scrolls were the word of God then the current OT isn't the word of God and vice versa. My point here is that if the word of God is not copied word to word then whatever you copied is false, and the Qumran scrolls demonstrate that.

What century are you from???
All modern Bibles today are based on the Qumran scroll findings.

Again, your christian scholars fail to tell you the truth about your NT scripture.Here is how your oldest scriptures look like:

What two Roman dudes said is not relevant to me.



And I don't use the KVJ, I use the NAB.
Although I often quote Bible verses from the NIV.

Pslam 22 certainly catches the moment at Jesus's crucifixion.

However, clear proof is presented above that Christianity is not a unique religion. Everything has been borrowed. Whenever the first conference was made, tha Roman pagan emperor wanted to combine all Roman religions into one, and he did, that's why the real Christians left the council in DISGUST. That is why all Hebrew bible, Aramaic Bibles were all burned and only translated copies from the original were kept. They were also chosen from 22,000 documents.

What? I see pure conjecture.
Everything we believe is a fulfillment of prophecies.
The "3" from the Trinity is a coincidence to anything else for good reasons.
Blah...just more of your baseless conjecture.


I call you:
Severely spiritually misguided.


Now about Jesus's crucifixion, there are many prophecies and historical accounts that fully support the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
Jesus was definitely crucified. Anything you and the Quran says is pure Satan-inspired conjecture.


What we believe about Jesus Christ is fully backed up in the Old Testament scruptures.
Begin a new search for truth here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=U ... prophecies

[Vision]

I just showed you the crucified DIONYSIUS and many other examples, you CAN NOT deny the similarities at all. GO look through it again and you'll see eventhough I doubt it.

That must be a very old artifact!
why does it appear to be a new carving?
What museum is it in?
Has it been carbon 14 dated?
Given the fact that crucifixions started long before the time of jesus, what is so unusual about having an image of a crucifixion?

You dont seem to have given any solid facts to back up your stories

[oneGOD]

Umm, why don't you please explain the similarities between those pagan religions and christianity?

I know you want, you're just going in circles as usual.

Jesus Christ controlled weather and forgave other's sins.

This is funy, Jesus said that he can not judge. The will of Jesus is different from the will of God, how can two beings with different wills be one?

And by the way when Jesus said :"I and father are one" you will need to read the whole passage and see why Jesus didn't mean he was God. this was answered already.

You cover this up with a fancy myth about Abraham and Ishmael, well I don't buy your elaborate myths.

I believe ALexei showed you where in the OT all of this stuff is mentioned. I'm not making anything up over here.

So, that doesn't mean anything.
The prophecy is what's important.

It does mean that he made a mistake, ohh... such an inspired man.

Cite me a manuscript to support this "Alpha and Omega" and the last argument.
You might not find any written records of the Dionysius mystery cult because it's a mystery cult, Their beliefs are not written down, they're passed down orally in secret meetings.
No reason to suggest that Christianity influenced these obscure cults with beliefs based on the hearsay of the day.

You just need to buy books and read about that.

Man, shut up

Nice...

What two Roman dudes said is not relevant to me.

Of course you live in denial. Why don't you read about the differences in the old manuscripts? You didn't want to...they didn't present their opinion...they presented facts about your trusty manuscripts.

[Believer]

Peace OneGOD,

Umm, why don't you please explain the similarities between those pagan religions and christianity?

I did, but you don't read.

I know you want, you're just going in circles as usual.

You have just describe yourself.

This is funy, Jesus said that he can not judge. The will of Jesus is different from the will of God, how can two beings with different wills be one?

And by the way when Jesus said :"I and father are one" you will need to read the whole passage and see why Jesus didn't mean he was God. this was answered already.

Where does Jesus say He has a different will than the Father?

Jesus said "I and the Father are one" which just so happens to mean that Jesus and the Father are one entity: GOD.
Start another post on this if you like.

I believe ALexei showed you where in the OT all of this stuff is mentioned. I'm not making anything up over here.

The Bible does not support your far-fetched myth.
Abraham stayed with his son Isaac, and His very large family with all his cattle.

It does mean that he made a mistake, ohh... such an inspired man.

If the prophecy was a mistake....now we would have an issue!

You just need to buy books and read about that.

You should get a book on common sense.

Of course you live in denial. Why don't you read about the differences in the old manuscripts? You didn't want to...they didn't present their opinion...they presented facts about your trusty manuscripts.

Modern scholars have found Gospels as ancient as 50 AD, I believe.
They even found a pre-Markan passion narrative!

Of course you live in denial.

Here you are praying 5 times a day (like the infidel Magians prayed) towards a pagan shrine with a pagan stone (like your pagan predecessors) and yet you have the pinache to say my faith is pagan?
You never cease to amaze me on how mislead people can be!

[Bushmaster]

What is this picture dude? It is like a guy carrying 2 seperate columns, that thing doesn't look like a cross to me... Hercules carried a cross, (who the heck is Hercules?) Jesus carried a cross, so?

[Bushmaster]

truth is..the christian scholars themselves admit they do not have the original scriptures. and hebrew and greek are dead languages.

Hebrew is a dead language? What do they speak in Israel? Italian?

And Greek? What do they speak in Greece? I bet Japanese...

Dudez, broz, man it is pointless to even argue with this level of ignorance! Drop it!

[Light]

Let's have a look at oneGod's arguement, I'm sick of doing this, last time as I'm sure many of you can remember, he used the rubbish S. Arycha's information, i believe that's the name, well it's close, who isn't even considered a real scholar.

It's fair to say oneGod that you really did drop the ball on that day, you made a boo boo. I went easy on you and the rest also did.

This time, you've really messed up.

Item 1 -




His name is Greg Kane, he is not a scholar. Here's what he says on one of his pages -

What's in it for me? Nothing on this web site is my original idea. I first heard about the Pagan Christs in religion courses at Rice U. decades ago. But only in passing. I did some reading on my own, and that's where the stuff here comes from.

Greg Kane
Denver
USA

[oneGOD]

Heh, I didn't use that lol

[Alpha]

oneGOD really gave us some facts there!

[Alpha]

Again, your christian scholars fail to tell you the truth about your NT scripture.Here is how your oldest scriptures look like:

Quote:
The Schofeild Bible's (1998 ed) footnote for this passage gives us the answer: "Verses 9-20 are not found in the two most ancient mss., the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. . ." They are claimed to be very relieble, but are they?

Sinaticus and Vaticanus disagree with about 90-95% of all known manuscripts, and they even disagree among themselves. Both have a long history of corruption and obscurity.

Omissions of Sinaticus and Vaticanus
Vaticanus omits:
a.) Everything from Genesis 1:1 to 46:28.
b.) Psalms 106-139
c.) All of First Timothy
d.) All of second Timothy
e.) All Titus
f.) All of Revelation
g.) All of Hebrews after Chapter 9:14 to the end of the book
h.) Our Lord's agony and blood like sweat in the Garden of Gethsemane. Luke 22:43- 44
i.) Our Lord's prayer for his adversaries. Luke 23:34 "Father forgive them; for they know not what they do."
j.) Mark 16:9-20. There is a significant blank space in the manuscript where this passage would have gone, testifying for it's inclusion in the Bible.
k.) The story of the women taken in adultery John 7:53 - John 8:11"
l.) Heb 9:15 to the end of the book.
m.) 2 Kings 2:5-7, 10-13


Vaticanus adds the Apocrypha to the OT.


Sinaticus omits:
a.) John 5:4, 8:1-11
b.) Matthew 16:2-3
c.) Romans 16:24
d.) Mark 16:9-20 Again, there is a significant blank space where these verses should have gone.
e.) Acts 8:37
f.) 1 John 5:7


Sinaticus adds: The Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas to the NT and the Apocypha to the OT.


Corrections of Sinaticus and Vaticanus


Sinaticus was corrected at least 15,000 times by multiple correctors. Most of these corrections were made in the seventh century, but some of these corrections were made as late as the twelfth century. (Sure sounds like the "oldest" reading, doesn't it?) The writing quality is very poor; many times words or whole phrases are repeated in succession. The original writing is completely written over in parts, and the original writer even corrected some of his mistakes. Vaticanus also shows very sloppy penmanship

Hebrew bible, Aramaic Bibles were all burned and only translated copies from the original were kept. They were also chosen from 22,000 documents.

I love how you focus on two things while you ignore the rest of the massive manuscript evidence to support the biblical scriptures.

The Bibliographical test shows the New Testament is reliable

The military historian C. Sanders devised a three part test when investigating any historical document as to whether it was reliable. Because of space limitations, we'll look at just two of these. The first of these tests is the bibliographical test, which judges an ancient historical document to be more reliable the more manuscript copies that exist for it. Also, it maintains the smaller the time gap that exists between the first copy of the document and the first surviving copy, the more reliable it is because there is less time for scribal errors to creep into its preserved text. By these two standards, the NT is the best attested ancient historical writing. Some 24,633 known copies (including fragments, etc.) exist of it, with 5309 of these being in Greek. By contrast, the document with the next highest number of copies outside the Hebrew Old Testament [OT] (which has over 1700 copies) is Homer's Illiad, with 643. Other historical writings by prominent ancient historians have far fewer copies: Thucycides, History of the Peloponnesian War, 8; Herodotus, The Histories, 8; Julius Caesar, Gallic Wars, 10.

Furthermore, the time gap between the earliest preserved copies and the autograph, or first manuscript, is much smaller for the NT than these works. For the NT, the gap is about 90 years or less, since most of it was first written before 70 A.D. Scholar John A.T. Robertson (in Redating the New Testament) has maintained that every NT book was written before 70 A.D., including even John and Revelation. Dates that place the writing of the NT in the second century have been generally discredited by scholars in recent decades. A fragment of John, dated to 125 A.D., is traditionally cited as the earliest copy known of any part of the NT. However, nine fragments of the NT were found in 1972 in a cave by the Dead Sea. Among these fragments, part of Mark was dated to around 50 A.D., Luke 57 A.D., and Acts from 66 A.D. The earliest major manuscripts, such as Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are dated to 325-50 A.D. and 350 A.D. respectively. By contrast, the time gap is much larger for the pagan works mentioned above. For Homer, the gap is 500 years (900 b.c. for the original writing, 400 b.c. for the first copy), Caesar, it's 900-1000 years (c. 100-44 b.c. to 900 A.D.), Herodotus, 1300 years (c. 480-425 b.c. to 900 A.D.) and Thucycides, 1300 years (c. 400 b.c. to 900 A.D.). Hence, the NT can be objectively judged more reliable than these pagan historical works both by having a much smaller time gap between when it was written and the first preserved copies, and in the number of ancient handwritten copies.

From: http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/christru.html

[Light]

Oh but OneGOD, you did.

Here's the link end of an image file you uploaded

h_getting_started_pocm_right_r1_c1.jpg


Here's the one from Greg Kane,

h_getting_started_pocm_right_r1_c1.jpg




Here's the link to the page, you'll find all his other pictures there and the same information quoted by oneGOD.

http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/getting_started_pocm.html


Also, the POCM stands for Pagan Origins Of Christ, the name of Greg Kane's site, you'll notice the same POCM is part of all oneGOD's recent picture property files.

Bottom line, don't deny it, also I've gone to the trouble of saving sceenshots of your uploaded pictures and their properties so that even if you change the name at the end, I will simply show everyone that you did indeed take this information from Greg and his site.

oneGOD, I know where you get your information.

[Alpha]

AS a matter of fact, common sense says that when someone read the OT and then read what people after Jesus did you will find no connection, apart of mistranslated verses which have been shown on so many occasions one can see that most of the ten commandments have been broken including "NO IMAGES OF GOD" which can be seen in every church these days. We see how Jesus says :" follow the law" and then we see others saying: no don't follow the law. We see how Jesus is called the servant of God and then we see how others say that God (Jesus) made himself so weak on earth just to save us. totally two contridictory doctrines. The mighty God of the OT is the servant God who was bashed by the disbelievers who he killed over and over in the OT. That's the common sense you refuse to look for, common sense tells you that a dying cruficied god is not unique, common sense tells you that christmas and easter were celebrated, common sense tells you that eating whine and bread is not new, and common sense tells you that those introduced conepts which never existed in the OT should not even exist. It is simply man made.

What are you talking about? First of all, you obviously ignore the prophecies of the Messiah's death in the OT, and you obviously ignored the prophecy I gave you in another thread from Jeremiah on God making a new covenant. Second of all, you come of as if the doctrine of the trinity (mentioning this because of Jesus' divinity) does not make any sense when it has been shown numerous times that it does by using earthly examples. In the words of Christ Himself, "If I tell you earthly things and you do not understand, what makes you think you can understand heavenly things?" You have no excuse for Isaiah 53 (prophecying the Messiah's death), you have no excuse for Daniel 7 (prophecying a Son of man shall rule in an everlasting kingdom), and you have no excuse for God saying in Genesis that the seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpant, which is obviously referring to Christ and the cross and was clarified in the New Testament to show it. You have no excuse for the hundreds of prophecies Christ fulfilled. What are you gonna do, refute all of them and continue to show ignorance? So don't tell me about common sense when you ignore prophecies and don't tell me about common sense when you ignore the forewarnings of God Almighty Himself.

[oneGOD]

Here is my refernces, I'l come back and go over your responses guy:

1) Let the Bible SPeak, a book I have.
2) Religions of the worlds, another book
3) How the Bible became the Bible, another book
4) http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/loisy/index.html
5) http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/Resources/Bauer/
6) http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/

Be back later,
peace.

[oneGOD]

Another book that I have:
Ancient religions of the world

[Vision]

http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/

oneGod the link below that Light posted is the correct one

http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/getti ... _pocm.html

If you goto http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/
, right click on the images and select on properties you will see that web address the Light posted two postings earlier

Plus what I want is the Carbon14 dating for that image you posted. Can you post that web link please, I dont want to waste my time searching those link if they are just proganda (which looks like they are)

[oneGOD]

You have no excuse for Isaiah 53 (prophecying the Messiah's death),

He never did. Check this link:

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic.php?t=2777 , that's to show your mistranslated verse as has been shown to you on so many other ccasions and you eventually admitted that twice.

Here is some other opinions:
http://www.messiahtruth.com/zohar.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/targum.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/haftorah.html

I wasn't ignoring no prophecies. I was showing you how the fundamental doctrines change between the OT and the NT is huge and that if you compare christianity today with pagan religions it has borrwed alot.

you have no excuse for Daniel 7

This one doesn't say Jesus will be crucified, Yes when Jesus returns he will establish his kindgom on earth until he dies. ANyway, this could by analyzed in other ways also, but it still doesn't mention Jesus's death on the cross.

You have no excuse for the hundreds of prophecies Christ fulfilled. What are you gonna do, refute all of them and continue to show ignorance?

Not one of these prophecies say that Jesus is God. Not one prophecy say that Jesus will die on the cross. Not one of them use ot talk about whine and blood. Yes they have been refuted so many times. SO MANY times it was shown to you that your honest christian scholars mistranslate certain passages and ALSO add certain passages just like :"pray in the name of the father, the son , and the holy spirit" . It has been added and you can't deny it because they were so desperate about something refering to the trinity in Jesus easrthly sayings.

So don't tell me about common sense when you ignore prophecies

and I know that this common sense I presented in my argument got you talking about the prophecies because this is the only defense you have to keep living the lie. read through it again, think about it.

I love how you focus on two things while you ignore the rest of the massive manuscript evidence to support the biblical scriptures.

Those two are the oldest, they are others and they have the same problems in them. You can find them in the same website. That guy established his argument on the fact that only LAtin manuscripts should be used since all those greece ones disagree on so many points. Yes they can redraw the whole NT from it but there is one simple little fact that you always prefer to IGNORE.One more thing, those older version dating to 80 AD are the reason why many scholars today are making new bibles ommiting hundreds of passages in the NT.

Those are Greece ones, Jesus never spoke Greece but Aramaic. All written material about Jesus were to be burnt except for the translated Greece ones. more than 22,000 documents were discarded, and your honest church leaders chose the ones tha fot their agenda. So, would you call transalted material "the word of God"? I guess not. Many sects who believed in Jesus as a prophet were eliminated by your church, eventhough some still exist till today, after they were mainstream they became nothing after the Roman empire unified all of the religions into one, and when someone inspects the religion during that time and compare it to your religion, they are identical. Read about Mithra, let me know what you think.

Read this link:

http://www.ku.edu/history/index/europe/ ... rut**.html

However, it would be a vast oversimplification to suggest that Mithraism was the single forerunner of early Christianity. Aside from Christ and Mithras, there were plenty of other deities (such as Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis, Balder, Attis, and Dionysus) said to have died and resurrected. Many classical heroic figures, such as Hercules, Perseus, and Theseus, were said to have been born through the union of a virgin mother and divine father. Virtually every pagan religious practice and festivity that couldn't be suppressed or driven underground was eventually incorporated into the rites of Christianity as it spread across Europe and throughout the world.

[Alpha]

He never did. Check this link:

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic.php?t=2777 , that's to show your mistranslated verse as has been shown to you on so many other ccasions and you eventually admitted that twice.

Here is some other opinions:
http://www.messiahtruth.com/zohar.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/targum.html
http://www.messiahtruth.com/haftorah.html

I wasn't ignoring no prophecies. I was showing you how the fundamental doctrines change between the OT and the NT is huge and that if you compare christianity today with pagan religions it has borrwed alot.

I appreciate the fact that other sites have opinions on this matter. All which are false. And in the "prophecies not fulfilled (pt. 1)" topic, your arguments have already been refuted by webmaster, Believer, and myself. Visit that topic again, I have replied to it again. (If there was not so many topics to reply to, I would have noticed what you and Fatima posted and replied to it sooner).

you have no excuse for Daniel 7

This one doesn't say Jesus will be crucified, Yes when Jesus returns he will establish his kindgom on earth until he dies. ANyway, this could by analyzed in other ways also, but it still doesn't mention Jesus's death on the cross.

I wasn't trying to show that this chapter would prophecy the death of Christ. I posted it to show that eventhough you won't refer to Christ as the Son of God, but the Son of man, then that passage states that a "Son of man" will be served in an everlasting kingdom. I do not see Muhammed, i.e. "the greatest prophet?" being served.

Not one of these prophecies say that Jesus is God. Not one prophecy say that Jesus will die on the cross. Not one of them use ot talk about whine and blood. Yes they have been refuted so many times. SO MANY times it was shown to you that your honest christian scholars mistranslate certain passages and ALSO add certain passages just like :"pray in the name of the father, the son , and the holy spirit" . It has been added and you can't deny it because they were so desperate about something refering to the trinity in Jesus easrthly sayings.

These sayings of yours have already been replied to and yet it is Christians who have to repeat themselves. We already went over the "Mighty God" discussion in the OT, and you did not prove that it does not mean Christ is God. So I offered you the challenge of reading the Bible in its context and you will find your answer--that Christ IS God in the flesh. As far as Jesus' death, your arguments have been refuted in the "prophecies not fulfilled (pt. 1)" topic. And the "pray in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit" passage has already been mentioned by Lady Fatima and refuted via Christians. There is nothing wrong with that passage seeing that the Biblical context shows the Father is God, Christ is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. Christ Himself said when baptism is to take place, baptize in the name of those three.

and I know that this common sense I presented in my argument got you talking about the prophecies because this is the only defense you have to keep living the lie. read through it again, think about it.

Your argument was that a God dying on the cross does not make any sense. That was an argument not worthy of a reply seeing that there is no searching for God's understanding [Isaiah 40:28]. You say the Trinity is not God, yet you have no reply to the fact that the God who created the universe gives us examples of trinities that exist in creation. Then how much more can you prove the Trinity is not true? You can't. All you can do is bow the knee to the revelation which God has given us through His Word in the Holy Bible. Job questioned God on matters, and he ended up repenting. How much more will you have to do when you argue the nature of God, whom you are not to fully comprehend? When God sent Isaiah, He said to Isaiah, "Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. " (Isaiah 6:9).

I love how you focus on two things while you ignore the rest of the massive manuscript evidence to support the biblical scriptures.

Those two are the oldest, they are others and they have the same problems in them. You can find them in the same website. That guy established his argument on the fact that only LAtin manuscripts should be used since all those greece ones disagree on so many points. Yes they can redraw the whole NT from it but there is one simple little fact that you always prefer to IGNORE.One more thing, those older version dating to 80 AD are the reason why many scholars today are making new bibles ommiting hundreds of passages in the NT.

Those are Greece ones, Jesus never spoke Greece but Aramaic. All written material about Jesus were to be burnt except for the translated Greece ones. more than 22,000 documents were discarded, and your honest church leaders chose the ones tha fot their agenda. So, would you call transalted material "the word of God"? I guess not. Many sects who believed in Jesus as a prophet were eliminated by your church, eventhough some still exist till today, after they were mainstream they became nothing after the Roman empire unified all of the religions into one, and when someone inspects the religion during that time and compare it to your religion, they are identical.

The reason some documents have been discarded by the Church was because they fail the test of canonicity. If we were to accept every manuscript (Christian, Muslim, Jewish, etc.) as the Word of God, we wouldn't even know the truth seeing that there are many discrepencies between them. Therefore a test of canonicity is done. For example, a simple test is given in order to determine what NT manuscripts to include:

First, the books must have apostolic authority-- that is, they must have been written either by the apostles themselves, who were eyewitnesses to what they wrote about, or by associates of the apostles.
Second, there was the criterion of conformity to what was called the "rule of faith." In other words, was the document congruent with the basic Christian tradition that the church recognized as normative.
Third, there was the criterion of whether a document had enjoyed continuous acceptance and usage by the church at large. --From: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... rigin.html

The reason certain manuscripts are not included are because they fail the test. Doesn't Islam have some kind of test to show which hadiths are true and which are false? So does Christianity in determining its doctrine.

Read about Mithra, let me know what you think.

Mithraism not an influence on Christianity: http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_04_02_04_MMM.html

[Vision]

Read this link:

http://www.ku.edu/history/index/europe/ ... rut**.html

Interesting footnote at the bottom of that link:

"In the interest of balance, it may be useful to point out here that the spread of Islam, achieved by the sword according to the very principle of the religion as repeatedly stated in the Koran, was far more violent and coercive than the spread of Christianity in Roman times or the medieval Crusades"

[Believer]

Peace OneGOD,

This one doesn't say Jesus will be crucified, Yes when Jesus returns he will establish his kindgom on earth until he dies. ANyway, this could by analyzed in other ways also, but it still doesn't mention Jesus's death on the cross.

What fantastic deed did the Son of Man do that greatly pleased the Ancient of Days that He recieved full dominion over the world?

Not one of these prophecies say that Jesus is God. Not one prophecy say that Jesus will die on the cross. Not one of them use ot talk about whine and blood. Yes they have been refuted so many times. SO MANY times it was shown to you that your honest christian scholars mistranslate certain passages and ALSO add certain passages just like :"pray in the name of the father, the son , and the holy spirit" . It has been added and you can't deny it because they were so desperate about something refering to the trinity in Jesus easrthly sayings.

This is nothing but your pure conjecture.
Well, Jesus fulfilled 100's of amazing prophecies!
And He verified what the prophets had said in regards to the Messiah.


Listen to what Jesus says:

Luke 24:25-27;44
25He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?" 27And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

44He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."

and I know that this common sense I presented in my argument got you talking about the prophecies because this is the only defense you have to keep living the lie. read through it again, think about it.

You're "common sense" is common ignorance.
Since you don't believe Jesus was the amazing man that He is, you won't recognize the amazing prophecies that He fulfilled as valid.
Well, you live the lies in your Quran repleted with lies, fairy-tales, and errors.

The reason certain manuscripts are not included are because they fail the test. Doesn't Islam have some kind of test to show which hadiths are true and which are false? So does Christianity in determining its doctrine.

Yes, and it's interesting to note that OneGOD has the audacity to declare all Christian scripture as corrupt (including the Gospel of Mark written at most 20 years after Jesus's life) when the Quran contains tales and stories from the Infancy Gospels and the Psuedo-Matthew Gospel!!! These were written 150 years after Jesus's life!!
Talk about corrupted writing! The Quran is replete with them!

[oneGOD]

Hi,

I read your link ALpha, the thing about the virgin birth is right. However, the wine and bread thing is true. Besides, your link claimed taht all discoveries made dates after Jesus. However, I think that link is outdated since they made alot of recent discoveries in Iran in the past few years, you should check them out.

Plus, there are other religions that were mentioned in this thread that has alot of similarities with Christianity.

The father, the son, and the holy spirit is not added to any bible these days. NO reference whatsoever came out of Jesus when he was on earth about these three things, how come it's refuted when it's never in the bible no more?

Why don't you read about the first Christian council? tell me what you think/

[Alpha]

Hi,

I read your link ALpha, the thing about the virgin birth is right. However, the wine and bread thing is true. Besides, your link claimed taht all discoveries made dates after Jesus. However, I think that link is outdated since they made alot of recent discoveries in Iran in the past few years, you should check them out.

Plus, there are other religions that were mentioned in this thread that has alot of similarities with Christianity.

The father, the son, and the holy spirit is not added to any bible these days. NO reference whatsoever came out of Jesus when he was on earth about these three things, how come it's refuted when it's never in the bible no more?

Why don't you read about the first Christian council? tell me what you think/

Christ made no references to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matt 28:19). There is only one passage that is argued on which contains the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And that passage is not the one I just referred to. The other was mentioned in scripture because when you read the context of the NT, it is a valid teaching. Christianity is based on the prophecies of the OT, not paganism. And if you keep stressing that Christianity came from paganism, I'll just ignore your arguments on Muslim paganism and the moon god just as how you are ignoring my arguments.

[Alpha]

Also, about this first Christian council stuff, listen man.....the canonicity of Biblical scripture is a teaching from God Himself in OT scriptures. That's where Christianity gets its structure to test truth and falsehood--from God. You keep bringing up things which are just speculation. People have all kinds of different stories on Christ. Some say He died, some say He didn't die. Some say He got married to Mary Mag and had children, and some say he faked His death and removed the stone from the tomb and miraculously limped His way to freedom! Whatever story you choose, none makes more sense than Him actually dying for the sins of man to fulfill prophecy--Something which was prophesied by God since Genesis. You like to interpret things carnally, but Christ obviously opposed that type of thinking. For example:

The Pharisees, like you Muslims, did not know what the mission of Christ was in the OT. When Christ would tell them about fulfilled prophecies in the OT, some were literal and some were spiritual. The Pahrisees said the Messiah was to be a son of David. But this is how Jesus replied:

How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

To plainly answer this question...I don't know. And no other person knew the answer to that question either. But it was clearly a prophecy about the Messiah in the OT. So it is best if you Muslims will stop making false claims about OT prophecies just because it does not make anysense to you. Clearly the Messiah was to die for our sins, and clearly Christianity did not come from paganism.

[oneGOD]

Hi,

You keep bringing up things which are just speculation

How can this be speculations when it is all written, the councils have been recorded, where am I speculating here?

One thing I can understand about our arguments here is that we always concentrate on what Jesus said when he was on earth. All the letters or the books after the four Gospels are not referred to most of the time. You can see that , read the post made by OMEGA: Jesus IS g*d.

There are no speculations here Alpha, you know taht when you read the oldest manuscipts you have don't even agree with each other, and every new version of the bible is different from the other. You know , it's all been translated and all the originals were burnt.

I have not made this post for you, it's been made for others to see where modern christianity came from..

[Scorpion]

LOL, originals burnt? Pathetic.

Where Do Bible Manuscripts Come From: http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_08.asp

Read here about the Bible's manuscripts: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorg.html

Please dont go around carrying the same brainless slogan that the Bible is corrupt. Thats quite foolish. Im working a thread to show the Quran supports the Bible's Authenticity. For you to say the Bible is corrupt, is to say the Quran is lying and Allah is a lier and Mohammed is a false prophet. Now you wouldn't agree to that now would you?

The only alternative according to your own book is that the Bible is authentic. I will explain the evidence later on. This week.

Read http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorg.html. Until you cant refute EACH and every one of the 5,366 New Testament manuscripts ... I suggest you keep your mouth closed.

OneGod: Would you like to take on the Job of going through EACH and every one of the 5,366 New Testament manuscripts and then make a wise decision saying wether the Bible is corrupt or is preserved?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/rr2003/res0312a.htm

This website goes through all claims about Bible translations and how you can trust it. The advantage Christians have over Islam is Archeology and History. When the Quran contradicts the Bible by saying 7 people were saved in the Flood and 1 died when the Bible clearly states that 8 people were saved from the Family of Noah, people dont really want to know about Islam.

Please go here ... http://www.souldevice.org/christian_manuscripts.html

And see the lovely pictures and information about Biblical Manuscripts.
Thanks.

[zampeada]

Interesting, I thought it was just MITRAISM that had similarities with Christians... Duh.

I wonder myself why Jews deny Jesus?

[Believer]

Mithraism is a completely different creature than Christianity.
It's a truly pagan religion only for men with NO written scriptures.
What's to say the fail didn't take up any new idea of the day?

What Mithraism and Christianituy have in common are very superficial and not in actual religious doctrine.
What Christiasn believe we believe comes from Jewish scriptures, not imported from other faiths.
I could point out to you, for instance, how Isaiah 53 talks about the passion, death, and ressurection of Christ.

[Amadeus]

oneGod,

I don't know if this has been said already, but couldn't God have used those pagan stories as some sort of sign of things to come? The fact that stories like that had been around before does not prove that Christianity is invalid. After all, you don't see any people believeing those religions any more, do you? Christianity has grown SO MUCH throughout time. That must be a sign to you that there must have been some validity to the resurrectuion.

[LindaBee2]

Man, shut up! You should have learned a few things from this site by now.

What century are you from???

Believer, you can make your points without being rude. You have a better chance of getting OneGOD to listen to you if you would treat him the way Jesus would treat him.

[LindaBee2]

OneGOD, since you believe that Christianity was founded on pagan beliefs and that the Trinity does not exist, please explain to me this Scripture:

Genesis 1:26 - Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. (NIV)

And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (KJV)

[Hannibal]

ya hating peoples bad if you love them and show that then it ticks them off even more!bwhaha!

[Kai Hagbard]

Let me quote myself ones again on this issue.

The whole postulate on Christianity and the myths of Mithra, Adonis and Attis, etc...is a modern view presented mainly by a group of atheists.

The entire theory comes as a full packet, in which the same similar elements are included within the life and accomplishments of more or less every particular mythological indivividual.

In other words, since the theory is presented as a packet, no individual is able to pick choose elements as one wishes. This is where Muslims reveal their desperation and fallacy, not realising that accepting this kind of arguments they simply commit religious suicide.

My first point in reply is:

Is the theory infallible? no! reasons are that scholars have jumped into conclusion, then to write a waste amount of theories into it, thirdly to present it as a fact.

These scholars have presented a great list of detailed claims, the problem is presenting the sources; this is typical as with all Bible-critique.

My challenge to anyone claiming that Jesus is a copy of Mithra, is simply to present me the evidence (not a scholars quote) but actual inscriptions and scriptures of Mithra which points directly to the Christian faith.

A statue or picture of something resembling a crucifixion proves nothing, as there of course will exist thousands of similarities between religions anyway.
Secondly, the cross is not biblically and necessarily a Christian symbol as we often present it. What I mean is, Christians are never told to wear crosses or hang up crosses in their homes or churches. We dont even know how the cross looked like. Christians are only required to follow the example of Jesus to the cross, by living a sacrificial life.


Secondly, can the person prove the linking persons, scriptures or events which caused this progress?

Thirdly, the motive? Why and would the whole Christian world, from British Wales to India get into this kind religious development, especially since Christians were divided into groups.

Any individual with any sense of church history or history would consider such assertions as ridicolous.

An atheist may of course state that Christianity from the very beginning was influenced by Mithraism. There are two problems here: how would Mithraism possibly become such an influence among the Jewish Christians, especially within Palestine, secondly, why should the apostles or church fathers allow themselves to corrupt the very message they belived in and even died for.

Thirdly, in terms of Islam, say the atheists are correct in their claims, where would that leave Islam? Just think about it.

My final point is this, since any individual who values the Jesus-Mithra theory is virtually welcoming a packet of claims, he is not able to pick and choose; he has to welcome every claim this scholar claims.

Lets think about it here is one issue which the Muslim finds hard to swollow:

Mithra was supposedly born by a virgin so was Jesus, do we have a copy Jesus, perhaps, but why does the Koran, say it is God's word, confirm the Bible on Jesus virgin birth.

Every time I ask a Muslim about this issue, he or either refuses to answer or he comes up with some silly speculative idea which contradicts his point.

[zyalnar]

jerk the proof you wanted about the strong relation between christianity and paganism is found in your book:

1: And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed.
2: But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made their minds evil affected against the brethren.
3: Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands.
4: But the multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles.
5: And when there was an assault made both of the Gentiles, and also of the Jews with their rulers, to use them despitefully, and to stone them,
6: They were ware of it, and fled unto Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and unto the region that lieth round about:
7: And there they preached the gospel.
8: And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in his feet, being a cripple from his mother's womb, who never had walked:
9: The same heard Paul speak: who stedfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed,
10: Said with a loud voice, Stand upright on thy feet. And he leaped and walked.
11: And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.
12: And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.
13: Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people.
14: Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,
15: And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein:
16: Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways.
Acts 14

The incarnated gods was already known before the coming of Christ and your bible assure that. Your demented psycho is not different from Jupiter and Mercurius.
Your pyscho is just a cracked enhanced copy of the ancient pagan mythic gods who were incarnated, moron.

[Kai Hagbard]

[LindaBee2]

jerk the proof you wanted about the strong relation between christianity and paganism is found in your book:

What's with all the name-calling? Can't you make your point without resorting to immaturity?

Clearly, you can't. How old are you anyway? If you're an adult, it's pretty sad that you're treating people this way. Grow up, stop insulting people, or just keep your opinions to yourself. And for goodness' sake, read the board rules.

I'm going to have a chat with the moderators and see what's going to be done about you. I have a feeling that you won't be posting again any time soon. Even Christians' patience runs low, especially in regards to internet trolls.

[st]

y is christions were around before islam is that wright y did islarm use the same angel gabreil as its messanger to mahamed was that so they could say as a argumet for there religion to be true I find it hard to believe why would god send the same angel that he sent to announce Jesus birth to call it a
fake that dose not register to me when psalm 22 talk of the cruserfixshion and Zech talks about it even Isaiah talks about it overlesly Mohamed thourt it would be the way to discredit the Christ because the gospels were around first to mi understanding and to use the same angel is a flaw in the Muslim belief because U can see y that angel was use gambrel isent he 1 of gods messengers y would god contradict him self I find that hard to believe when there's more proof for Christ then Mohamed so 1 has to be a fales profit so lets look at it U could in a sense be telling us that ur religion is the fales profit menchend in revelation to me this makes a lot of sense comeperd to what U preach U waist your time trying to convert us to your false doctrine there is something we reairly menchain our church severses we have experienced the precens of god we also feel his presence when we pray and in our worship that's how we no the truth yes we go bi faith but god or Jesus has made his self known to us and we have a fire in owe bell that tells more then word cansay we have a relationship with god and god revels him self in his word many of us here have exspirecet the holy spirit so maybe Evan Muslim believes mite Evan be the lie menchand in the word of god because god would not lie god is truth satan lies in the word of god it says satan can appear as an angel of light im not mocking U im only stating a truth and about Isaiah in case U say im lieing about the cruserfixshion IL wright the passage Isaiah 52 vers13 and my servant will act wisely HE WILL BE RAISED AND LIFTED UP HIGHLY EXALTED and to my understanding gods word says 1cor14:33 for god is not the author of confusion but of peace as in all the churches of the saints I find it to hard to believe god would do that maybe the false profet isant a man but a religion thank U St

[st]

sorry about mi spelling thank st

[H2O]

Christianity is the FULFILLMENT of Judaism.

We have a problem here. Jesus said salvation is of the Jews, so how could Christianity be a fullfilment of Judaism ?

[Sevryn45]

I don't know about any of you guys but what confuses me the most about Islam is that supposedly Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah and yet they reject his teaching because they think he's a pagan Sun God.

Can anyone please explain this to me?

[Kai Hagbard]

I find Islam extremely confused, contradictory and desperate.

They are told to believe and respect all scripture but the Koran is supposedly referring to ancient non-corrupted Scripture; strangely the Koran does not state: 'believe in all Scripture as they existed before they were corrupted', it does not do that, and such would not even seem logical either.

Sadly when listening to Muslim apologists, especially someone like Shabir Ally, I somehow forget the guy is a Muslim, suddenly I wake up, astonished, realising the guy is not an atheist.

Sad for Islam that it has to employ so much of atheistic technic, views and ideas to combat earlier Scripture, which they are supposed to believe in anyway.

In this forum they state to respect the prophet Jesus, but at the same time refer to him as a moron psycho savior.

[Sevryn45]

Shabir Ally got smoked by Sam Shamoun in a debate.

http://www.muslimhope.com/debates.htm

[Amadeus]

H2O:

Christ is the fulfillment of Judaism because Jesus's sacrifice made it possible for the Jews to have a closer communion with God and not have to be SO focused on ceremony. Since Christ's blood made them holy, they no longer had to worry about sacrifices and the Holiness Code. Jesus is also the fulfillment because the Jewish people were (are) waiting for the Messiah, and Jesus is that Messiah.

[galaxy]

To oneGod:
By questionung about Jesus and the Virgin Mary, you are going againt the Koran. You are rubbishing your own Koran. And, just think that in Islam is apostacy. So according to your own religion laws, whatever!!!
In Christianity, you can question, and reason, no penalties. But as a Muslim, and attack the Koran, its integrity, isn't that apostacy, OOOOOH, DEAR!!!??? Surely you know what the Koran said about Jesus and Mary (the only woman mentioned in Koran and has a whole Sora by her name).

[Ozanf]

Take a look at:

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html


http://www.tektonics.org/pocemon/pagan_ ... nysus.html


and;


How about pagan origins of islam?!?

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-moon-god.htm


http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-myths.htm

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-polytheism.htm

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-meteorite-worship.htm


Animism and islam:

http://answering-islam.org.uk/Books/Zwe ... /index.htm

Sources of Quran:

http://answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Sources/index.html

[Endurance]

There are many pagan things that have been incorporated into the true worship of God. If people would stop defending their faith and start seeking God. They would see the truth and the false in the original post. Seek God, forsake the world. A friend of the world is an enemy of God. Before we go off in long debates about our TRADITIONS, we need to seek God and see what He says about them...

With Love,
Snipe