Hell discussion (split from Delta Lounge)

[Eliza Thomason]

@lungs, I just don't know how to respond to something so gross and ugly. I showed SLI your picture and your quote and he says he doesn't know either.

Now he is thinking. He says, "Its from someone who is hostile to Christianity and is expressing that hostility in a ... I don't know.... .... Christian sacrifice is being tarred with the same brush as the worse kind of Paganism.. Like something the Aztecs did... ... I don't have the theological preparation to take that on."

I assure him that no one here is using much brains on this. But he is still thinking. He continues as if someone here is:

"The Sacrifice of Christ is God's willingness to submit himself to the ultimate wickedness of man, and to forgive that, and the forgiveness is the redemption... He is not just a sacrifice; what happened to Jesus is what God didn't want, but allowed, knowing it was going to happen...." He continues and explains, "Its taking the worse man has to give and turning it into good."

So there you go, lungs. My SLI was able to take what you said more seriously than me. To me, it looks like just hate, narrow-minded, ignorant prejudice, adopted mindlessly and whole-hog. But SLI saw something more and took you seriously and that's what he said. I guess that's why we need Duals.

Christian indoctrination of children is child abuse.

Teaching your child intolerance and hate of religion and teaching him lies about other religions is child abuse. To raise a child without religion is sad indeed.

We are made upright; we turn our heads heavenward to worship, we don't have to stare at the ground like animals.

Remember when I drew up your sons birth chart? Your sons birth moon was in Rohini. Right where mine is.
The symbol of Rohini is the Cobra. Your son .... the cobra.
You think I'm a snake, eliza? Do I seem snakelike? (say yes).

More ratlike probably.

Yes, I remember now you did a chart. I guess you really are into that different kind of astrology thing. Okay, you share a moon with my son; I did not remember. But do you, like my son, have someone praying constantly for the state of your soul? I 'll pray for yours, rat1. Probably will require fasting too...

It amuses me you don't even attempt to MAKE a logical response.

How logical is the snake thing you just said?

I will try to address your Greek thing, and all that other illogical stuff you said. Its just that your "ponts" are so far outside the realm of reality that I can only conclude that you must not care about reality, so, what is the point? However I will attempt to comment, and ask my Dual if I get stuck on the Greek/Hebrew as he studied the Bible in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin and sat exams for it in the various languages. Though it was some time back he has a great memory for it.

But its not logical and not coherent and not accurate what you said.

Yes Delta Kin, but also a Christian Kin. I'm a true Christian here to help.

There are legion who "create their own" religion and call it Christianity. I am into true Christianity. The one that Jesus founded and has not changed and never will. Its essentials have always been the same and are simple enough for anyone to understand.

In 1000AD the Kingdom of Germany was the largest, most central Kingdom of the Roman empire. The Romans were Pagans, and it was here in 1000AD Constantine declared Christianity the dominant religion of Rome. All Romans were to convert from Paganism to Christianity.

Conrad the II was the Holy Roman Emperor in 1000AD. Constantine was 700 years dead at this time. Yes, the one whose mother was Helena, who found the True Cross, on pilgrimage, after a dream about it, fragments of which we still have.

And Constantine never got to Germany, either.

SLI asks what the heck are you smoking. He says you must be thinking of the "The Holy Roman Empire", which was neither Holy nor Roman nor an Empire. Christmas Day in 800 Charlemagne was crowned by the Pope, that's where the "Roman" came from, but it all has nothing whatsoever to do with what you are talking about. It was a very quiet period, that has nothing to do with the shaping of Christianity. SLI says you are mixing up all kinds of history events and centuries here.

Constantine did not make people convert. Christianity is not Islam. He simply said it was time to stop persecuting Christians, something he decided during his reign, after he converted to Christianity. So Christians no longer had to hide in the catacombs to celebrate Mass, and were no longer thrown to the lions for their beliefs, so yes, it was a big moment for Christianity. Constantine proclaimed the Edict of Milan which now said Christianity could be tolerated, and that religion was not to be persecuted.

Imagine that!

That's the truth, and what you said is completely mixed up.

SLI wonders why I am arguing with someone who has history so mixed up.

original hebrew word we know as hell - gehenna - was here translated by the Romans into 'hell'. Hell was a Pagan concept, and when the two belief systems merged, hell had to integrate with Christianity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wikiGehenna
"English "Gehenna" represents the Greek Ge'enna (γέεννα) found in the New Testament, a phonetic transcription of Aramaic Gēhannā (ܓܗܢܐ), equivalent to the Hebrew Ge Hinnom, literally "Valley of Hinnom"." - wiki

The original hebrew word, Gehenna, is an actual physical place outside Jerusalem where dead bodies were thrown. People who'd died of all sorts of disease, for crimes, for worshipping Baal, and so on. They were thrown into this massive pit... This real, physical place. Every reference to hell within the new testament was actually referring to this pit, this real place outside of Jerusalem.

No. Paganism and Christianity did not "merge". This is an imaginary event you refer to with no facts to back it up.

Your link doesn't work but from another Wiki link on Gehenna: "In the Hebrew Bible, the site was initially where apostate Israelites and followers of various Ba'als and Caananite gods, including Moloch, sacrificed their children by fire (2 Chr. 28:3, 33:6). Thereafter it was deemed to be cursed (Jer. 7:31, 19:2-6).[1]"

The cursed place. Yes, Hell is where some will end of eternity, and yes, it is a cursed place.

It is a place for those who reject good and love and mercy all of which is God. If you don't want that, you go there to be away from that FOREVER. I understand that those who end up in hell CHOOSE it.


And no, the New Testament, when it mentions hell is NOT referring to this pit where apostates put the bodies they sacrificed. But you can believe whatever you want to believe and if you could care less about truth this probably appeals to you. And you are free to care less about truth because God gave us free will. What a dreary choice though. But I don't know what else to say about your silly no-hell theory. Its based on nothing.

Here is just one reference from the original Hebrew New Testmanent where this word is used by Jesus. This is from Youngs Literal Translation - that's the original hebrew translated as best as possible into english.
Mathew 5:29 `But, if thy right eye doth cause thee to stumble, pluck it out and cast from thee, for it is good to thee that one of thy members may perish, and not thy whole body be cast to gehenna.

I wonder if it occured to you aware that this is a metaphor? You need to know that we actually aren't supposed to pluck our eyes out. We don't even have to "cast them from thee"! Nope.

There was also 'Sheol' used in the original hebrew, which was just a concept of neutral darkness ... death encompassing. Totally neutral, no concept of righteousness or judgment attached to it, no punishment or pain. Just blackness. Then that was also translated into hell by the romans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol

There was a place of expectation when the dead were waiting for heaven to open before the redemption. Heaven is open now.

There are two judegments. There is the judgement immediately at death. The determination is then made, heaven or hell (or purgatory, probably most of us, all of whom are heaven bound and will never go to hell, so, ultimately, there is just the two destinations). Then there is a judgement at the end of the world when our bodies are resurrected from the dust of the earth and join our souls, in heaven or hell.

But do you want to know this, rat? I don't see where you have any desire to know truth.

You have funny interpretations of the Bible that do not fit any Christian religion I ever heard of. But there are tons of people who are their own personal authority on what the Bible says, and there always will be. You can even become a minister on the internet. And people start their own churches every day, and elect themselves in charge.

Christianity is not the Bible. "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work." That is the truth. Also true is that Jesus on earth never wrote a Bible; he founded a Church, and it is the Church, not the Bible, that is the pillar and foundation of truth. And I am with the Church. "Bible alone" arguments are not going to sway me.

There was never any idea of hell in the original bible. This is why Jews today still don't believe in hell. It's only the Roman Catholic church and its offshoots that believe in hell.

You are not going to hell. No one is. It never existed.

If you can say definitively what the Jews believe on that subject you are doing much better than all of them because they aren't so sure as you are!

So do you like the idea that hell doesn't exist? That appeals to you? Just because a thing sounds nice to believe does not mean its true, rat.

Nothing you say appeals to me. None of it rings truth and light. Also nothing you say makes me think you care about that. But its what I want. I do not want to be like those people who come to mind when I read what you write, who are "always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." Timothy 2:3-7

How boring that is.

[ashlesha]

@lungs, I just don't know how to respond to something so gross and ugly. I showed SLI your picture and your quote and he says he doesn't know either.

Now he is thinking. He says, "Its from someone who is hostile to Christianity and is expressing that hostility in a ... I don't know.... .... Christian sacrifice is being tarred with the same brush as the worse kind of Paganism.. Like something the Aztecs did... ... I don't have the theological preparation to take that on."

I assure him that no one here is using much brains on this. But he is still thinking. He continues as if someone here is:

"The Sacrifice of Christ is God's willingness to submit himself to the ultimate wickedness of man, and to forgive that, and the forgiveness is the redemption... He is not just a sacrifice; what happened to Jesus is what God didn't want, but allowed, knowing it was going to happen...." He continues and explains, "Its taking the worse man has to give and turning it into good."

So there you go, lungs. My SLI was able to take what you said more seriously than me. To me, it looks like just hate, narrow-minded, ignorant prejudice, adopted mindlessly and whole-hog. But SLI saw something more and took you seriously and that's what he said. I guess that's why we need Duals.

kids grow into and internalize your expectations for them and christianity teaches that you are fundamentally bad and need to beg for forgiveness just for being who you are. little kids are told that some guy was nailed to a cross by his hands (hows that for gross and ugly) to pay for the badness of people. i don't know how you could be so tunnel visioned that you could possibly deny that this message could be unsettling for a small child.

that said i posted it the picture mostly because i had seen a similar one earlier that day that made me think and i was reminded of it when i saw this thread. i think it has a good point. but i don't have a belief religion is always child abuse. i think there are also positive things that could come out of it like compassion and charity and the understanding that you're not the center of the universe. it depends on the parents and how they handle it.

[Eliza Thomason]

Excellent question. Unfortunately many religions teach people (children) to "hate" and disguise it as righteousness. It's insidious....

Well what about anti-religion haters, Aylen? Are they insidious, too?

...
I've hated religious people (not the quiet ones, but the ones that like @Maritsa and @Eliza Thomason make a lot of noise about it) my entire life.

Wow, Reficulris, you hate me? I never even met you. I guess Rat1 hates me, too, since he likes what you said? Is that why you goaded me into talking to you, rat1, because you hate me and you wanted to get into a hateful conversation?

There is a LOT of hate in this thread, that's for sure.

I am not the one making religious noise, Reficulris, its Rat1. I didn't start this. I asked that Rat's question be moved to philosophy forum, since there was no Religion forum, because people get touchy about talk about religion; they want religious discussion to be censored because they cannot tolerate it, and Rat's religious question was in the Lounge forum and I did not want intolerant people to be offended.

But how am I making noise?? I was trying to protect intolerant from having to see any words about God by having the thread moved here. So I think I am pretty quiet about religion.

So why do you hate me??

BTW, in my experience, people who have the complaint about all religious people being hateful in their life actually only had one or two people like that, and they had a lot of nice religious people in their life, too, that they prefer to pretend did not exist. Whenever I have dug into that mystery, that is what I find. Its just intolerance, wanting to broad-stroke ALL religious people to match some intolerant person they met in their past.

Intolerance is really bothering you, I see,. You should look in the mirror, my friend.

[Reficulris]

Wow, Reficulris, you hate me? I never even met you. I guess Rat1 hates me, too, since he likes what you said? Is that why you goaded me into talking to you, rat1, because you hate me and you wanted to get into a hateful conversation?

There is a LOT of hate in this thread, that's for sure.

I am not the one making religious noise, Reficulris, its Rat1. I didn't start this. I asked that Rat's question be moved to philosophy forum, since there was no Religion forum, because people get touchy about talk about religion; they want religious discussion to be censored because they cannot tolerate it, and Rat's religious question was in the Lounge forum and I did not want intolerant people to be offended.

But how am I making noise?? I was trying to protect intolerant from having to see any words about God by having the thread moved here. So I think I am pretty quiet about religion.

So why do you hate me??

BTW, in my experience, people who have the complaint about all religious people being hateful in their life actually only had one or two people like that, and they had a lot of nice religious people in their life, too, that they prefer to pretend did not exist. Whenever I have dug into that mystery, that is what I find. Its just intolerance, wanting to broad-stroke ALL religious people to match some intolerant person they met in their past.

Intolerance is really bothering you, I see,. You should look in the mirror, my friend.

Well, obviously I don't know you, so I don't hate you. I hate the people that you remind me off. I hate the way of argumenting. I hate what I percieve as dogmatism. You are free to believe what you want and yes, there are probably more nice religious people than there are bad religious people. It's just that the most cruel people i've met had religion as shield and armour and the most callous groups i've seen were churches.

So, you are compeletly right, as I put down at the end of my post, it was posted in spite. It's spite that is, in my own frame of reference, completely justified as is the hate/fear I feel when I read your posts. There is a complete and utter difference in assumptions between how you communicate and how I prefer to communicate. There is a complete and utter difference between our values (the implied ones) where I rather see some-one elses paradigm than assert my own as truth (true faith? please..).

But than, I'm as dogmatic in my views as you are, dogmatism strives in opposition and when i see believers my dogma grows as does theirs, which is frankly why i'll never go into discussion about religion/philosophy with you, we can only polarize our views which in my case is not desirable.

So no, I don't hate you, I hate what you remind me of, I hate what people have done in name of religion. I hate what people have done because they followed "the true faith". I hate how religion is a way for people not to see the abyss. I hate that you can't convince me the world is a safe and magical place. I hate how people pretend there are answers where I find none. I hate how they assume I've never tried, or am unwilling. I hate how they see others' attempts to undestand and/or cope with the world as heresy or wrong. I hate how this is about right and wrong, good and evil bible v.s. dead seascrolls instead about making sense of the world.

I don't believe @rat1 is more "right" than you are... I believe his/her views are more...modern...more accomodating to the other ways of thinking. Less constrained by tradition, creed....again, dogma.

But in the end, who knows. It's just my psyche that rebels when someone claims to understand...to know...to have an ultimate source of truth. As if there's anything i'm convinced of, dogmatically so, it is that such doesn not exist. No-one knows, no-one understands, no-one has the truth.

We're all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.....

[kadda1212]

@rat1 I have to cry right now. See, I'm studying Byzantine art history. You know the Byzantine Empire? Named after Byzantium or Constantinople, founded by emperor Constantine?
He lived in the 3rd/4th century, not around 1000AD (that's about the time Hildegard of Bingen was born, a famous composer of Christian hymns, a mystic and healer...Christianity was obviously well developed at that time). Constantine didn't make Christianity the state religion either, he only legalized it. His succesor made it a state religion (watch the movie "Agora" if you want to know more about it...).
And it's got nothing to do with Germany. My country didn't even exist at that time (3rd/4th century), it was a bunch of tribes, some lived in Roman provinces.

[kadda1212]

@Eliza Thomason, it's not such an easy topic. When rat1 says Christianity and Paganism merged he may even be right. I can think of a lot of stuff that lingers in the minds of Christian people that has its root somewhere else. But maybe it's more of a parallelism than a merging. And a lot of beliefs about hell come from old beliefs about the underworld. As the word "hell" refers to the Germanic idea of the netherworld. And the Jews already knew how to borrow a lot of Babylonian stuff, you can find that in the Old Testament. But it's not a big problem, cause in the end everything derived from the first beliefs of Indoeuropean people and they were all very similar.
I can explain you the Greek and Hebrew words that are translated into hell, though. I know Ancient Greek, so it's not a big deal. What's important though is that there is a concept of hell, but we know about as much of it as we know about heaven. It's probably not something Jesus wanted to elaborate so much on, must be painful even to think about it.

[Eliza Thomason]

Thanks @lungs and @Reficulris for explaining yourselves better. I will get back to this thread (also to respond to what you said @kadda1212) but right now I am preparing to go away where there is no computer for a week...

But I just want to say, Reficulris, if one of Jesus's own Apostles was a traitor and a thief then don't you think we still have them, too? Calling yourself a Christian does not suddenly make you into a good person. And some people are just a mess, and they like themselves that way, and do not want to change. God does not violate anyone's free will just because they become a believer.

You will find no group of humans that has no hypocrites in it. You cannot judge a religion by its hypocrites. You can judge it by its true teaching, though. (true ones- not someone's rumors or confused ideas about what they think is taught in that religion).

Rat1 you are confused about what is Christianity and so are many of the posters in this thread who are clearly relieved to be keeping themselves safe from some awful place that is in fact an imaginary place. But I have battled windmills too. I never imagined I would ever be Catholic; and never wanted to be Catholic - there is SO MUCH so wrong with it, I was so sure, for so long. But then I decided to find out what it really taught. And I ended up Catholic.

And because of my previous misguided prejudice, this quote below from Bishop Fulton Sheen is one of my favorites. Since I know it is really true:

"There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing."

Well this evening I read up some on Charlemagne, after my SLI mentioned him, to correct Rat's misguided history. Well I never knew Charlemagne discovered the relics of St. Anne, mother of the Mother of Our Lord. What an uplifting story. (Catholics know: Matter matters!). Here it is for anyone who wants refreshment. There are typos here, but its an easy-read version): http://taylormarshall.com/2012/07/ho...relics-of.html

[Reficulris]

Thanks @lungs and @Reficulris for explaining yourselves better. I will get back to this thread (also to respond to what you said @kadda1212) but right now I am preparing to go away where there is no computer for a week...

But I just want to say, Reficulris, if one of Jesus's own Apostles was a traitor and a thief then don't you think we still have them, too? Calling yourself a Christian does not suddenly make you into a good person. And some people are just a mess, and they like themselves that way, and do not want to change. God does not violate anyone's free will just because they become a believer.

You will find no group of humans that has no hypocrites in it. You cannot judge a religion by its hypocrites. You can judge it by its true teaching, though. (true ones- not someone's rumors or confused ideas about what they think is taught in that religion).

Rat1 you are confused about what is Christianity and so are many of the posters in this thread who are clearly relieved to be keeping themselves safe from some awful place that is in fact an imaginary place. But I have battled windmills too. I never imagined I would ever be Catholic; and never wanted to be Catholic - there is SO MUCH so wrong with it, I was so sure, for so long. But then I decided to find out what it really taught. And I ended up Catholic.

And because of my previous misguided prejudice, this quote below from Bishop Fulton Sheen is one of my favorites. Since I know it is really true:

"There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing."

Well this evening I read up some on Charlemagne, after my SLI mentioned him, to correct Rat's misguided history. Well I never knew Charlemagne discovered the relics of St. Anne, mother of the Mother of Our Lord. What an uplifting story. (Catholics know: Matter matters!). Here it is for anyone who wants refreshment. There are typos here, but its an easy-read version): http://taylormarshall.com/2012/07/ho...relics-of.html

Sure all your points about judging people based upon the bad ones are valid, as I conceded already.

But than we get to the point of the "real" faith and there I get into trouble. See, there's been a few (quite a few) people who told me they had the "true" faith, the "true" teachings. You see, for every Eliza there is a Rat, for every Refi there is a DJA. How can you KNOW your faith is the true one? you can't. you have to believe. And so you risk believing in the wrong faith. Don't try to convince me your faith is the true one, I don't believe in truth nor in history nor in books (well, books exist, but their content is highly debatable). So, for me it ends up with a socially construct that is called "church x church y". Which i will judge, yes, based upon which people identify with it and which people and behaviours it encourages.

The catholic church and people who say they are the catholic church:

I am talking about the institution, the very real body of people and fast wealth that seats in the vatican. I think it is the epitome of evil in every way. Ofc, if you say "that's not the true catholic church" then we are just talking about different things. If you don't think it's evil you hold different standards. But i've never seen opression as institutionalized as what is professed in the vatican (although the new pope seems of a kinder breed than his predesessor).

Than, my "own" church, Reformed (yeah you can see where my hatred for the catholic church comes from...) they're narrowminded people that believe life on earth is worthless and should be spend toiling for salvation in the afterlife. Also, they kinda dislike people questioning faith (even though they started out that way originally) and the only way they answer questions is by throwing bible quotes at you that, frankly were arbitrarily collected. For everything in the bible there is the opposite in the same damned book.

At least catholics know how to enjoy life, too bad they think that enjoying children is part of that (and yes, that is part of the catholic church, the highest officials of that very institution shielded known pedophiles) and also think that abortion is a sin (making milions of women miserable) and that condoms are bad (prolonging HIV infections) and mentally abusing homosexuals...so no, nothing good about them. And then there's the riches they got by having people "pay to remove the sins before death". Such an awesome business model... If it was dreamt up on modern day we would call it a scam.

So the institutions themselves are out, they'll never appeal to me. I've seen them up close and found them rotting on the inside of their golden crusefixes. That same rot permeades most people that will actively state their believe. As soon as it becomes social and not personal believe has the toxic effect of meddling in the freedom of people to make sense of the world. Any missionary drive in my opinion is dangerous and can only lead to misery.

So, I can't agree or follow the institutions since they're just too horrible... and I can't find a reasonable way of demarcating one true faith from another true faith. That leads to one conclusion; I can only tolerate the existance of the very thing. I can only, passively watch it, watch people wage wars or discussions based upon...well...dusty books, misinterpretations, failing assumptions, faulty logics..... I see no benefit of the existance of believe, as stated before my experiences with believers is that on average, they contain more unpleasant people than non-believers. The institutions make me feel sick. History doesn't give too great of a reputation to religions either, most good stuff only starting to exist when the religions lost power (freedom of expression, emancipation, technological breakthroughs).




And than... I look at the world. The only thing that comes to mind, when I look through my religious lense is the following "if gods exist he's a damned bastard". I like my world, I like the fact that it's chaotic, beautifull I love the opposition, I love the conflict, I love most things that others call evil. But to say it is created by a omnipotent being is....painful, cause beautiful as it is, it could have been different, better, less....cruel. I am in the position to love what I listed above, but that's because i'm a filthy rich european bastard who will never starve, be raped plundered exploited. It's because in a way I, myself rape exploint and plunder other countries by consuming.... you do too (I asume) and still call yourself a christian? That alone for me is hard to accept, I think you cannot be a true christian and live in first world contries since doing so inherently takes away the life of others....There is not much goodness in our society, even if you're a "good individual" I still believe you are "sinning" against the third world populace, the creatures other than humans, the world itself. This is no problem for me, if and only if you accept yourself as such and do not think you're better than someone else because you're christian.

end of rave.

[rat1]

@rat1 I have to cry right now. See, I'm studying Byzantine art history. You know the Byzantine Empire? Named after Byzantium or Constantinople, founded by emperor Constantine?
He lived in the 3rd/4th century, not around 1000AD (that's about the time Hildegard of Bingen was born, a famous composer of Christian hymns, a mystic and healer...Christianity was obviously well developed at that time). Constantine didn't make Christianity the state religion either, he only legalized it. His succesor made it a state religion (watch the movie "Agora" if you want to know more about it...).
And it's got nothing to do with Germany. My country didn't even exist at that time (3rd/4th century), it was a bunch of tribes, some lived in Roman provinces.

@Eliza Thomason, it's not such an easy topic. When rat1 says Christianity and Paganism merged he may even be right. I can think of a lot of stuff that lingers in the minds of Christian people that has its root somewhere else. But maybe it's more of a parallelism than a merging. And a lot of beliefs about hell come from old beliefs about the underworld. As the word "hell" refers to the Germanic idea of the netherworld. And the Jews already knew how to borrow a lot of Babylonian stuff, you can find that in the Old Testament. But it's not a big problem, cause in the end everything derived from the first beliefs of Indoeuropean people and they were all very similar.
I can explain you the Greek and Hebrew words that are translated into hell, though. I know Ancient Greek, so it's not a big deal. What's important though is that there is a concept of hell, but we know about as much of it as we know about heaven. It's probably not something Jesus wanted to elaborate so much on, must be painful even to think about it.

OK.. imperial conversion to christianity happened. between 300-400AD, not 1000AD. You're right. I was wrong.
I think @hitta is the one who told me it was 1000AD... Thanks Hitta! ; D
Hitta come in here and shed light on this. I'm sure I misinterpreted you...

If the merging of Christianity and Paganism happened earlier than I thought, than, to me, that corrupts Christianity even further. 300AD. Some of the earliest Bibles, considered historically authoritative, come from around these times... ~300AD. So even your most authoritative texts may have been influenced by Paganism...

Let's talk about hell some more.
Why were the words 'Gehenna' and "Sheol" translated into Hell? Do you concede those are mistranslations, and now are perpetuated lies?
If you concede this, why do you still suspect there being a hell elsewhere? ....

You say there 'may be an idea of hell in the bible'. What does that mean there "may be" one?
If there was a Hebrew concept of hell, show me where.

Because to me, the layman, it's evident the word was mistranslated and there is no hell in the original bible.

Beliefs from various cultures DO evolve and merge, and the bible has meaning paralleled in mithraism, the egyptian religions... many other religions.
But this only refutes a dogmatic evaluation of the Bible. Such realizations inspire an inclusive, multicultural religious appreciation, with inner spirituality.
That's the healthy view to have, and the realistic one. So when you talk about the evolution of Christianity from other religions, I'm confused.. are you even a Christian? What are your beliefs?

I started this conflict intending to root out the Christian dogma I see rampant in this country, exemplified in people like Eliza and Abby, and who force it onto their children.
If you're a multiculturalist, I don't see why you'd value Christianity over the myriad of beautiful alternative religious works. Vedism I can personally testify to... it's an amazing religion. Ancient Hinduism.
The Christian religion, by comparison, is nihilistic and demented. It's sadistic in the old testament, masochistic in the new, sexually abusive throughout, with an dismal, apocalyptic view of humanity and the future, it encourages and perpetuates child abuse, and leads to suicide.

Even for a spiritualist who finds personal, mythical meaning in Christianity, I find this psychologically deranged.

Let me not get too far off of the original topic of hells existence, though.

[Aylen]

More ratlike probably.

Yes, I remember now you did a chart. I guess you really are into that different kind of astrology thing. Okay, you share a moon with my son; I did not remember. But do you, like my son, have someone praying constantly for the state of your soul? I 'll pray for yours, rat1. Probably will require fasting too...

That is the MOST arrogant thing I've read anyone say, to another, on this entire forum so far. In a little while I will tell you a true story and would like your opinion. Right now I am focused on something else.

ar·ro·gant
ˈarəgənt
adjective
1.
having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.

I find this less offensive:

 

[Beautiful sky]

I don't advocate the abolishment of religion. I prefer natural religion; a religion connected to nature, much like those of the indians. A spiritual attunement with nature. This is far more compassionate and real than any of the worlds modern dominant religions (with the exception of some hindu sects). The moment a religious belief becomes dogma (it happens through presession) it's become maladaptive and... ultimately cancerous. Dogmatic religion departs from nature and civilization expands...

The best examples of natural religion are in tribal people. The egyptian religion is often cited as an exception... a highly civilized society which managed to remain in balance for 3000 years, connected to nature; they never expanded their civilization beyond its limits... all their practices were sustainable, and they respected animals as much as they did human beings. Then again, there are geographical reasons for that. They were surrounded by deserts. ...I still love their religion.

Yawn... but cancer is a natural occurrence, too.


You cannot separate scientific advancement from society as a whole. Science is a byproduct of modern society which has only destroyed the biosphere. Disease serves an important function of controlling population numbers; again preventing pollution buildup. (And an evolutionary function). When you eliminate that function, the population booms and pollution begins building. Right now, the Meditteranean sea... 90% of the fish are extinct. In the Atlantic ocean it's something like 40%. For you science and medicine may be a good thing. For the future generations, they'll be picking up the shit we've left behind. So no, this modern expansion isn't a good thing. It's cancerous.

A lot of stuff is subject to interpretation and translation. I've read the Bible in Hebrew and there have been so many things taken out of context or interpreted incorrectly. Also, most people will walk away from books with differing perspective and value in accordance to their own goals and feelings. Like I've said some of it isn't meant to be litteral...as in "wash them with my blood" is some thing like "cleans them and give them a renewed sense of purpose because I represent that."

You just want to malign Eliza for her beliefe. You're being cruel.

[rat1]

"The Sacrifice of Christ is God's willingness to submit himself to the ultimate wickedness of man, and to forgive that, and the forgiveness is the redemption... He is not just a sacrifice; what happened to Jesus is what God didn't want, but allowed, knowing it was going to happen...." He continues and explains, "Its taking the worse man has to give and turning it into good."

The sacrifice of Christ, however meaningful, is still a mythical story and a metaphor. There have been countless similar dying God figures in other cultures throughout history, conveying the same meaning. We don't need to worship Christ in order to forgive eachother. I may be an atheist, but I forgive people all the time for the most deranged shit. More deranged than you have ever known, I'd wager.

Teaching your child intolerance and hate of religion and teaching him lies about other religions is child abuse.

Your religion is sexually abusive, sadomasochistic, leads to suicide, perpetuates pedophilia in secret, and has rallied war since its inception. I would not tolerate a rapist grabbing my sister, pulling her into an ally and having his way with her. Neither must I "tolerate" your toxic religion.

To raise a child without religion is sad indeed.
We are made upright; we turn our heads heavenward to worship, we don't have to stare at the ground like animals.

Your religion is not the only religion on earth.
The highest form of religion is identification with nature. To teach a child about nature, to show them the animals and the mountains and the plants... is beautiful.
The most ancient religions are of the stargazers. But your hatred of animals I find unacceptable, and your child IS the BEAST.

More ratlike probably.
Yes, I remember now you did a chart. I guess you really are into that different kind of astrology thing. Okay, you share a moon with my son; I did not remember. But do you, like my son, have someone praying constantly for the state of your soul? I 'll pray for yours, rat1. Probably will require fasting too...

Here's a mother smothering her son by pouring her religiously repressed sexual instincts into him.

There are legion who "create their own" religion and call it Christianity. I am into true Christianity. The one that Jesus founded and has not changed and never will. Its essentials have always been the same and are simple enough for anyone to understand.

The new testament teachings are mostly taken from other sources.

If you can say definitively what the Jews believe on that subject you are doing much better than all of them because they aren't so sure as you are!

There's disputes among the Jews... the dominant viewpoint is hell doesn't exist. Some Jews are ignorant... you'll find ignorance pretty much everywhere.

So do you like the idea that hell doesn't exist? That appeals to you?

It makes me very happy to know that.

Just because a thing sounds nice to believe does not mean its true, rat.

Ok... neither does it make it untrue. Is there a point here? Are you implying that a miserable prospect is.... necessarily true?

Nothing you say appeals to me. None of it rings truth and light. Also nothing you say makes me think you care about that. But its what I want. I do not want to be like those people who come to mind when I read what you write, who are "always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." Timothy 2:3-7

How boring that is.

..........
Does this ring truth and light?

[Beautiful sky]

@Eliza Thomason bail out

don't waste your energy on such nonsense

[Eliza Thomason]

ar·ro·gant
ˈarəgənt
adjective
1.
having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.
@Aylen, the important thing is not my ability to pray, its the prayer itself. The importance of even a poor prayer cannot be exaggerated. In prayer I have no special ability but I try not to let that trip me because a thing worth doing is worth doing poorly.

I am too aware of all I lack as a parent and all the things I could have should have done better and the lack in even my best efforts. However I take comfort that my poor effort at prayer for my son is his wealth. For my part, its regular at least. They are poor prayers badly said but they are backed by one who is a giant in love and prayer. Which is nothing at all to do with any merit of mine but everything to do with who she is: Advocate.


And we ALL need prayer...

[rat1]

[InvisibleJim]

Saturns comin fo you.

Pray to your moon god Yaweh!

[Eliza Thomason]

@Eliza Thomason bail out

don't waste your energy on such nonsense

Good advice, Maritsa.

But why is rat1 all in a tizzy about what he imagines are my opinions and practices which he has no idea of since I have never discussed them here? Its kind of surreal. Its like one of those surreal paintings.

...Actually I have this picture in my mind right now of a melting clock in the desert.

[rat1]

Saturns comin fo you.

Pray to your moon god Yaweh!

Yeah I'm just a quack, aren't I?

Christian indoctrination is child abuse. It perpetuates child sexual abuse. At the highest levels the priests are child molesters.

[Beautiful sky]

Good advice, Maritsa.

But why is rat1 all in a tizzy about what he imagines are my opinions and practices which he has no idea of since I have never discussed them here? Its kind of surreal. Its like one of those surreal paintings.

...Actually I have this picture in my mind right now of a melting melting clock in the desert.

He just wants to start drama and rouse your emotions, shake you up.

Yeah I'm just a quack, aren't I?

No one said that.

[InvisibleJim]

Yeah I'm just a quack, aren't I?

Depends if you believe the Ancients, some 15th century control freaks or worse, some materialistic minimalists.

[rat1]

Depends if you believe the Ancients, some 15th century control freaks or worse, some materialistic minimalists.

The Ancients were all quacks, weren't they?

[InvisibleJim]

The Ancients were all quacks, weren't they?

I'll withhold my answer for about 9,000 years.

[Aylen]

@Eliza Thomason bail out

don't waste your energy on such nonsense

I believe... it would not be a waste of her energy, if she is following what her faith asks of her. Who knows maybe she will say something to change someone's life in this cyberworld. I do not dismiss her beliefs. They are just very different than mine but I'm not in a state of consciousness, at the moment, to discuss my beliefs. If she fades out of this conversation I will probably still answer her question (to me) from earlier.

 

[rat1]

I'll withhold my answer for about 9,000 years.

You may only need to wait another couple hundred. Their knowledge is returning.
...Assuming we find a way to keep you alive that long in the meantime.

[Beautiful sky]

The world's only going to get better as we understand and tollerate each other <3

Love on

[Aylen]

The sacrifice of Christ, however meaningful, is still a mythical story and a metaphor. There have been countless similar dying God figures in other cultures throughout history, conveying the same meaning. We don't need to worship Christ in order to forgive eachother. I may be an atheist, but I forgive people all the time for the most deranged shit. More deranged than you have ever known, I'd wager.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-death-rebirth_deity

[rat1]

Wow, I didn't realize there were female dying Gods in past history. That's... not intuitive for the prevailing cultural view of women.

[Aylen]

Wow, I didn't realize there were female dying Gods in past history. That's... interesting.

Look at us! I think we are "dualing" it up. haha but that can't be because we are identical, but, but, you also activate me... maybe you are my supervisor... or hmmm, one of us is going to have to stop being so IEI, it's just fucking annoying.

[rat1]

I refuse to be categorized an IEI.

Maybe I should go run around the block for a bit and be SLE in the meantime.

[Aylen]

I refuse to be categorized an IEI.

see, once again we agree, arrrgh! I have to strike you down once so... close your eyes... it won't hurt.



Edit: it is almost time to count sheep. can you tell i am getting delirious...

[rat1]

You want disagreement? Give me time.

[kadda1212]

OK.. imperial conversion to christianity happened. between 300-400AD, not 1000AD. You're right. I was wrong.
I think @hitta is the one who told me it was 1000AD... Thanks Hitta! ; D
Hitta come in here and shed light on this. I'm sure I misinterpreted you...

Shame on Hitta. xP It was emperor Theodosius who declared Christianity as a state religion and it was one of the biggest mistakes that ever happened in Christian history. Before, converting to Christianity was a matter of belief, after that it turned into a political thing. People got baptized because they wanted to have power in the state and couldn't receive that if they still clung to the religion of there forefathers. And the mixture of political power and religion always turned into a big mess.

If the merging of Christianity and Paganism happened earlier than I thought, than, to me, that corrupts Christianity even further. 300AD. Some of the earliest Bibles, considered historically authoritative, come from around these times... ~300AD. So even your most authoritative texts may have been influenced by Paganism...

I'm not so sure what you mean by merging. As far as I can tell the New Testament is pretty much incorrupted, there are no Pagan ideas inside it, except the use of a Greek word like "Hades" as translation of the Hebrew "Sheol". I mean, whatever word is there to use in Greek. They don't have another word for that. The Old Testament, though, is debatable, there are many Babylonian influences, as far as I can tell, because some of the writers are believed to have lived in Babylon. So, it's very easy to compare those mythological stories of the Genesis to things like the Enuma Elish or Gilgamesh. And you'll find similarities.
But if you mean by merging of Christianity and Paganism, forcefully converting Pagans to Christianity, christianizing Pagan festivals and traditions. Yes, that happened. I believe, the worship of saints is a mere replacement for polytheism. It may be a little bit more complicated, but it clearly is a thing messianic Jews don't care at all about. Only Christians with pagan roots. Also, the intensified worship of Mary, the way she is depicted in pictures - clearly a replacement for Isis, who was a very, very, very popular goddess with a big cult in the 2nd/3rd century. I live quite near to the ruins of one of her many temples that existed throughout the Roman provinces, so I'm sure about it. But I guess the need for a mother goddess is an idea that couldn't be simply washed away. Christmas falls of course on the date of the festival of Sol Invictus, so some ideas of that survived in Christmas (eternity, winter doesn't last forever and so on), Easter though is completely Christian and the date simply depends on the Jewish Pessach festival. There are no pagan roots behind it, that's something that the Brothers Grimm invented when they wrote the first German dictionary, the invented a Germanic/Celtic fertility goddess called Ostera who has a rabbit as her companion. This goddess never existed though. The idea is still quite popular in Germany, because the Nazis spread it further - they wanted to reinvent old Germanic religions, because believing that a Jew is the saviour of the world didn't fit into their world image.

Let's talk about hell some more.
Why were the words 'Gehenna' and "Sheol" translated into Hell? Do you concede those are mistranslations, and now are perpetuated lies?
If you concede this, why do you still suspect there being a hell elsewhere? ....

Illogical. Sorry.
First, is it a mistranslation? One of my teachers once told me, that it is impossible to translate any language into another. Well, I say it's possible as long as you talk about concrete things, the things you can see, hear, smell, touch, taste, though it already turns complicated here because everything is a subjective perception. And when the word "red" or "blue" was invented, noone made sure, everybody understands the same when they hear those words. Language is a complicated thing and it turns more complicated when you invent words for abstract things, like emotions, virtues, the metaphysical...
But it happens so, that all the cultures somehow developed an idea of the afterlife and they were all very similar in Ancient Europe. So, I can tell the Germanic "Hel" was not so much different from the Greek "Hades". And it doesn't differ much from "Sheol" in fact. Sheol is also a place with different stages, the deepest being reserved for the evil people, the highest being the Bosom of Abraham, a place for good people. But what the Bible somehow teaches is that this place is only a periodic one, and there's something else that happens in the last days, when the people are finally judged and separated into two groups. One will receive everlasting life and the other death. It's more interesting to find out what the scripture teaches on death. It certainly is something else than non-existence. You will always exist. But as death is the consequence of sin, the being apart from God, the ultimate life source, it is bound to pain and suffering. And this very abstract feeling of pain is something Jesus tries to explain by using an example (as he so often does), that of place Gehenna.
What happens when both places are translated into "hell" is confusion of course, people cannot differentiate anymore. But luckily we have commentaries and stuff like that and we can figure it out now. It's really not a big problem after all.

You say there 'may be an idea of hell in the bible'. What does that mean there "may be" one?
If there was a Hebrew concept of hell, show me where.
Because to me, the layman, it's evident the word was mistranslated and there is no hell in the original bible.

I hope I made it clear. There a re concepts of life and death. There are many prophecies on judgement.
There are of course many Jewish scriptures that didn't make their way into the Tanach that elaborate a bit more on the ideas of the afterlife. Enoch, for example.
Other than that you have to read the Bible as whole, and try to see and understand those overall concepts: What is life? What is death? What is sin? What is God's idea for the human race? What is sacrifice? What is judgement? It's all there, you simply have to read it, think about it and understand it. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask. I really don't know how much you have read or what you've been told before.
Here's one interpretation of hell, if you have the time to watch it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afloDCTwluY I don't agree with everything that the man called John Crowder says here (I think, for example, that there will be a physical separation between people who want to be with God and people who don't want to be with him), but a lot of things he says are actually very much in line with the scripture. And it's just an interesting video, that makes my head spinning around.

Beliefs from various cultures DO evolve and merge, and the bible has meaning paralleled in mithraism, the egyptian religions... many other religions.
But this only refutes a dogmatic evaluation of the Bible. Such realizations inspire an inclusive, multicultural religious appreciation, with inner spirituality.
That's the healthy view to have, and the realistic one. So when you talk about the evolution of Christianity from other religions, I'm confused.. are you even a Christian? What are your beliefs?

Oh, Mithraism, that is not sure... I said it before, there are parallels between worshiping Mary and Isis, but Mithraism... I've recently been to a lecture at my university given by a professor of religious studies, it was all about how much Christianity was influenced by mystery cults and he said that it was in fact not much influenced by it at all. The guy who invented that theory that Christian was so much influenced by Egyptian cults was by the way Rudolf Steiner, father of anthroposophy and the way he tried to proof it was very unscientific. The problem is that we give to much credit to those mystery cults. They were popular, yes, but it was also an elitary thing. You could only be member of a mystery cult if you had enough money. And Christians around the 2nd century, when those mystery cults were on the height of their popularity, belonged to the poor mass. Many slaves were Christians for example. The only big similiarities are maybe baptism and meeting and eating together. But that doesn't mean that one adopted the idea from the other.

So, to answer your question about my belief. I'm a Christian, yes. But I also study Archaeology and Philology. I've learned to use certain scientific methods to learn more about my religion.

I started this conflict intending to root out the Christian dogma I see rampant in this country, exemplified in people like Eliza and Abby, and who force it onto their children.
If you're a multiculturalist, I don't see why you'd value Christianity over the myriad of beautiful alternative religious works. Vedism I can personally testify to... it's an amazing religion. Ancient Hinduism.
The Christian religion, by comparison, is nihilistic and demented. It's sadistic in the old testament, masochistic in the new, sexually abusive throughout, with an dismal, apocalyptic view of humanity and the future, it encourages and perpetuates child abuse, and leads to suicide.

Ughh... Here's why I value Christianity over the other religions: It's the only religion that worships a God who turned himself into a human to die and save the whole world.
That's a short, simplified answer to your question. I have my reasons.
Other religions have it worse than Christianity though, when I look at the things you wrote down here.
The Old Testament is a complicated thing. I suppose with "sadistic" you are referring the wrathful, vengeful God. But how can you judge God for killing people? ... An omniscient being who lives beyond time who already knows every decision a person will do in his life, a being who's intention it is to save every person in the world, but is unable to do so because people have to make the decision. Maybe it's cruel to say, but if you try to look at things from this perspective, you'll see it doesn't matter if some people live 80 years and die in their bed at home, or die with 50 because of some sickness, or die with 20 in the war or don't live a day. Death, as I said before, is the consequence of sin. Surely God didn't want it to happen. But it did. And he provided a way out. He could also have said: "Yes, well, if you don't want to be with me, human beings, I'm going to ignore you for the rest of eternity." But he got involved with us and our history. Also something unique among the religions.
I don't think God's a sadist who wants us to suffer, but the only way he could stop the pain immediately would be taking free will away from us.
I also know, there's still a lot of things that need to be explained, I haven't figured everything out yet, but I figure out more and more, step by step.

Hope that helps, and I really recommend to watch the video.

[Aylen]

I'm not so sure what you mean by merging. As far as I can tell the New Testament is pretty much incorrupted, there are no Pagan ideas inside it, except the use of a Greek word like "Hades" as translation of the Hebrew "Sheol". I mean, whatever word is there to use in Greek. They don't have another word for that. The Old Testament, though, is debatable, there are many Babylonian influences, as far as I can tell, because some of the writers are believed to have lived in Babylon. So, it's very easy to compare those mythological stories of the Genesis to things like the Enuma Elish or Gilgamesh. And you'll find similarities.

I was on my way to bed but I had to respond to the bold part... goodnight.

JESUS TURNED WATER INTO WINE...TRUTH OR SUN-MYTH RETOLD?

In the gospels, Jesus is claimed to have changed water into wine during the wedding at Cana as proof of his divinity.
Answer for yourself: Are you aware that this same story is found in other mythologies and is part of the solar mythos? Long before the Christian era, Dionysus/Bacchus was said to turn water into wine, as related by A.J. Mattill:
"This story is really the Christian counterpart to the pagan legends of Dionysus, the Greek god of wine, who at his annual festival in his temple of Elis filled three empty kettles with wine-no water needed! And on the fifth of January wine instead of water gushed from his temple at Andros. If we believe Jesus' miracle, why should we not believe Dionysus's?" (Tim Leedom, The Book Your Church Does Not Want You To Read, 1993, p. 125.
Barbara Walker relates from her excellent book:
The story of his miracle at Cana was directly modeled on a Dionysian rite of sacred marriage celebrated at Sidon; even the Gospels' wording was copied from the festival of the older god (Barbara Walker, The Women's Encyclopedia Of Myths And Secrets, 1983, p. 464).
The Priests, from the beginning of time, has pulled the wool over the eyes of unsuspecting "believers". In Ancient times priests would turn water into wine to fool the gullible masses into believing they had miraculous powers thereby gaining the trust and allegiance of the masses to do their bidding. At Corinth, where "Paul" purportedly taught, there existed a water-to-wine device into which water was poured and then diverted by priests, who, hiding inside the covered parts of the sluice, would pour wine out the other end. Another such device was used at Alexandria (Acharya S., The Christ Conspiracy, 1999, p. 195).
The answer to this easy "sun-myth" has to do with the laws of Nature in response to the Sun. The Sun, personified as God, always turns "water into wine" following the rains when the grapes would ripen on the vine and ferment in the heat from the Sun after picked. But there is more to this than meets the eye as we see when we continue to read. Jesus, as the personified Sun, should be expected to turn water into wine as had all the prior Sungods and we should expect this and are not disappointed because in like fashion the same tale is told about Jesus Christ as had been done to all the prior Sungods.
John 2:1-12 1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: 2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. 3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. 4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. 5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. 6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. 7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. 8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. 9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, 10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. 11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him. (KJV)
Answer for yourself: Did this event actually happen? Did a historical Jesus really turn water into wine?
Answer for yourself: Are you aware that during the centuries leading up to the birth of Christianity, the Pagan Mystery religion, often known simply as the 'Mysteries', had spread throughout the ancient Mediterranean and that many of the greatest figures of the Pagan world were initiated into these Mysteries, and regarded them as the very source of civilization?
Answer for yourself: Are you aware that each Mystery tradition had exoteric Outer Mysteries, consisting of myths which were common knowledge, and rituals which were open to anyone who wanted to participate as well as esoteric Inner Mysteries in which were sacred secrets only known to those who had undergone a powerful process of initiation? Initiates of the Inner Mysteries had the mystical meaning of the rituals and myths of the Outer Mysteries revealed to them, bringing about personal transformation and spiritual enlightenment.
At the heart of the Mysteries were myths concerning a dying and resurrecting godman, who was known by many different names. In Egypt he was known as Osiris, in Greece as Dionysus, in Asia Minor as Attis, in Syria as Adonis, in Italy as Bacchus, in Persia as Mithras. Fundamentally all these godmen are the same mythical being, who the ancients called 'Osiris-Dionysus'. As I studied these myths, it became obvious that the story of Jesus had all the characteristics of another version of the same perennial tale. Moving ever each event by event I found that I was able to construct the Jesus story from mythic motifs previously relating to Osiris-Dionysus. Common to many of them was the "godman" turning water into wine.

• Osiris-Dionysus is God made flesh; the saviour and 'Son of God'
• His father is God and his mother is a mortal virgin.
• He is born in a cave or humble cow shed on the 25th of December before three shepherds.
• He offers his followers the chance to be born again through the rites of baptism.
• He miraculously turns water into wine at a marriage ceremony.
• He rides triumphantly into town on a donkey while people wave palm leaves to honor him.
• He dies at Easter time as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
• After his death he descends to Hell, then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends to heaven in glory.
• His followers await his return as the judge during the Last Days.
• His death and resurrection are celebrated by a ritual meal of bread and wine which symbolize his body and blood.

These are just some of the mythic motifs the tales of Osiris-Dionysus share in common with the supposed 'biography' of Jesus.
Answer for yourself: Why are these remarkable similarities not common knowledge? Because, as I was to discover later, the early Roman Church did everything in its power to prevent the world from perceiving them. Rome over the early centuries of the organized Church systematically destroyed Pagan sacred literature in a brutal program of eradicating the Mysteries - a task it performed so completely that today Paganism is regarded as a 'dead' religion.

http://jesusastrotheology.com/turn_water_into_wine.htm

Answer for yourself: Ever heard of the Greek god Dionysus? Dionysus or Bacchus is thought of as being Greek, but he is a remake of the Egyptian god Osiris, whose cult extended throughout a large part of the ancient world for thousands of years. Dionysus’s religion was well-developed in Thrace, northeast of Greece, and Phrygia, which became Galatia, where Attis also later reigned. Although a Dionysus is best remembered for the rowdy celebrations in his name, which was Latinized as Bacchus, he had many other functions and contributed several aspects to the Jesus character:

• Dionysus was born of a virgin on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger.
• He was a traveling teacher who performed miracles.
• He “rode in a triumphal procession on an ass.”
• He was a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification.
• Dionysus rose from the dead on March 25.
• He was the God of the Vine, and turned water into wine.
• He was called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.”
• He was considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.”
• He was identified with the Ram or Lamb.
• His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” intimates he was hung on a tree or crucified.

He was sacrificed on a cross long before Jesus' conception. We know this from a multitude of stories of Dionysus. Archaeologists have even found an engraving of Dionysus hanging on a cross, which predates any finding of a Christian cross. Dionysus, also called Bacchus, was the god of wine, and he also performed the famous "turning water into wine" miracle long before Jesus is made to accomplish the same act. One greater than Dionysus has come.

[kadda1212]

I was on my way to bed but I had to respond to the bold part... goodnight.

JESUS TURNED WATER INTO WINE...TRUTH OR SUN-MYTH RETOLD?

In the gospels, Jesus is claimed to have changed water into wine during the wedding at Cana as proof of his divinity.
Answer for yourself: Are you aware that this same story is found in other mythologies and is part of the solar mythos? Long before the Christian era, Dionysus/Bacchus was said to turn water into wine, as related by A.J. Mattill:
"This story is really the Christian counterpart to the pagan legends of Dionysus, the Greek god of wine, who at his annual festival in his temple of Elis filled three empty kettles with wine-no water needed! And on the fifth of January wine instead of water gushed from his temple at Andros. If we believe Jesus' miracle, why should we not believe Dionysus's?" (Tim Leedom, The Book Your Church Does Not Want You To Read, 1993, p. 125.
Barbara Walker relates from her excellent book:
The story of his miracle at Cana was directly modeled on a Dionysian rite of sacred marriage celebrated at Sidon; even the Gospels' wording was copied from the festival of the older god (Barbara Walker, The Women's Encyclopedia Of Myths And Secrets, 1983, p. 464).
The Priests, from the beginning of time, has pulled the wool over the eyes of unsuspecting "believers". In Ancient times priests would turn water into wine to fool the gullible masses into believing they had miraculous powers thereby gaining the trust and allegiance of the masses to do their bidding. At Corinth, where "Paul" purportedly taught, there existed a water-to-wine device into which water was poured and then diverted by priests, who, hiding inside the covered parts of the sluice, would pour wine out the other end. Another such device was used at Alexandria (Acharya S., The Christ Conspiracy, 1999, p. 195).
The answer to this easy "sun-myth" has to do with the laws of Nature in response to the Sun. The Sun, personified as God, always turns "water into wine" following the rains when the grapes would ripen on the vine and ferment in the heat from the Sun after picked. But there is more to this than meets the eye as we see when we continue to read. Jesus, as the personified Sun, should be expected to turn water into wine as had all the prior Sungods and we should expect this and are not disappointed because in like fashion the same tale is told about Jesus Christ as had been done to all the prior Sungods.
John 2:1-12 1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: 2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. 3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. 4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. 5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. 6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. 7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. 8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. 9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, 10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. 11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him. (KJV)
Answer for yourself: Did this event actually happen? Did a historical Jesus really turn water into wine?
Answer for yourself: Are you aware that during the centuries leading up to the birth of Christianity, the Pagan Mystery religion, often known simply as the 'Mysteries', had spread throughout the ancient Mediterranean and that many of the greatest figures of the Pagan world were initiated into these Mysteries, and regarded them as the very source of civilization?
Answer for yourself: Are you aware that each Mystery tradition had exoteric Outer Mysteries, consisting of myths which were common knowledge, and rituals which were open to anyone who wanted to participate as well as esoteric Inner Mysteries in which were sacred secrets only known to those who had undergone a powerful process of initiation? Initiates of the Inner Mysteries had the mystical meaning of the rituals and myths of the Outer Mysteries revealed to them, bringing about personal transformation and spiritual enlightenment.
At the heart of the Mysteries were myths concerning a dying and resurrecting godman, who was known by many different names. In Egypt he was known as Osiris, in Greece as Dionysus, in Asia Minor as Attis, in Syria as Adonis, in Italy as Bacchus, in Persia as Mithras. Fundamentally all these godmen are the same mythical being, who the ancients called 'Osiris-Dionysus'. As I studied these myths, it became obvious that the story of Jesus had all the characteristics of another version of the same perennial tale. Moving ever each event by event I found that I was able to construct the Jesus story from mythic motifs previously relating to Osiris-Dionysus. Common to many of them was the "godman" turning water into wine.

• Osiris-Dionysus is God made flesh; the saviour and 'Son of God'
• His father is God and his mother is a mortal virgin.
• He is born in a cave or humble cow shed on the 25th of December before three shepherds.
• He offers his followers the chance to be born again through the rites of baptism.
• He miraculously turns water into wine at a marriage ceremony.
• He rides triumphantly into town on a donkey while people wave palm leaves to honor him.
• He dies at Easter time as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
• After his death he descends to Hell, then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends to heaven in glory.
• His followers await his return as the judge during the Last Days.
• His death and resurrection are celebrated by a ritual meal of bread and wine which symbolize his body and blood.

These are just some of the mythic motifs the tales of Osiris-Dionysus share in common with the supposed 'biography' of Jesus.
Answer for yourself: Why are these remarkable similarities not common knowledge? Because, as I was to discover later, the early Roman Church did everything in its power to prevent the world from perceiving them. Rome over the early centuries of the organized Church systematically destroyed Pagan sacred literature in a brutal program of eradicating the Mysteries - a task it performed so completely that today Paganism is regarded as a 'dead' religion.

http://jesusastrotheology.com/turn_water_into_wine.htm

I already commented on the mystery cults. There are similiarities, I don't deny that. But the question is, if two things are similiar to each other, is the consequence that they are related to one another? Scientists are always so eager to believe that things can happen by chance, why not here? The miracle of Cana is a somewhat weird story only found in John, the youngest of the gospels. It's debatable yes.

But things like this:

• He dies at Easter time as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
• After his death he descends to Hell, then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends to heaven in glory.

This refers to the sign of Jona, so it has it's root in Judaism, not in a mystery cult.
There are also similiarities between the Osiris cult and the story of the Japanese sun goddess Amaterasu. Does this mean they influenced each other?
I think, many of the ideas developed out of observation of nature, changing seasons and so on.

But once again: Mystery cults were a trend among rich Roman people. They met somewhere in a closed area (a little bit like the free masons), drank a lot of wine and ate a lot of good food and sometimes had some dancers or prostitutes to accompany them. With the exceptance of the Isis cult, most cults were reserved for men and women were forbidden to take part. Noone really knows exactly what they did and what they believed in, because it was a mystery cult, things were meant to be kept secret. There's a lot of pseudo-science around this. Really, we only know what is passed down through literal sources and archaeological sources.

I want the ancient texts, not some quotes from modern books, please. I found about the three kettles of wine in Pausanias, but who wrote about the marriage at Sidon? Does Barbara Walker name a source?

[anndelise]

Tangent regarding "I'll pray for you."

 

Before anyone claims these are hating on religions, think about how your own actions/words can be interpreted as "hating on nonbelievers".

[kadda1212]

@Aylen, also there's the question if Christianity and mystery cults really are somehow related to each other, who influenced who? I think, we mustn't underestimate the power of the gnostic beliefs, about which the apostle Paul already talks about in his letters and refers to it as heretic teachings. Gnosticism is a mixture of Christian beliefs and ancient eastern and mediterranean religions (simplified). But hey adopted ideas of the Christian faith and not the other way around. Surely, still today some Christians actually believe in some gnostic stuff. Many of the later gospels (Thomas and so on) have a gnostic background. They really popularized e.g. the idea that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, because they had this idea of a male god and a female coming together in order to make creation happen.
I guess gnosticism had more of an impact on the mystery cults and maybe transferred some Christian ideas into them. Baptism could be one of those. Because gnosticism already emerged in the first century, the mystery cults were at the height of their popularity in the second century.

Actually those mystery cults made it hard for Christians during that time. Because people thought Christianity was something like a mystery cult. So when they heard about baptism, they associated something like the baptism in the Kybele cult with it, where one has to stand in a pit under a grate while a bull is slaughtered over that pit, the blood runs down and covers the person. Also when they heard that Christians eat the body and blood of a person, it mus have sounded strange in their ears. Some people thought Christians were cannibals.

[kadda1212]

I post that video again. Though I'm not sure about all the things he says there, a lot of things are true and he uses a lot of scripture. It's just a good thing to meditate about and to get some new input on the highly debated topic of hell:



He really starts talking about it at about 8:00 minutes.

[InvisibleJim]

the bolder and the redder the wall of text the more my eyes bleed.

[Kim]

I find it touching when people pray for me because they genuinely wish for good things for me. But these are also the people who do not see the need to tell me that they do because to them, praying for me is about me, not them and their self-perceived role as Christians.

Telling someone you will pray for them in an argument becomes part of that argument and comes across as condescending and self-righteous (even if it was not intended as such). If you truly want to pray for someone because you believe it is a good thing for THEM, then you can do it quietly (I am not trying to bash you Eliza, but you are inviting unnecessary resentment when saying that you pray for someone because you think they need to be fixed or improved).

[kadda1212]

Under certain circumstances, the phrase "I'll pray for you" is just a Christian euphemism. Christians have their own language: