I used to be, not anymore.
PHG.
ARE YOU SCARED THAT GOD WILL KILL YOU "SOON"?
by clarity 39 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Christ Alone
Well I haven't thoroughly researched it yet, but there are a few problems with this claim of the coin. An understanding of language disproves this claim immediately. Namely, if Dionysus is on one side and the inscription JHVH is on the other, that means that this coin is of late origin and NOT from the 5th century BCE. The tetragrammaton written as JHVH did not come about until MUCH later. The hard "J" is germanic and would have no place on a Greek coin. The "J" is the later product of a stylized I.
I've seen the exact same quote that you posted above about this coin on a ton of sites, with nothing scholoarly to back it up. I haven't seen a photo of this so called coin, nor a scholar saying that this coin is a 5th century BC coin.
Again, many of these claims come from books by non historians, non scholars, non archeologists. They are ameature spiritualists for the most part. Check your sources and you'll usually find a dead end. Nearly all connections of Jesus to pagan god occur AFTER Jesus resurrection. For example the popular amulet that some use that portray Dionysus on a cross were produced AFTER the 1st century AD. If the connection is not AFTER Jesus life, then many times the facts are twisted to attempt to show a similarity.
Like I said, Zeitgeist pulled all of these inaccuracies together and a ton of people started believing it without checking any sources. CHECK YOUR SOURCES!
-
Christ Alone
I think one of the easiest ways to debunked Zeitgeist is to look at its attempt to connect Horus to Jesus. Zeitgeist mixes God's, applies stories from different God's to Horus, fails in it's calling Horus the Sun God, shows a lack of understanding of language, etc etc etc. Most of the stories that they apply to Horus actually belonged to Osirus.
Sadly, though, there are plenty of people that WANT to believe Jesus is a pagan myth, so they will accept the bad scholarship and repeat it without investigating for themsleves. It's almost embarrassing when I see these stories repeated and they are so obviously false.
-
Christ Alone
Here is a fuller portion of the debate contained in the above video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jhHvuNpACc&feature=related
-
Xanthippe
A few years ago I had to organize some publicity for the Hindu festival of Diwali in the town where I work and on researching it, because I didn't know much about it, I found that Krishna had a virgin birth too, supposedly in 3228 BCE.
'Krishna was born without a sexual union, but by divine "mental transmission" from the mind of Vasudeva into the womb of Devaki.' Thought it was interesting.
-
Yan Bibiyan
F@#k no!
-
Christ Alone
When you get down into the details of Krishna, they do not mirror Jesus at all. Many times it appears to be a case of searching for patterns. Much of the comparisons come from a book by Murdock.
Jesus was prophesied a thousand years prior in the OT in Isaiah 7:14. Krishna was the 8th incarnation of Vishnu. Krishna's mother was Devaki and she was not a virgin. She had a total of 8 children. Krishna was the youngest of her children. So the virgin birth - Not true. Hinduism does not teach that the birth was even miraculous, as far as I can see.
Murdock claims that Krishna's father was a carpenter. That is also untrue. Devaki was a princess and married the nobleman Vasudeva. The claim is also made that the birth was attended by angles, wise men, and shepherds and that he was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Again this is completely made up. There is not a single reference to back it up. Reading the story of Krishna's birth shows that only his parents were present. Another claim is that a tyrant ordered the killing of thousands of infants because Krishna was a threat. Again, reading the story shows that only King Kasma only killed 6 of his sisters sons, because they were a threat.
There is also a claim that Krishna was killed on a crucifix between 2 theives. Another case of bad scholarship. Mahabharata 16:4 shows that Krishna was accidentally shot in the heel by a hunter who thought he was a deer.
What I keep seeing is people repeating the same claims over and over again without any proof. Either they repeat claims with no Hindu soruces or they repeat claims from other non scholars.
But people will believe what they want.
-
mouthy
I dont believe he will KILL me ...But I am hoping HE calls me" home" soon
I would prefer it would be with a kiss of the LORD!But if some shoots me thats ok.I am just afraid I will get Dementia ( oh No I have that already,) I mean Alszheimers
So friends & enemies start praying for me now. Even you atheists.make an exception
just for 1 day.
repeat after me. !!!!!" Heavenly Father Creator of this beautiful earth, We have an old woman
who drives me nuts, I am asking you to please remove her from this realm, so I wont be bothered
by her anymore. I ask this in the name above all others JESUS CHRIST. Oh Yes God while you
are about that would you let me KNOW Jesus as she claims SHE does ' Thanks " -
Balaamsass
No- not scared. But I promise to stay off any buses going to a convention....................
-
Xanthippe
Christ Alone
So the virgin birth - Not true (About Krishna)
You're right I used the wrong phrase. I should have said sexless birth. That was what reminded me of Jesus. However I have to say you made me smile when you said about Krishna:-
The claim is also made that the birth was attended by angles, wise men, and shepherds and that he was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Again this is completely made up
How could anyone make that up -shocking!
As you say
But people will believe what they want.
Indeed they will.