Black Spirituality Religion : The Real History of Christianity

Discussion in 'Black Spirituality / Religion - General Discussion' started by Keita Kenyatta, Feb 13, 2012.

  1. Keita Kenyatta

    Keita Kenyatta going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,642
    Likes Received:
    3,328
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +3,382
    What is it that blocks otherwise intelligent people from looking objectively or critically at Christianity? Is it like overlooking the defects of a loved one? Is it denial, like refusing to see the signs of drug abuse in a loved one? Is this how the myriad contradictions are reconciled within the believer’s mind? While all religions are fabrications, Christianity deserves special investigation because of its aggressive history, namely in the forced conversions and the murderous removal of opposing sects. It is this very sort of abusive power that has controlled what the masses hear, but anyone who wishes to discover the true origins is by no means completely blocked. It is not an ordinary thing, however, for someone to actually research history, especially when it applies to religious farce.

    The one thing that is common to all forms of Christianity is the myth of the crucifixion and the resurrection of Jesus. It should be interesting to note that the story of the resurrection did not exist in the earliest manuscripts. Further, the Gospels were composed during times when hundreds of Jews were being crucified each week. They were written for a Greco-Roman audience. If the events did actually happen, the obvious role of the Romans in the trial of Jesus as well as his execution “had to be whitewashed and presented as sympathetically as possible” (Holy Blood, Holy Grail 348). There was absolutely no criticism of Roman oppression, nor any mention of Jewish revolt. The Jews were cast in the role of villains, but this is historically illogical because they (the Sanhedrin) had the right to pass death sentences. They did not need Pontius Pilate. Further, if they had wanted Jesus to be killed, he would have been stoned to death, not crucified. Crucifixion was exclusively used by Rome to execute the enemies of Rome. It was never a Jewish form of capital punishment. If he really was crucified, he did something to provoke Roman wrath, not Jewish wrath.

    The three Synoptic Gospels have Jesus being arrested and condemned by the Sanhedrin on the night of the passover. This could not be real history because the Sanhedrin, by Judaic law, were forbidden to meet over Passover. The Gospels state that the arrest and trial occurred at night, but the Sanhedrin “were forbidden to meet at night, in private houses, or anywhere outside of the precincts of the temple” (Holy Blood, Holy Grail 349).

    The story of Barabbas being freed in exchange for Jesus is pure fiction. Two Gospels describe a Roman custom of freeing a prisoner during passover festival, but no such policy ever existed on the part of the Romans. A Roman procurator, especially someone as ruthless as Pilate, would likewise never consent to the pressure of a mob.

    Pontius Pilate, as he is depicted in the Gospels, appears to be a decent person who consents only reluctantly to the crucifixion of Jesus. History paints a different picture of him. He was a procurator of Judea from A.D. 26 o 36, and he was a cruel and corrupt man. Why is there no criticism of him in the Gospels?

    Another historical impossibility in the crucifixion story is the removal of the body of Jesus from the cross. According to Roman law at the time, a crucified man/woman was denied burial. The person was left to the elements, birds, and animals, which completed the humiliation of this form of execution.

    There is no verification of a significant crucifixion in the writings of historians such as Philo, Tacitus, Pliny, Suetonius, Epictectus, Cluvius Rufus, Quintus, Curtis Rufus, Josephus, nor the Roman Consul, Publius Petronius. The crucifixion also was unknown to early Christians until as late as the Second Century.

    The punishment for robbery was not crucifixion. The New Testament accounts of the crucifixion depict two thieves being crucified along with Jesus. Crucifixion was never the penalty for robbery. On the other hand, the Romans spoke of Zealots as 'Robbers' in order to defame them. Zealots were crucified because of their crimes against the Roman empire.

    Muslims have never attributed the crucifixion of Jesus as true. "And they killed him not, nor did they cause his death on the cross" (The Koran, Surah 4). Although the premise of this essay is that all religions are fabrications, it is interesting to note how they regard each other.

    “Messiah” is a term that Christians think had specifically been applied to Jesus, but for people living at the time of Jesus, the idea of a divine Messiah “would have been preposterous, if not unthinkable” (Holy Blood, Holy Grail). The Greek word for Messiah is Christos. The term generally referred to a king. For Zealots, the term implied a lost king, someone from the bloodline of David who would liberate them from Roman tyranny. In one Gospel, the lineage of Jesus is traced to David, which is ironic because his father is named as Joseph, which contradicts the myth of the immaculate conception in which Jesus is birthed by a deity as well as a mortal woman.

    "Many of the now-called persecutions of the early Christians were due solely to the fact that they were criminal activists, not religious devotees. As Marcellinus Ammianis (c. 330-400), the famous Roman historian said of them in his time, 'the atrocity of the Christians against opponents surpasses the fury of wild beasts against men'." (The Bible Fraud 96) Rome was tolerant of all religions except Druidism. They resented religions that presented pol http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/mysteries/index.html
     
  2. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/portrait/jews.html
    Jews and the Roman Empire


    The spiraling tension between Jews and Rome erupted in two revolts that deepened the rift between Jews and Christians.


    ....
    PILATE'S INSCRIPTION FOUND AT CAESAREA
    In Caesarea, they also found a block of stone with a local Governor's name carved on it. Tell us the story. What does that tell us about the society and the politics of that time?

    [​IMG]


    Yes, this inscription that's now been found at Caesarea Maritima, which refers to Pontius Pilate, is one of the most important discoveries made in the archeological work of the last two decades. Precisely because it's the first piece of hard evidence of the existence of Pontius Pilate. Now, for Pilate, of course, we have a number of literary references, both in the Jewish historian, Josephus,and also among the Christian gospels. But this is the first piece of direct evidence from an archaeological source which actually gives us his name and tells us he was there as Governor. The city of Caesarea Maratima was actually the Governor's residence. This was the capitol city, from the perspective of the Roman political administration. So, it would have been where Pontius Pilate would have lived, where he would have had his court.


    And what does that tell us, because if Herod ruled the city, if Herod was the local client King, what was Pontius Pilate doing there?


    Herod ruled from 37 B.C.E. to 4 B.C.E. Quite a long and impressive reign from just the political perspective. But, at his death, his kingdom, which was the largest extent for the Jewish state since the time, really, of David and Solomon, was subdivided among three of his sons. One son, Herod Antipas, took the northern territories of the Galilee and those on the east side of the Jordan River. Another son, Phillip, took the areas to the east of the Sea of Galilee ... the area now thought of as the Golan Heights, and a good stretch of territory over in that direction. The third son, Archelaeus, took the major portion, and in fact the most important cities... Now this region, which we would probably call Judea, was really the most important of the three sub-divisions. But Archelaeus, in contrast to his two half-brothers, didn't fare as well as his father. And within ten years, he was removed by the Roman overlords, and replaced with military governors ... what we usually refer to as Procurators, or Prefects, posted there by the Roman administration to oversee the political activities of the state.


    Pontius Pilate, is one of these first round of governors posted to the province of Judea, once it was given over to Roman military governorship. And the stone that we now have from Caesarea ... is very important. It gives us three pieces of information. First, it tells us that Pontius Pilate was the Governor. Secondly, it calls him a Prefect. That's what we see in line three of the text. Thirdly, and in some ways most interestingly, the first line tells us that Pilate had built a Tibereum. What that means is, a temple for the Emperor Tiberius, as part of the Imperial Cult. Thus, here we have, at Caesarea Maritima, a Roman Governor building a temple in honor of the Roman Emperor.
     
  3. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560

    THE OLDEST SECULAR ACCOUNTS & HISTORICAL EVIDENCE ON THE EXISTANCE OF JESUS OF NAZARETH

    Cornelius Tacitus
    1. AD55-120) Roman historian: Most acclaimed works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals cover the period from Augustus Caesar's death in AD14 to the death of the Emperor Nero in AD68, while the Histories begin after Nero's death and proceed to the reign of Domitian in AD96. In the Annals, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians at Rome. See Annals XV,44: But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also." (The misspelling of Christ as "Christus" was a common error made by pagan writers). It is interesting that Pilate is not mentioned in any other pagan document which has survived. It is an irony of history that the only surviving reference to him in a pagan document mentions him because of the sentence of death he passed on Jesus the Messiah.
    2. Suetonius: Roman historian and court official during the reign of the Emperor Hadrian. Suetonius wrote in his Life of Claudius: "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." (Life of Claudius 25.4). .....
    3. Pliny the Younger: Roman governor in Bithynia AD112 wrote to Emperor Trajan to seek advice as to how to treat the Christians. He recounts that he had been killing Christian men, women, and children. He is concerned that so many have chosen death over simply bowing down to a statue of the emperor or being made to "curse Christ, which a genuine Christian cannot be induced to do." (Epistles X, 96)
    4. Tallus: Tallus was a secular historian who (circa AD52) wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean from the Trojan War to his own time. The document no longer exists but it was quoted by other writers like the Christian, Julius Africanus, who wrote around AD221. He quotes Tallus' comments about the darkness that enveloped the land during the late afaternoon hours when Jesus died on the cross. Julius wrote: Tallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as an eclipse of the sun'unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died." Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18.1 The importance of Tallus' comments is that the reference shows that the Gospel account of the darkness that fell across the earth during Christ's crucifixion was well known and required a naturalistic explanation from non-Christians...
    ...cont....http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/Historical evidence on the exhistance of Jesus.htm

     
  4. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4782-crucifixion
    Crucificion

    ...The agony lasted at least twelve hours, in some cases as long as three days. To hasten death the legs were broken, and this was considered an act of clemency (Cicero, "Phil." xiii. 27). The body remained on the cross, food for birds of prey until it rotted, or was cast before wild beasts. Special permission to remove the body was occasionally granted. Officers (carnifex and triumviri) and soldiers were in charge.

    ... Bodies of delinquents were not buried in private graves (Sanh. vi. 5), while that of Jesus was buried in a sepulcher belonging to Joseph of Arimathea. Besides this, penal jurisdiction had been taken from the Sanhedrin in capital cases "forty years before the fall of the Temple."

    These facts show that the crucifixion of Jesus was an act of the Roman government. That it was customary to liberate one sentenced to death on account of the holiday season is not corroborated by Jewish sources. But many of the Jews suspected of Messianic ambitions had been nailed to the cross by Rome. The Messiah, "king of the Jews," was a rebel in the estimation of Rome, and rebels were crucified (Suetonius, "Vespas." 4; "Claudius," xxv.; Josephus, "Ant." xx. 5, § 1; 8, § 6; Acts v. 36, 37). The inscription on the cross of Jesus reveals the crime for which, according to Roman law, Jesus expired. He was a rebel. Tacitus ("Annales," 54, 59) reports therefore without comment the fact that Jesus was crucified...

     
  5. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    ...When was Jesus Condemned to Death ?

    Even before Jesus was brought to public trial following his arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane, the Sanhedrin had already assembled three times in secret and rendered decisions which prove, beyond a doubt, that the death-sentence of Christ was determined upon even before his public accusation. The first such meeting was held in September of the year preceding the crucifixion. This fact is made clear by St. John the Evangelist in his account of Jesus healing the man born blind, when he states “for the Jews had already agreed that if any man did confess that he was the Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.” (Jn. 9:22) For only a solemn assembly of the Sanhedrin had power to pronounce such a decree of excommunication. In excommunicating Jesus’ followers, they indirectly declared Jesus a false prophet, and hence subject to the death penalty. Is this not a proof, as Nicodemus had implied (Jn. 7:51), that they had already condemned him without having granted him a hearing or listened to a word in his defense?

    The second such session of the Sanhedrin took place in the month of February, about four and a half months after the first session. The resurrection of Lazarus was the occasion that called the Sanhedrin into council at this time.(from Jn. 11:47-53)

    So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council, and said, "What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. If we let him go on thus, every one will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy both our holy place and our nation." But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all; you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish”. So from that day on they took counsel how to put him to death.

    We see then, that at this second council the death of Christ was decided upon. In the September session his death was proposed only indirectly, but this time the sentence is passed, the high-priest having himself declared that it were better for one man to die! This sentence was pronounced without summoning the accused into council, without witnesses, and without making any investigation of his doctrines or his miracles. Neither was it pronounced because Jesus was found to be seditious or revolutionary, but because it was necessary to put a stop to his miracles, and thus destroy the peoples’ belief in him. The sentence having been pronounced by the high-priest, it was ratified by the whole assembly “From that day on they took counsel how to put him to death.” It is a settled question; there remains to be determined only the time and the manner of executing the sentence. Have we not here ample evidence that the condemnation of Jesus preceded is arrest and trial?

    The third session was held about three weeks after the second, just two days before the Passion.

    Now the feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called the Passover. And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to put him to death; for they feared the people. Then the chief priests and the elders of the people gathered in the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, and took counsel together in order to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him. But they said, "Not during the feast, lest there be a tumult among the people."(Lk. 22:1-2, Mt. 26:3-5)

    We notice that at this gathering the question of the sentence of Christ is no longer debated. His death had already been determined upon at the second session. The only things that now remain to be settled are the manner of his death and the proper time for its execution.

    Now let us sum up the decisions of the three councils. The first council, in excommunicating the partisans of Christ, denounced him as a false prophet, and consequently guilty of death. In the second council the question of whether he should die was proposed, and unanimously decided in the affirmative. In the third council his arrest and execution were appointed to take place at the first favorable opportunity. We now ask of every sincere Israelite if the trial of Christ was not a fearful mockery and a lie.

    The subsequent trial of Jesus on the eve of the Passion entailed no less than 27 violations of Jewish law, any single one of which would be sufficient to nullify the verdict of the Sanhedrin. [note: for reasons of space not all of the 27 appear in this extract]

    Violation 1: The court was prohibited from meeting to decide capital cases either on a Sabbath or feast-day, or on the preceding day:

    “Court must not be held on the Sabbath, or any holy day.” – Mishnah, Betza, ch. v, #2.

    “They shall not judge on the eve of the Sabbath-day, nor on that of any festival” – Mishnah, Sanhedrin, ch. iv, #1


    Violation 2: A capital trial could not take place at night:

    “Let it be tried during the day and suspended at night”. – Mishnah, Sanhedrin, ch. iv, #1. This is further expounded by Maimonides: ”The reason why the trial of a capital offense could not be held at night is because a more thorough and searching examination can be made by daylight.” – Maimonides, Sanhedrin, ch. iii.

    No session of the Court could take place before the offering of the morning sacrifice: “The Sanhedrin sat from the close of the morning sacrifice to the time of the evening sacrifice.” – Talmud Jerusalem, Sanhedrin, ch. i, folio 19; Talmud Babylonian ch. x, folio 88; also Mishnah Thamid ch. iii

    Both of these prohibitions – that a capital trial could not place on the eve of a feast-day, nor at night -- were violated when the first part of trial of Jesus took place during the night preceding the start of the Feast of Passover, as is evident in all four Gospel accounts (Jn. 18, Mt. 26, Mk. 14, and Lk. 22).

    ....cont...http://www.salvationisfromthejews.com/Sanhedrin.html
     
  6. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560
    ....The Jews reckoned days from sunset to sunset. As you can see, John points out repeatedly that the "last supper," the betrayal by Judas, and Yeshua's trial and crucifixion all occurred before the Passover, on the Preparation Day. But exactly when was the Preparation Day?
    The New Unger's Bible Dictionary says that the Preparation Day for the Passover was from the evening (end) of Nisan 13 until the evening (end) of Nisan 14 (p. 411). E.W. Bullinger, in Appendix 156 to The Companion Bible, states: "Wednesday, Nisan 14th (commencing on Tuesday at sunset), was 'the preparation day', on which the crucifixion took place" (p. 180)....
    ...Now let's examine the accounts of this event recorded by Matthew, Mark, and Luke in the Synoptic Gospels and compare them with John's version:
    MATTHEW 26:17 Now on the first day of the Feast of the Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying to him, "Where do you want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?" 18 And he said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, 'The Teacher says, "My time is at hand; I will keep the Passover at your house with my disciples."' 19 So the disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover [hetoimasan to pascha]. 20 When evening had come, he sat down with the twelve. 21 Now as they were eating, he said, "Assuredly, I say to you, one of you will betray me." (NKJV)​
    MARK 14:12 Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, "Where do you want us to go and prepare, that you may eat the Passover?" 13 And he sent out two of his disciples and said to them, "Go into the city, and a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him. 14 Wherever he goes in, say to the master of the house, 'The Teacher says, "Where is the guest room in which I may eat the Passover with my disciples?"' 15 Then he will show you a large upper room, furnished and prepared; there make ready for us." 16 So his disciples went out, and came into the city, and found it just as he had said to them; and they prepared the Passover [hetoimasan to pascha]. 17 In the evening he came with the twelve. 18 Now as they sat and ate, Jesus said, "Assuredly, I say to you, one of you who eats with me will betray me." (NKJV)​
    LUKE 22:7 Then came the Day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover must be killed. 8 And he sent Peter and John, saying, "Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat." 9 So they said to him, "Where do you want us to prepare?" 10 And he said to them, "Behold, when you have entered the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house which he enters. 11 Then you shall say to the master of the house, 'The Teacher says to you, "Where is the guest room where I may eat the Passover with My disciples?"' 12 Then he will show you a large, furnished upper room; there make ready." 13 So they went and found it just as he had said to them, and they prepared the Passover [hetoimasan to pascha]. 14 When the hour had come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. 15 Then he said to them, "With fervent desire I have desired [epithumia epethumesa] to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16 for I say to you, I will no longer eat of it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God." (NKJV)​
    First, let's note the timing of these events. Matthew says it was "the first of Unleavened Bread." On the surface, this appears to contradict John's account, which plainly states that the "last supper" occurred before the Feast of Passover. However, Mark and Luke add an additional detail that helps clarify the time. Mark says it was "the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover"; Luke states it was "the day of Unleavened Bread when the Passover must be killed."
    The Bible tells us in Exodus 12:6 that the Passover lambs were to be killed "between the evenings" on Nisan 14. The Jews have traditionally interpreted "between the evenings" to mean "in the afternoon." For an in-depth discussion of this phrase, refer to "What Does 'Between the Evenings' Mean?" and "Exodus 12-When Was the First Passover?"
    The Jews at the time of Yeshua killed the Passover lambs on the afternoon of Nisan 14. In The Wars of the Jews, Josephus records that in the 1st century, the Passover lambs were slaughtered "from the ninth hour till the eleventh" (Wars 6.9.3), which corresponds to our 3:00-5:00 p.m.
    Obviously, the day Matthew and Mark call the "first day of Unleavened Bread" is the same day that John calls the "the Preparation Day of the Passover." The New Unger's Bible Dictionary says that the 14th of Nisan was "called until the evening the preparation for the Passover" (p. 411). As shown below, all three Synoptic Gospels confirm that Yeshua was crucified on the "Preparation Day," Nisan 14:
    MATTHEW 27:62 On the next day [Nisan 15], which followed the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate. (NKJV)​
    MARK 15:42 Now when evening had come, because it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the [high] Sabbath, 15 Joseph of Arimathea . . . went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. (NKJV)​
    LUKE 23:54 That day was the Preparation, and the [high] Sabbath drew near. (NKJV)
    http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/index.cfm?page_name=Last-Supper-Passover-Meal
     
  7. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560

    Mary (mother of Jesus)

    Hebrew: Miriam.

    ... Her genealogy is given in Luke 3 (see below). She was of the tribe of Judah and the lineage of David (Psalm 132:11;Luke 1:32).

    ...
    Geneaology

    Mary was a direct descendant of King David which gave Jesus the right to ascend the Jewish throne, both through Mary and through adoption by his foster father, Joseph. Mary’s genealogy is supplied inLuke 3:23-38 . Dr. Henry Morris explains the genealogy in Luke:
    Joseph was clearly the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16, so this verse [Luke 3:23 - says “son of Heli”] should be understood to mean “son-in-law of Heli.” Thus, the genealogy of Christ in Luke is actually the genealogy of Mary, while Matthew gives that of Joseph. Actually, the word “son” is not in the original, so it would be legitimate to supply either “son” or “son-in-law” in this context. Since Matthew and Luke clearly record much common material, it is certain that neither one could unknowingly incorporate such a flagrant apparent mistake as the wrong genealogy in his record. As it is, however, the two genealogies show that both parents were descendants of DavidJoseph through Solomon (Matthew 1:7-15), thus inheriting the legal right to the throne of David, and Mary through Nathan (Luke 3:23-31), her line thus carrying the seed of David, since Solomon’sline had been refused the throne because of Jechoniah’s sin[Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Defender’s Study Bible, note for Luke 3:23 (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Publishing, Inc., 1995).]....

    http://christiananswers.net/dictionary/mary-motherofjesus.html
     
  8. cherryblossom

    cherryblossom Banned MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,252
    Likes Received:
    5,505
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +5,560

    http://www.hebrewhistory.com/the-messiah.html
    The Hebrew Messiah
    "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren"
    Deuteronomy 18:18



    The Lord promised the Hebrews throughout their history that one day He would bring a Messiah. This Hebrew messiah would speak the Word of God, and if any Hebrew would not obey, he would be treated as an unbeliever.

    Deuteronomy 18:18-19
    18 - I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
    19 - And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him.








    Somewhere through the ages,
     
  9. neworleans baby

    neworleans baby Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    38
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA. " A state inside of a state"
    Ratings:
    +38
    Thank you for your post. All religions have false things, There made by humans. So i chose to stop worrying about that. What makes me disguised are alot of christians, 1. They say only God can judge and then tell you your going to hell. They also say everyone can speak things into existence. 2. They also keep crucifying Jesus.

    Christianity was form because of the barrack greed. They had to control each other.
     
  10. Fine1952

    Fine1952 Happy Winter Solstice MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,218
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +2,775
    JC "is" a myth, culled from an older myths.
    Christianity "is" one of three hybrid religions that mock true spirituality.
    The OT of the bible "is" a mis-translated version of African folklore.
    The NT of the bible "is" an incredible fabrication of the "weak" European version of spirituality.

    Great Post, Keita!
     
Loading...