- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Other than setting up a new belief system Constantine, and the Council of Nicea, for that matter, had virtually nothing to do with the forming of the canon.
It was not even discussed at Nicea. Only how the deities were to be acknowledged and worshipped.
The council that formed an undisputed decision on the canon took place at Carthage in 397, thirty to sixty years after Constantine's death.
However, long before Constantine, 21 books were acknowledged by all Christians (the 4 Gospels, Acts, 13 Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John, Revelation). There were 10 disputed books (Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Ps-Barnabas, Hermas, Didache, Gospel of Hebrews) and several that most all considered heretical—Gospels of Peter, Thomas, Matthaias, Acts of Andrew, John, etc.
Liberal scholars and fictional authors like to purport the idea that the gospels of Thomas and Peter (and other long-disputed books) contain truths that the church vehemently stomped out, but that simply has no basis historically.
It is closer to the truth to say that no serious theologians really cared about these books because they were obviously written by people lying about authorship and had little basis in reality.
That is one reason why a council declaring the canon was so late in coming (397 AD), because the books that were trusted and the ones that had been handed down were already widely known.
In the spring of 311, with 40,000 soldiers behind him, Constantine rode toward Rome to confront an enemy whose numbers were four times his own.
Maxentius, vying for supremacy in the West, waited in Rome with his Italian troops and the elite Praetorian Guard, confident no one could successfully invade the city.
But Constantine's army was already overwhelming his foes in Italy as he marched toward the capital.
Maxentius turned to pagan oracles, finding a prophecy that the “enemy of the Romans” would perish. But Constantine was still miles away.
So, bolstered by the prophecy, Maxentius left the city to meet his foe.
Meanwhile, Constantine saw a vision in the afternoon sky: a bright cross with the words By this sign conquer.
As the story goes, Christ himself told Constantine in a dream to take the cross into battle as his standard.
Though accounts vary, Constantine apparently believed the omen to be a word from God.
When he awoke early the next morning, the young commander obeyed the message and ordered his soldiers to mark their shields with the now famous Chi-Rho.
Maxentius's troops fled in disarray toward the surging Tiber.
The would be emperor attempted to escape over the wooden bridge erected to span the stream, but his own army turned mob, pressing through the narrow passage, forced him into the river, where he drowned by the weight of his armor.
Constantine entered Rome the undisputed ruler of the West, the first Roman emperor with a cross in his diadem.
Chi-Rho:
The labarum (λάβαρον) was a vexillum (military standard) that displayed the “Chi-Rho” symbol, formed from the first two Greek letters of the word “Christ” (ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ, or Χριστός) — Chi (χ) and Rho (ρ).
Seeing a pattern yet?
It was first used by the Roman emperor Constantine I.
Since the vexillum consisted of a flag suspended from the crossbar of a cross, it was ideally suited to symbolize crucifixion.
The Chi-Rho symbol was also used by Greek scribes to mark, in the margin, a particularly valuable or relevant passage; the combined letters Chi and Rho standing for chrēston, meaning “good.”
gollamudi wrote:
Quote Here is how Paul had interpreted the Law to prove his dogma.
I am not sure where Paul obtained that particular interpretation since it is not in the Law of Mosses. I do know that a question in the same vein was asked of Jesus by a Sadducee.
Luke 20:27-36(NIV) reads:
Quote Some of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus with a question. “Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first one married a woman and died childless. The second and then the third married her, and in the same way the seven died, leaving no children. Finally, the woman died too. Now then, at the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.
So the opinion most likely varied on that matter and Paul was choosing one side to advance his argument. Still, going by Paul’s premise that a person’s participation in a contract is dissolved by their death I can see how he reaches the conclusion that entering the new covenant frees us from serving God through human effort so that we can serve in the new way of living by the Spirit.
People of course misinterpret what Paul meant and instead state he preached that is nonsense as all he taught was that Jews should obey God as Jews and Gentiles should obey God as Gentiles but whichever customs they followed they needed to live by the Spirit.
I can see how one can be confused because Paul is sometimes perhaps a little verbose. He also seem to assume his hearers are following his logic as he does explain it. On the other hand he may be verbose in attempt to explain his logic to people of another culture and time and we just do not follow the explanation.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,15:03) Quote (942767 @ Nov. 06 2009,18:44) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 06 2009,22:18) Emperor Constantine is the Father of Chritianity, the Apostles went by two terms during their ministry “Slaves unto the Messiah” and “The Way.” The word Christian(s), Christianity, etc, was placed into scripture by the translators.
Hi Con:And so, are you saying that the following scripture is not correct?
Quote Act 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. If so, what is your source that indicates that “Christians” was added by the translators?
Love in Christ,
Marty
Maybe the same way Easter made it's way into Scripture?Act 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put [him] in prison, and delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
The NIV version does state Passover.The King James Version does translate the word “Pascha” to Easter on 1 time in 29. The same is not true with the word “Christianos”. If the church of Rome had not played any games with the date then the date of Easter would be the same date as Passover. I suspicion they played that game because of anti-Jewish sentiments. How many Jewish Christians were invited to the council of Nicea?
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,01:37) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,15:03) Quote (942767 @ Nov. 06 2009,18:44) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 06 2009,22:18) Emperor Constantine is the Father of Chritianity, the Apostles went by two terms during their ministry “Slaves unto the Messiah” and “The Way.” The word Christian(s), Christianity, etc, was placed into scripture by the translators.
Hi Con:And so, are you saying that the following scripture is not correct?
Quote Act 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. If so, what is your source that indicates that “Christians” was added by the translators?
Love in Christ,
Marty
Maybe the same way Easter made it's way into Scripture?Act 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put [him] in prison, and delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
The NIV version does state Passover.The King James Version does translate the word “Pascha” to Easter on 1 time in 29. The same is not true with the word “Christianos”. If the church of Rome had not played any games with the date then the date of Easter would be the same date as Passover. I suspicion they played that game because of anti-Jewish sentiments. How many Jewish Christians were invited to the council of Nicea?
The whole idea of the word christian was born out of the concept of Constantine, Messianic believers did not use Greek terms.By the time Carthage in 397 Constantines organized church (religion) already cemented in the foundational beliefs on hoe the bible was to put together and translated through the Greco-Roman thought.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,01:37) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,15:03) Quote (942767 @ Nov. 06 2009,18:44) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 06 2009,22:18) Emperor Constantine is the Father of Chritianity, the Apostles went by two terms during their ministry “Slaves unto the Messiah” and “The Way.” The word Christian(s), Christianity, etc, was placed into scripture by the translators.
Hi Con:And so, are you saying that the following scripture is not correct?
Quote Act 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. If so, what is your source that indicates that “Christians” was added by the translators?
Love in Christ,
Marty
Maybe the same way Easter made it's way into Scripture?Act 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put [him] in prison, and delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
The NIV version does state Passover.The King James Version does translate the word “Pascha” to Easter on 1 time in 29. The same is not true with the word “Christianos”. If the church of Rome had not played any games with the date then the date of Easter would be the same date as Passover. I suspicion they played that game because of anti-Jewish sentiments. How many Jewish Christians were invited to the council of Nicea?
You missed my point. If you go into the dictionary cross references they include all sorts of meanings, but you know as well as I Easter is pagan and has no bearing on Pacsha, but the word Easter is translated in.Thus many believe in Easter and not Pacsha.
Constitutionalist wrote:
Quote Thus many believe in Easter and not Pacsha.
I have done one better than go into the dictionary. I have found the origins of what is called Easter in the modern Christian traditions. Easter is a label that was taken from some unknown source. Some say it was an Anglo Saxon goddess but they do not even know if she existed. That would have been in the 9th or 10th Century. The day for Easter was established in the second century after a well know controversy in the so called “Christian” church of that era. The debate centered on the date of the 14th of Nisan advocated by Polycarp and the Eastern churches and the current date. Polycarp did not consider the issue important enough to stress. I am pretty much in agreement with Polycarp though I can think of at least one reason it is important enough to stress since it is a Jewish custom.
Constitutionalist wrote:
Quote The whole idea of the word Christian was born out of the concept of Constantine, Messianic believers did not use Greek terms.
It depends on what language you happen to speak. Those who spoke Greek used Greek terms which are why “Passover” is “Pascha” in Greek and “Pecach” in Hebrew. The same appears to be true with names as the ancients seemed to put actual stock in the meaning of names as opposed to the mere sounds; so Yeshua was translated to Jesus for those that spoke Greek. The proper translation of his name into English should actually be something like “The Lord is Salvation” or maybe “Lord’sSalvation”. I believe if we were using their reasoning the name “Easter” instead of “Passover” would have been a big no no.
You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs.
None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
Many do not grasp that during translations much of the beliefs and customs and beliefs creep into the translation, hence sixty years of Constantines Organized religion had a great impact on what words were used to translate scripture.
This is also the time and why Arianism (The belief God is One) was all but eradicated. Constantines group of Bishops in which he was the head Bishop of the people diefied the Messiah and made him into a God.
Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 06 2009,21:21) Hi brothers Kerwin, Const., and Marty thanks for coming on this new thread. I know that you will not agree with me in stating that St. Paul was the real founder of Christianity. In fact Constantine came much later to support the traditional church of Rome. Know for sure that Jesus never invented a new religion but he always preached his own mother religion, Judaism. But Paul later invented this new religion, Christianity from his Hellenistic background. I will be sharing more on this in my coming posts. Hope you all will share more on this thread.
Peace to all
Adam
I agree Jesus never invented a new religion, and I believe Paul/Saul put a little twist to it, but history bares out the destructive works of the translations of the early Apostolic letters by Constantine and his minions organizing the first church.Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,01:29) gollamudi wrote: Quote Here is how Paul had interpreted the Law to prove his dogma.
I am not sure where Paul obtained that particular interpretation since it is not in the Law of Mosses. I do know that a question in the same vein was asked of Jesus by a Sadducee.
Luke 20:27-36(NIV) reads:
Quote Some of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus with a question. “Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first one married a woman and died childless. The second and then the third married her, and in the same way the seven died, leaving no children. Finally, the woman died too. Now then, at the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.
So the opinion most likely varied on that matter and Paul was choosing one side to advance his argument. Still, going by Paul’s premise that a person’s participation in a contract is dissolved by their death I can see how he reaches the conclusion that entering the new covenant frees us from serving God through human effort so that we can serve in the new way of living by the Spirit.
People of course misinterpret what Paul meant and instead state he preached that is nonsense as all he taught was that Jews should obey God as Jews and Gentiles should obey God as Gentiles but whichever customs they followed they needed to live by the Spirit.
I can see how one can be confused because Paul is sometimes perhaps a little verbose. He also seem to assume his hearers are following his logic as he does explain it. On the other hand he may be verbose in attempt to explain his logic to people of another culture and time and we just do not follow the explanation.
HeHe, you made me chuckle, I havn't heard “verbose” used in ten years and you used twice in one statement, way cool.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,17:00) You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs. None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
According to my source on Ishtar, Tammuz was her son, husband, brother. Some she remained a virgin. A lot of contradictions but that probably did not bother the Babylonians.The Greeks did conquer Babylonia so they may have somehow absorbed her worship but their parallel goddess was Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans. She had a number of children but none named Jesus.
I do not find the information you state exists.
According to this Greek Lexicon Jesus(Iesous) means “Jehovah is salvation”
I have also read that early versions of the New Testament scriptures may have used “YHWH” or its Greek equivalent instead of “The Lord.”
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,03:49) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,17:00) You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs. None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
According to my source on Ishtar, Tammuz was her son, husband, brother. Some she remained a virgin. A lot of contradictions but that probably did not bother the Babylonians.The Greeks did conquer Babylonia so they may have somehow absorbed her worship but their parallel goddess was Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans. She had a number of children but none named Jesus.
I do not find the information you state exists.
According to this Greek Lexicon Jesus(Iesous) means “Jehovah is salvation”
I have also read that early versions of the New Testament scriptures may have used “YHWH” or its Greek equivalent instead of “The Lord.”
Ishtar = Goddess of fertility = EasterIsis = Virgin birth to a God Son + Resurrected her dead Son = Jesus (Don't look at the name, look at the belief)
Now for the name Jesus look into the God Zues and the term the Greco Romans used “Gee Zues” = Hail Zues, Sounds Like?
Gee Zues = Jesus
Also look into when the hard consenant “J” came into language. As recent as 500 years ago. So how did “Jesus” make it into scripture?
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,18:14) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,03:49) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,17:00) You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs. None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
According to my source on Ishtar, Tammuz was her son, husband, brother. Some she remained a virgin. A lot of contradictions but that probably did not bother the Babylonians.The Greeks did conquer Babylonia so they may have somehow absorbed her worship but their parallel goddess was Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans. She had a number of children but none named Jesus.
I do not find the information you state exists.
According to this Greek Lexicon Jesus(Iesous) means “Jehovah is salvation”
I have also read that early versions of the New Testament scriptures may have used “YHWH” or its Greek equivalent instead of “The Lord.”
Ishtar = Goddess of fertility = EasterIsis = Virgin birth to a God Son + Resurrected her dead Son = Jesus (Don't look at the name, look at the belief)
Now for the name Jesus look into the God Zues and the term the Greco Romans used “Gee Zues” = Hail Zues, Sounds Like?
Gee Zues = Jesus
Also look into when the hard consenant “J” came into language. As recent as 500 years ago. So how did “Jesus” make it into scripture?
You have certainly exceeded my knowledge base but I have found out that we English speakers mispronounce Zeus which should actually be “Zevs“.I will see if I can learn more.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,03:49) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,17:00) You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs. None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
According to my source on Ishtar, Tammuz was her son, husband, brother. Some she remained a virgin. A lot of contradictions but that probably did not bother the Babylonians.The Greeks did conquer Babylonia so they may have somehow absorbed her worship but their parallel goddess was Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans. She had a number of children but none named Jesus.
I do not find the information you state exists.
According to this Greek Lexicon Jesus(Iesous) means “Jehovah is salvation”
I have also read that early versions of the New Testament scriptures may have used “YHWH” or its Greek equivalent instead of “The Lord.”
None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.And a lexicon is correct in a translation of a word, but what is the Greek belief behind a word?
IESOUS: is “yeah-sooce”. (“gee-zuss”, G consenant is soft)
Greek Ἰησοῦς –
ISIS: Son was Called “Horus, son of Isis”.
Egyptian – ỉs.t or ȝs.t
IHS: Isis Horus Seramis
http://www.sabbatariannetwork.com/Paganism/Ishtar.html
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message772711/pg1
http://www.hlinc-zionsake.org/Babylon/06-Rome-Doctrines.htmlQuote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,18:31) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,03:49) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,17:00) You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs. None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
According to my source on Ishtar, Tammuz was her son, husband, brother. Some she remained a virgin. A lot of contradictions but that probably did not bother the Babylonians.The Greeks did conquer Babylonia so they may have somehow absorbed her worship but their parallel goddess was Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans. She had a number of children but none named Jesus.
I do not find the information you state exists.
According to this Greek Lexicon Jesus(Iesous) means “Jehovah is salvation”
I have also read that early versions of the New Testament scriptures may have used “YHWH” or its Greek equivalent instead of “The Lord.”
None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.And a lexicon is correct in a translation of a word, but what is the Greek belief behind a word?
IESOUS: is “yeah-sooce”. (“gee-zuss”, G consenant is soft)
Greek Ἰησοῦς –
ISIS: Son was Called “Horus, son of Isis”.
Egyptian – ỉs.t or ȝs.t
IHS: Isis Horus Seramis
http://www.sabbatariannetwork.com/Paganism/Ishtar.html
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message772711/pg1
http://www.hlinc-zionsake.org/Babylon/06-Rome-Doctrines.html
There is nothing there that convinces me of very much since I am not Catholic and most of the attacks are against Catholic dogma. You first source bases a weak argument on the mistaken fact that Zeus name sounds similar to one syllable in the name of Jesus. We mispronounce Zeus' name which destroys that argument.Jesus was born of a human woman who was a virgin at the time and is himself human. He has no father as his conception was the result of a miracle and not of the union between a man and woman.
Of that only the virgin birth is the same as with Astarte and the birth of her child. There is certainly more similarities with Catholic dogma but that dogma is not taught in scripture and so to argue against it is equivalent to a straw man argument.
I certainly agree that the Catholic doctrine is a false doctrine.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,09:52) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,18:31) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,03:49) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,17:00) You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs. None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
According to my source on Ishtar, Tammuz was her son, husband, brother. Some she remained a virgin. A lot of contradictions but that probably did not bother the Babylonians.The Greeks did conquer Babylonia so they may have somehow absorbed her worship but their parallel goddess was Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans. She had a number of children but none named Jesus.
I do not find the information you state exists.
According to this Greek Lexicon Jesus(Iesous) means “Jehovah is salvation”
I have also read that early versions of the New Testament scriptures may have used “YHWH” or its Greek equivalent instead of “The Lord.”
None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.And a lexicon is correct in a translation of a word, but what is the Greek belief behind a word?
IESOUS: is “yeah-sooce”. (“gee-zuss”, G consenant is soft)
Greek Ἰησοῦς –
ISIS: Son was Called “Horus, son of Isis”.
Egyptian – ỉs.t or ȝs.t
IHS: Isis Horus Seramis
http://www.sabbatariannetwork.com/Paganism/Ishtar.html
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message772711/pg1
http://www.hlinc-zionsake.org/Babylon/06-Rome-Doctrines.html
There is nothing there that convinces me of very much since I am not Catholic and most of the attacks are against Catholic dogma. You first source bases a weak argument on the mistaken fact that Zeus name sounds similar to one syllable in the name of Jesus. We mispronounce Zeus' name which destroys that argument.Jesus was born of a human woman who was a virgin at the time and is himself human. He has no father as his conception was the result of a miracle and not of the union between a man and woman.
Of that only the virgin birth is the same as with Astarte and the birth of her child. There is certainly more similarities with Catholic dogma but that dogma is not taught in scripture and so to argue against it is equivalent to a straw man argument.
I certainly agree that the Catholic doctrine is a false doctrine.
Utilizing your Greek proper pronunciation for sounding out Zues (Zēvs) use the same methodology and do the same with Greek Iēsous, Ἰησοῦς (Iēsovs), or Latin Iesus (Iesvs), notice Islamic Arabic Isa عيسى / Yasu يسوع.ISIS (ỉs.t or ȝs.t):
1] Isis was a goddess in Ancient Egyptian religious beliefs.
2] Adopted by the Greco-Romans.
3] Worshiped as the ideal mother, wife, patron of nature and magic.
4] She was the friend of slaves, sinners, artisans, the downtrodden.
5] Isis is the Goddess of motherhood, magic and fertility.
6] She was said to have conceived Horus.
7] Many dangers faced Horus after birth, and Isis fled with the newborn to escape the wrath of Set, the murderer of her husband.
8] Isis is also known as the goddess of simplicity, protecter of the dead and goddess of children from whom all beginnings arose, and was the Lady of magic and natural events.NOTE: Plutarch, a Greek scholar who lived from 46 C.E. to 120 C.E., wrote: “I am all that hath been, and is, and shall be; and my veil no mortal has hitherto raised.” Sound familiar?
NOTE: Roman writer Apuleius wrrote: “You see me here, Lucius, in answer to your prayer. I am nature, the universal Mother, mistress of all the elements, primordial child of time, sovereign of all things spiritual, queen of the dead, queen also of the immortals, the single manifestation of all gods and goddesses that are, my nod governs the shining heights of Heavens, the wholesome sea breezes. Though I am worshipped in many aspects, known by countless names … some know me as Juno, some as Bellona … the Egyptians who excel in ancient learning and worship call me by my true name…Queen Isis. Not seeing anything yet?
Some of Isis's many other titles were:
Queen of Heaven,
Mother of the Gods,
The One Who is All,
Lady of Green Crops,
The Brilliant One in the Sky,
Star of the Sea,[21]
Great Lady of Magic,
Mistress of the House of Life,
She Who Knows How To Make Right Use of the Heart,
Light-Giver of Heaven,
Lady of the Words of Power,
Moon Shining Over the Sea.Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,09:52) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,18:31) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 07 2009,03:49) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 07 2009,17:00) You can go back further and match Easter to the Goddess Ishtar, and then paralell Jesus' name Iesus/Iesous as the son of Isis in Greco Roman beliefs. None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.
According to my source on Ishtar, Tammuz was her son, husband, brother. Some she remained a virgin. A lot of contradictions but that probably did not bother the Babylonians.The Greeks did conquer Babylonia so they may have somehow absorbed her worship but their parallel goddess was Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans. She had a number of children but none named Jesus.
I do not find the information you state exists.
According to this Greek Lexicon Jesus(Iesous) means “Jehovah is salvation”
I have also read that early versions of the New Testament scriptures may have used “YHWH” or its Greek equivalent instead of “The Lord.”
None of those translates in Yahshua/Yehoshua יהושע/ישוע “YHWH rescues” or “YHWH delivers.And a lexicon is correct in a translation of a word, but what is the Greek belief behind a word?
IESOUS: is “yeah-sooce”. (“gee-zuss”, G consenant is soft)
Greek Ἰησοῦς –
ISIS: Son was Called “Horus, son of Isis”.
Egyptian – ỉs.t or ȝs.t
IHS: Isis Horus Seramis
http://www.sabbatariannetwork.com/Paganism/Ishtar.html
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message772711/pg1
http://www.hlinc-zionsake.org/Babylon/06-Rome-Doctrines.html
There is nothing there that convinces me of very much since I am not Catholic and most of the attacks are against Catholic dogma. You first source bases a weak argument on the mistaken fact that Zeus name sounds similar to one syllable in the name of Jesus. We mispronounce Zeus' name which destroys that argument.Jesus was born of a human woman who was a virgin at the time and is himself human. He has no father as his conception was the result of a miracle and not of the union between a man and woman.
Of that only the virgin birth is the same as with Astarte and the birth of her child. There is certainly more similarities with Catholic dogma but that dogma is not taught in scripture and so to argue against it is equivalent to a straw man argument.
I certainly agree that the Catholic doctrine is a false doctrine.
Attacks?I am attacking no one.
I am only trying to show how pagan myths blend and overlap each other, and you are trying to seperate each one, and then claim I am attacking.
You not a nice person. I believe our dialogue has ended.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
