Hellenic religion

[Philosopher]

Philosopher, are you anti-Pagan? Are you pro-Christian? If both are yes then please, don't even answer. I'll put you on my ignore members list immediately.

Thank you for the kind words!!!

Actually, my position is rather clear. I distinguish two different principles. My political philsophy from my theological beliefs.

I believe in freedom of religion; if modern Greeks want to worship the ancient gods, let them; they should have the right and freedom to do so without state intervention. If you or anyone else wants to worship Isis or pay reverence to the teachings of Buddah, then so be it.

I can see the appeal paganism or eastern religions may have on people; I can understand prima facie the hope such religions may inspire. After all, such religions have always been with mankind and are undergoing a rebirth in the Western world. I am for religious toleration and freedom of conscience.

However, I am of the position that there is only one true religion--the Christian religion. Call me a bigot and call me what you may will, my friend. But my theological beliefs are that there is only one true religion on this earth--the religion of Jesus Christ--and all other religions are false.

Besides being a political scientist, I have formally studied theology and philosophy. So my position is not based on ignorance. We may disagree but I respect your opinion, even if it is different than mine own.

So I am pro-Christain and anti-pagan in my theological beliefs; but I am pro-pagan, and pro all peaceful religions in general, in civil society. Religion should not be imposed or forced on anyone.

[Risto the Great]

Whilst I am still waiting for Christianity 2.0 to arrive, I am of the belief that Christianity 1.0 is an evolution of human thought that stems from many of the earlier pagan beliefs, amongst other things.

[Philosopher]

Whilst I am still waiting for Christianity 2.0 to arrive, I am of the belief that Christianity 1.0 is an evolution of human thought that stems from many of the earlier pagan beliefs, amongst other things.

First explain what you mean by 2.0 and 1.0? I'm lost.

However, your superfical, and ignorant statement that Christianity is an evolution of human thought on heretofore pagan belief is nonesense.

The problem with your argument is that it lacks depth and critical thought. This subject has been dealt with since the Church Fathers took up the pen and refuted the arguments of the pagans they were living with.

You see Christ's Virigin birth and you say this event has occured myriads of times in pre-Christian lore; you see the Son of God, and you say this is a lore borrowed from the Egyptians; you see the story of the resurrection, and you say this is borrowed from the legend of the Phoenix, among others; you see the Ten Commandments, and you say this is borrowed from an older pagan code.

Let me ask you something: do you understand the types and antitypes of the Old and New Testaments? Do you understand the shadows of the law? Do you understand the text within the text? Do you understand the purpose of the ceremonial law? Do you understand the figures of the Old Testament? Do you understand the nature of prophecy? From whence did the Christian dogma of salvation of grace, by faith, and not of works, did the early church get their beliefs from?

Ask yourself: why would ignorant Jews of the first century, who hated gentiles--non-Jews--their cultures, their religions, and their customs, steal or borrow their concepts and apply them to their Messiah? And why would these people, after having borrowed such concepts, refuse to intially go to spread their message to non-Jews?

How could they use non-Jewish concepts of God and of the Messiah and make them fit the Old Testament Scriptures?

[osiris]

that idea that jesus is the son f a god and the jewish theological base that christianity is based on is prepsoterous to me risto. jesus philosophy of love and forgiveness most likely based on the teachings of the budahist monks alexandar was reputed to have brough back with him from india is certainly something i beleive in, but thats not evident in the culture and history of any christian church that i know off.

insead the christianity i know is judgemental violent and authoritarian, i doubt jesus would agknowledage and approve of it. the ancient gods acted as human beings would if they were gods.

[Risto the Great]

First explain what you mean by 2.0 and 1.0? I'm lost.

However, your superfical, and ignorant statement that Christianity is an evolution of human thought on heretofore pagan belief is nonesense.

The problem with your argument is that it lacks depth and critical thought. This subject has been dealt with since the Church Fathers took up the pen and refuted the arguments of the pagans they were living with.

You see Christ's Virigin birth and you say this event has occured myriads of times in pre-Christian lore; you see the Son of God, and you say this is a lore borrowed from the Egyptians; you see the story of the resurrection, and you say this is borrowed from the legend of the Phoenix, among others; you see the Ten Commandments, and you say this is borrowed from an older pagan code.

Let me ask you something: do you understand the types and antitypes of the Old and New Testaments? Do you understand the shadows of the law? Do you understand the text within the text? Do you understand the purpose of the ceremonial law? Do you understand the figures of the Old Testament? Do you understand the nature of prophecy? From whence did the Christian dogma of salvation of grace, by faith, and not of works, did the early church get their beliefs from?

Ask yourself: why would ignorant Jews of the first century, who hated gentiles--non-Jews--their cultures, their religions, and their customs, steal or borrow their concepts and apply them to their Messiah? And why would these people, after having borrowed such concepts, refuse to intially go to spread their message to non-Jews?

How could they use non-Jewish concepts of God and of the Messiah and make them fit the Old Testament Scriptures?

1.0 vs 2.0 was merely a suggestion that the religion is still evolving.
The rest of your discussion sounds nice.

Were you actually asking about whether there were examples of virgin births, resurrections, commandments etc before? I believe there are examples of this. I hope you won't report me to my local priest.

I can't read biblical Hebrew and as a consequence do not profess to know the "text within the text" of the old testament. Ditto for the new testament.

I am having a hard time understanding why the Arabs of the middle-east needed yet another religion in Islam. But that is life. I don't want to offend anyone here in there religious beliefs, but to suggest that Christianity does not flow from the evolution of human thought and understanding ... well ... I don't want to offend anyone.

[osiris]

rtg dont worry about offending anyone mate we are all searching for truth on this forum whne we are not deabting the nonsensical with nonsensical neo hellenes.

[Philosopher]

that idea that jesus is the son f a god and the jewish theological base that christianity is based on is prepsoterous to me risto. jesus philosophy of love and forgiveness most likely based on the teachings of the budahist monks alexandar was reputed to have brough back with him from india is certainly something i beleive in, but thats not evident in the culture and history of any christian church that i know off.

insead the christianity i know is judgemental violent and authoritarian, i doubt jesus would agknowledage and approve of it. the ancient gods acted as human beings would if they were gods.

The problem with this argument is that you have no evidence to support it. You are making an assertion without any evidence to undergird this claim. If Christ got his teachings from the monks, why didn't he teach Nirvana and reincarnation?

Christ spoke more of hell and eternal judgement than anyone else in the Bible; he told his followers not to pray like the gentiles; not to act like the gentiles; he spoke of One, True, Personal Deity, whom he called Father, and said He was One with; the teachings of Buddha are the exact opposite in this regard.

Just because there is a similarity on the teaching of love does not mean they are of the same source; this is nonesense.

[Philosopher]

1.0 vs 2.0 was merely a suggestion that the religion is still evolving.
The rest of your discussion sounds nice.

Were you actually asking about whether there were examples of virgin births, resurrections, commandments etc before? I believe there are examples of this. I hope you won't report me to my local priest.

I can't read biblical Hebrew and as a consequence do not profess to know the "text within the text" of the old testament. Ditto for the new testament.

I am having a hard time understanding why the Arabs of the middle-east needed yet another religion in Islam. But that is life. I don't want to offend anyone here in there religious beliefs, but to suggest that Christianity does not flow from the evolution of human thought and understanding ... well ... I don't want to offend anyone.

By "text within the text," I do not speak of knowing the original language. Here is my issue. If you understood the text within the text, and the shadows of the law, you would understand that the Bible is not the work of humans. You would understand how it all relates.

I'm not asking if there were examples of virigin births and trinities; I know that there are; my point was do you know why there are such examples.

The Arabs needed a new religion in the Middle East for the simple fact that some uneducated plebian began to preach to the ignorant masses a new religion that blended Chrisitianity with paganism, known as Islam, and then he forced it with the sword in time.

[osiris]

the influence of buddahism on judasim is not my idea, an influence is just that an influence, it is not a carbon copy, the fact that jesus did not adopt reincarnation an everything else form buddhaism doesnt mean that the ideas of the buddah are totally absent from christianity. the fact that the essenes began to live in monastaries is another axample of the buddahist influence.
philospher do you truly belive the history of christianity is set in stone and cannot be reinterpreted.

[Philosopher]

the influence of buddahism on judasim is not my idea, an influence is just that an influence, it is not a carbon copy, the fact that jesus did not adopt reincarnation an everything else form buddhaism doesnt mean that the ideas of the buddah are totally absent from christianity. the fact that the essenes began to live in monastaries is another axample of the buddahist influence.
philospher do you truly belive the history of christianity is set in stone and cannot be reinterpreted.

You make many fundamental erros in your post. If you understood anything about the Old Testament, and the Hebrews, they were strickly forbidden from associating with non-Jews, even to eat with them, as St. Peter states in the New Testament. The Jews received their teachings from God; the pagans, including Buddha, are man made and Satan inspired teachings. To suggest that Jesus Christ, God incarnate, the Eternal One, the Alpha and the Omega, who quotes Scriputre after Scripture in the Gospels, would "pick up" the false teachings of Buddha, you are grossly and ignorantly mistaken.

But the premise you start with is that Jesus was just a man, which the New Testatment does not teach; and that Jesus, depsite being an observant Jew, and forbiden to seek after the ways of the Gentiles, would violate his religious beliefs and oaths and learn the teachings of the pagans, like Buddha, is being erroneous and silly.

You do realize that almost all religions on this earth have certain tenets such as love, mercy, compassion, justice, and the like that exist almost everywhere? Does this mean that Jesus got his teachings from the Stoics, because they taught to live according to Nature? Does it mean that Buddha copied his teachings from Moses? If you believe this, then you are arguing that all religion is man made and you are subsequently denying Divine Revelation.

When you deny Divine Revelation, then what we have are human teachings that afford us neither salvation nor security. We have evolving beliefs and morals. No, I do not believe Christianity is an evolution. Yes, I believe Chrisitanity is set in stone and is not open to reinterpretation. I based this on the premise that God has revelad certain truths found in Scripture which are as eternal as the God who gave them.

For me to believe that the Christian religion is open to new interpretation is to deny a theistic, God centered, divine revelation world view, something which I am not prepared to do.

My belief in Jesus Christ and the Scriptures are not, as you would ignorantly assume, based on blind faith. My faith is not blind; if you actually understood the Bible, from Genesis, to Revelation, and how it relates, the point of the Bible, the point of the ceremonial law, the shadows of the law, the types and the anti-types, the prophecies set forth therein, you too would think otherwise.

I don't read the Bible and think to myself could this story be true? If the Bible had no coherence, and no connection, then I would believe like you.

But, when I see in the Old Testament, a picture of the things to come in the New Testament, written thousands and hundreds of years before they happend, both the plain prophecies and the hidden ones--the text within the text--then I understand that the Bible has one Author--God, even though there were many human authors behind its formation.

Until you actually understand these things, you are not qualified to speak on the subject. I, too, was ignorant on these matters and dismissed the Bible as a human work, and of human creation. But this I thought before I even gave the Bible and Christianity a real chance; but as Christ said "these things are hidden from the wise and prudent and have been revealed unto babes. And, seeing you shall see, and not understand."

[osiris]

philosopher if you believe jesus is god incarnate good for you, i dont and am prepared for the consequences.now please stop being so condescending and abusive about my knowledge of christianity i dont think it serves any purpose.

[Daskalot]

1.0 vs 2.0 was merely a suggestion that the religion is still evolving.
The rest of your discussion sounds nice.

Were you actually asking about whether there were examples of virgin births, resurrections, commandments etc before? I believe there are examples of this. I hope you won't report me to my local priest.

I can't read biblical Hebrew and as a consequence do not profess to know the "text within the text" of the old testament. Ditto for the new testament.

I am having a hard time understanding why the Arabs of the middle-east needed yet another religion in Islam. But that is life. I don't want to offend anyone here in there religious beliefs, but to suggest that Christianity does not flow from the evolution of human thought and understanding ... well ... I don't want to offend anyone.

Anyone believing that Christianity is something unique is a fool and lacks knowledge about Religion. What RtG said stands, do not kill the messenger because of your own ignorance.

[Daskalot]

Christianity was and is a tool to control the average man or woman life, to obscure the real Truth about our selves and our place in the universe. Religion is control of the mind and thus control of your life. Be a Freethinker not a sheep following your herder. God is looking at you all day, he is the all seeing eye in the sky, he is our Sun. Neglect this fundamental fact and you are lost forever.

[Philosopher]

Anyone believing that Christianity is something unique is a fool and lacks knowledge about Religion. What RtG said stands, do not kill the messenger because of your own ignorance.

I find it funny that you and Osiris keep beating this down my throat--that "I'm killing the messenger" and being "condensending" when in fact I have attacked no one at all. In fact, I have stated that all people are free to believe.

The problem you have with me is that I stand for a position and that position I express with knowledge and eloquence, which neither you nor your buddies can refute in the least.

So it appears you are attacking me; I must be a fool for thinking Chrisitianity is unique. This is not a personal attack?

Who is the hypocrite now?

[Philosopher]

Christianity was and is a tool to control the average man or woman life, to obscure the real Truth about our selves and our place in the universe. Religion is control of the mind and thus control of your life. Be a Freethinker not a sheep following your herder. God is looking at you all day, he is the all seeing eye in the sky, he is our Sun. Neglect this fundamental fact and you are lost forever.

I forgot you, RTG, and Osiris, are experts on religion. None of you know anything of Biblical Chrisitanity or the Bible, and yet you are all so qualified to attack it. Explain to us Daskalot what is you educational level? Do you have master's degree? A Bachelor's? In what subject? How do you know so much about "religion." How do you know so much about Christianity? Who taught you?

You see, I'm having a hard time trying to understand experts such as yourself who claims to know so much and yet knows so little. I find it sad that a person who is lecturing me about blindly following some religion blindly follows another.

On what do you base your religious beliefs on--this all seeing eye in the sky, the Sun? You worship a Sun--a Star that was made by God? You're really bright.

You pseduo-experts on this forum make me laugh...how pathetic.



I don't recall Chrisitianity teaching me to be a puppet to the system. The Scripture states that we ought to behave God and not man.

I find it amusing that you guys make all kinds of statements and have been unable to back up even a single one.