The New Testament refers to more than 12 apostles. Try again.myrnova wrote:Guess why the apostles are 12... and the Christ 1... How comes it reminds 12 planets and 1 sun?...Jack McOck wrote:
"the new" testamentJack McOck wrote:The New Testament refers to more than 12 apostles. Try again.myrnova wrote:Guess why the apostles are 12... and the Christ 1... How comes it reminds 12 planets and 1 sun?...Jack McOck wrote:
Aka "harry potter" the revenge?The Bible is both books. You can't discuss one without discussing the other. Saying that there are only 12 disciples in the Bible is as accurate as saying that Jesus is not in the Bible.myrnova wrote:"the new" testament
Of course not, I meant...Jack McOck wrote:To answer both of you, Matthew 10:34 ("I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword") doesn't make any mention of central banking
Agreed!Jack McOck wrote:but rather uses the term "sword" to symbolically mean ideological conflict or division.
Jack McOck wrote:For my closing comments, I refer you both to my signature.
The bible is not "2 books". The so-called "bible" invented by the Church corporation is just a load of bullshit taken from old egyptian magic rituals (sacrifices, etc.) and sold as "something mysterious and symbolic" in order to control the fearful and ignorant masses. Just this. As soon as people get culture, religion disappear. The rest is individual mental illness (paranoia, magic thought, superstition, obsessive behaviour etc.).Jack McOck wrote:The Bible is both books. You can't discuss one without discussing the other. Saying that there are only 12 disciples in the Bible is as accurate as saying that Jesus is not in the Bible.myrnova wrote:"the new" testament
Help me out here. 12 planets?myrnova wrote:How comes it reminds 12 planets and 1 sun?...
So Jesus is a proto-communist because both communists and Jesus call for bloody revolution?Funk N. Furter wrote:I was thinking of this one myself, good call.lowshelf wrote:2 out of 3. See Matthew 10:34.Jack McOck wrote:I must apologise, but I do not recall Jesus ever promoting central banking, bloody revolution or child labor.
It's not that difficult. All ancient astrology (the "ancestor" of modern astronomy) was based on 12 planets and the sun. This is the basis for every "modern" religion: (known) solar planet and the sun + seasons (2: winter and summer). The difference is that nowadays, thanks to modern science, french revolution and atheist ethics, "religion" has become a sort of "moral teacher" or something. But this is of course a fake rule. The real function was against fear of death. In "modern" times (egyptians, greeks, romans, europe, islam) it has become an instrument of mass control through fear (the ancient DIRECT fear of death became INDIRECT: "the devil take you and you go to hell" etc.). In order to make it more "misterious" they copied old magic rituals. Ignorant people are easily brainwashed and scared by all this staff.lowshelf wrote:Help me out here. 12 planets?myrnova wrote:How comes it reminds 12 planets and 1 sun?...
These kind of arguments never get "won". They just go round and round.Funk N. Furter wrote:
I think it's best to give some of it the benefit of the doubt and assume for the sake of argument that he existed and said the things attributed to him. Then you can win all the arguments against Christians by debating with them.
myrnova wrote:scared by all this staff.
So how is Matthew 10:34 relevant?Funk N. Furter wrote:No, because he sided with the poor against the rich.Jack McOck wrote: So Jesus is a proto-communist because both communists and Jesus call for bloody revolution?
1. "woe to the rich" is because they have to control poor masses. Infact the church should selfdestroy itself if this was true, right? It is just propaganda, like the U.S.A. "we love peace" while making war. Ignorant people believe this crap because it is much easier and they live "better"Funk N. Furter wrote:Two snags with the above.
1. If the bible was 100% created by a corporation, why would they put in stuff like 'woe to the rich', the camel and needle and so on?
2. Modern civilisations have 'culture' but religion has not disappeared. Civilisations had culture back in Roman times as well. How are you defining culture? Lack of religion? That would be a circular argument.
How do you define winning?Funk N. Furter wrote:I always win actuallyandydes wrote:These kind of arguments never get "won". They just go round and round.Funk N. Furter wrote:
I think it's best to give some of it the benefit of the doubt and assume for the sake of argument that he existed and said the things attributed to him. Then you can win all the arguments against Christians by debating with them.
Based on his previous "debates", for funken to win, he must:andydes wrote:How do you define winning?
So according to you, anyone who wants to bring any kind of change by any kind of means is at the very least a some kind proto-communist?Funk N. Furter wrote:He wanted to bring change.
