"When God was dead for 3 days and 3 nights who was controlling the Universe?" - Ahmed Deedat

invalid

Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
20,130
Reputation
6,984
Daps
81,511
O.K. so I am not a religious scholar, but I am inclined to believe that Judaism itself is likely based on Egyptian religion. A lot of Judaism and therefore for Christianity and Islam is borrowed directly out of the religion of the Egyptian Sun God.

We even say Amen in prayers, which is Amun or Amun-Ra. Jesus birth by a Virgin is the same as Horus Virgin birth. So the mythology is all out of Egypt, which is where the Jews were enslaved.

The thing to take away from any religion is that God is a Spirit and when we die we rejoin the Spirit.

Amun - Wikipedia

jesus_horus.gif


408242_3804304192798_850548532_n.jpg

One of the things I was really into as a child was Egyptology. I can’t remember how I fell into the subject but it became something more than just a passing familiarity. It became to the point where a relative got me a hieroglyphics book and I studied to the point that I was able to start translating heiroglyphics texts (I was a real nerd, not like these gaming and comic book reading wannabes).

I say all this to say, as someone who knows a bit more than the average person about Egyptian mythology, I can tell you that there were some aspects of the mythology that had a “touch” of similarity to Judeo-Christian ideas, such as the concept of life - death - life after death, and some similarities with the New Kingdom cult of the god Aton (compared with the Jewish “Adonai”) but that’s where it stops.

There were no similarities between Jesus and Horus.

Looking at the graphs that you posted I can go down one by one and point out the falsehood in most of the claims.

1) “Isis with Sun-God Horus” - Horus wasn’t the Sun God. Ra was the Sun God. Egyptian mythology had this weird thing where gods would merge. So Ra-Horakhty became this synergized version of the two. However, as a stand-alone god, Horus was not associated with the sun.

2) Horus was not born of a Virgin. Isis, his mother, was a Goddess. And he was born out of necrophilia. Osiris was killed and his body chopped up into pieces. Isis recovered the pieces of his body back together with the exception of his penis which was eaten by a fish. She made a replacement erect penis, then had sex with the body, and gave birth to Horus by the Nile in a marsh. He was not born in a manger.

3) Egyptian mythology didn’t go into details about the individual lives of each of their Gods. I can tell you with 99% certainty that none of the points under Horus happened. Birthday isn’t on the 25th, he’s not associated with a star, there is no text supporting any claims of his life as child, he never baptized anyone, all the way down the line, none of that happened.

For the most part, Egyptian gods did not die, with two exceptions. Ra, the Sun, who is born every morning and dies every evening. And Osiris, the god of the dead. Those are the only two Gods that die and needed to die because the Egyptians needed to explain away 1) the regenerative power of the sun and by extent creation and 2) human life and death and its eventual resurrection. If humans died and went to the underworld, they needed a god to lord over them in the underworld, which is why Osiris had to die.

Horus never dies, was never crucified. The Egyptian pharaohs were believed to be the sons of Horus. When Horus went away to merge with Ra, the pharaohs were left in his place to rule the Earth. Which is why pharaohs were referred to as the living Gods.

No correlation to the Jesus story whatsoever even though numerous people online have tried to draw up false similarities.
 

null

...
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
31,097
Reputation
5,448
Daps
48,917
Reppin
UK, DE, GY, DMV
:dahell: How many times do I have to repeat myself? Ok I'm gonna go over this one more time.

The creators of our simulation most likely created our simulation for the same reasons we humans create simulations in our reality. Right now we have supercomputers running all kinds of simulations researching all sorts of scientific questions. Our world could be an "ancestor simulation" as Nick Bostrom (the Oxford Professor who popularized the Simulation Hypothesis in recent years) would say. A simulation created by future humans as a means of studying their own evolution. Obviously if you are making simulations for research purposes they have to be as realistic as possible. Thus if suffering exists in the "real world" then it would also be in the "simulation".

Satisfied? Or are you still gonna make me repeat myself.

Bullet Points: ONLY point 3. applies - which was my original point anyway. No need to repeat anything.

1. It is a non-falsifiable hypothesis so it amounts to a reasoned guess at best.

2. Also the statistical argument at the core of Simulation Arguments is weak because we don't actually know how rare life is.

3. Adding first person Qualia suffering to actors within a simulation is an act of mendacity. I didn't ask why they created a simulation so you repeating yourself "one more time" is because you didn't understand the question. I asked why suffering was added and this is the FIRST time that you have answered that specific question.

4. Any Oxford College founded in the last 150 years or near the bottom of the Norrington Table isn't that great to be honest. Bostrom is at St Cross College founded 1965. All of Oxford University is not equal.

zyKeX7M.png


Norrington Table - Wikipedia

NB. Not to mention that you said that you were being "imprecise and hence not fully detailed/accurate" in your previous posts and now you want to claim that your previous posts were sufficient and your last post is a repetition of what you said before. Tying yourself up in knots.
 

TAYLONDO SAMSWORTHY

Veteran
Verified
Supporter
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
14,750
Reputation
31,975
Daps
119,642
This religious shyt be all over the place
:mjlol:


Lol yeah none of us know shyt but nikkas so frightened to say “I dont know” they end up explaining inconsistent shyt for hella long.

Our limited human brains have no concept of whats really out there. Trying to define the higher power as one thing or as a being with a gender or race is sooooo fukkin human minded.

Its crazy to witness the lengths people go to just to sound like they know what they’re talking about. I be doin that shyt too cant eeeem lie but Cheese n Rice, the religious shyt takes the cake :russ:
 
Last edited:

null

...
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
31,097
Reputation
5,448
Daps
48,917
Reppin
UK, DE, GY, DMV
Aight white boy. No need to prove you're smart. Keep shyt simple so common folks can understand. I try to dumb down my explanations so everyone can easily digest it.

Only thing I'll disagree with you is about the "many worlds interpretation" being an equally valid explanation for the phenomena we see in quantum mechanics.

Go read up on the "Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiment". It essentially blows away all interpretations to explain wave/particle duality other than the simulation hypothesis. That experiment confirms beyond any reasonable doubt that its our consciousness that actually drives reality.

Scientists don't talk about it as much as they should. Its a way bigger deal to me than the simple double slit experiment.

The Simulation Hypothesis is NOT a broadly recognised explanation for wave/particle duality.

"Consciousness actually driving reality" is not at odds with either Many Worlds or Copenhagen.

"It is a way bigger deal" in what sense? It is an open question and one for which other non MW/C interpretations have been suggested. One being future->past causality. We also have non-locality issues in QM so there are clearly still massive gaps in our understanding.
 

Thatrogueassdiaz

We're on the blood path now
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
29,176
Reputation
4,368
Daps
51,750
Reppin
Center self, inner self
As a human being we are limited to existing in one body and one form at a time. God is not under the same limitation.

God in the form of man (Jesus Christ) died but God in the form of the father was still in heaven.

Why is it so hard to understand that God can be in multiple places at the same time? Can exist in multiple forms at the same time.
In Christianity and even in the gospels it's debated on whether Jesus was born as the Christ or if the Christ descended upon Jesus after he was born. What people in this thread is missing is that the Jesus myth is talking about the Christ, which exists prior to creation, as the bridge to which man is able to connect to God and to his own godliness. I believe the concept of the Christ is greek? I can't remember. Either way it's not Jesus himself that is the son but the Christ in which Jesus represents. People mistake that a lot. That's why he's Jesus Christ, man and God.
One Godhead manifest in three forms.
Trinity came later, did not exist in the earliest forms of Christianity.
Jesus IS GOD in human form. Son of God is a title that refers to the creation of the being and is NOT exclusive to Jesus. Angels are called the sons of God in the bible before Jesus is, Lucifer is called a son of God. Christians who are born again are said in the bible to be new Creations reborn spiritually and are now sons of God. Son of God refers to beings that are created spiritually rather than physically, not created from physical conception like two parents make a child but rather any creation direct from God. Even Adam the first man is called a son of God.

Jesus Christ is called the only BEGOTTEN son of God because just like a child begat by two parents is made up of part of both, a mix of the DNA that makes up both Jesus is a part of God that was made into the form of a Human, specifically the word of God, the biblical says that Gods word is a living thing and that word was made in flesh, was made in the form of a Human. Jesus Christ is every bit God as God the father, he is just part of the father, his word that was made flesh.
Read above on what I said about the Christ. Also word made flesh comes from the Gospel of John, which heavily references and takes from Greek philosophy. Logos is a Greek concept. They were trying to incorporate that into the Jesus myth to convert more gentiles.

I am certainly not a Biblical scholar, but I think that people overthink their belief systems.

Death means to be away from the body. If a person is away from the body then they are in the form of a Spirit. Your body houses your Spirit and your Spirit is set free when your body dies, but the person is not actually dead because their spirit is still alive. This seems to fit with the notion that you can lose a leg or an arm. Those body parts will wither and die, but a person is still alive even though those body parts are dead. I think the though process is that the body and spirit are separate beings, but while the body is alive they live together.

So God is a Spirit. Jesus says that over and over again. Not only is God a Spirit, but God is our ancestor. He is our Father in Heaven, which is how Jesus advised that we prayed to God. Which is to say Our Father who is in Heaven.

Oddly enough Africans and Native Americans have always known that God was a Spirit and that their ancestors went to be with God. So the White mans version of religion did not teach them that. They always knew that God was a Spirit. So I think that people really overthink religion.
I personally think it's the other way around: the spirit houses the body and then leaves it behind. That's just my personal belief. I think the body and spirit are one until the spirit no longer assumes it.
Most Christians have adopted the Eurocentric version of Christianity,and don't take the bible in with their own discernment. The "Son" is the spirit,so basically the pure conscience of man is the closest thing to god. Its the reason he told them they need to become like children again.

“Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
4Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."

Now keep in mind that god is also the devil as well,but he is the lower self aspect of god,just like man has that same lower side of ourselves. The bible is not meant to be taken literally but most Christians do,but Jesus may or may not be real,but either way he was just a man. But the purpose of Jesus in the bible is just to let people know that god gave his "son" to man. Jesus is just the highest version that every one of us could hope to reach as man,the quest to reach our purest form:respect:.


This is true, especially the literal interpretation. I'll add though that in God there is no duality, and thus there is no devil. But yes you are correct.
3, Elohim is plural. Christianity is not monotheistic. That was a myth created by white ppl. God is not even a man nor woman, just a massive spiritual composition in which we all come from. Which is why the biggest war is spiritual, not physical.
Judaism was polytheistic early on. Wasn't until many revisions and agreed upon concepts that God became one. The Hebrews were many tribes that came together on the desert. They each had a mythology that centered around Yahweh but they had different beliefs about him. I took a class once that explained how there are disparate, contradictory elements even in genesis where you can see opposing views being played out. Several tribes wrote pieces of Genesis. Hebrews didn't start off as one big tribe. Also early Judaism practiced human sacrifice. People are very ignorant when it comes to Judaism and Christianity. Crazy too since they worship a religion they themselves don't understand
 

Soylent Greenz

All Star
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,506
Reputation
432
Daps
5,378
Reppin
Brooklyn
Religion tends to do very well in controlled environments,and not so well when one is being mauled and partially eaten by a Grizzly Bear.
 

invalid

Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
20,130
Reputation
6,984
Daps
81,511
i disagree

the Quran and the old testament are very similar

its the new testament that sticks out like a sore thumb and reads like Buddhist literature.

If this was a "one of these don't fit" meme image you'd have to pick the new testament if we're comparing the books of those 3 religions.

Islam, to legitimize itself as a religious faith, makes the claim that it succeeds both Judaism and Christianity. Despite your Buddhist characterization of the New Testament, the fact remains, the New Testament precedes the Koran. So if you believe there to be a major deviation between the Old and New Testament, with the claim that Islam makes of being a successor to Christianity, I would expect the Koran to either 1) build off of what preceded it or 2) deviate even further. So the meme “one of these don’t fit” doesn’t actually work in this context considering the claim Islam makes of being a successor.

If you characterize the New Testament as having Buddhist overtones, I characterize the Koran as being a plagiarized but b*stardized version of Jewish and Christian text. For it to be a successor, it doesn’t even characterize the Jewish and Christian faiths, for whom it supposedly succeeds, correctly in its text. How does the Koran claim the the Trinity to be false when it characterized the Trinity as the “Father, Son, and Mother”.

And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah?'"

And then, Muslims believe the actual third person of Trinity to be Muhammad himself, based off the exchanges in this thread.

https://www.thecoli.com/threads/ive...for-20-years-ama.433022/page-20#post-33710902

It’s a complete total b*stardization of Judeo-Christian texts stemming from what Muslims distantly perceived the faiths to be due to being in regional proximity to its practitioners and not due to having any real interaction with them or the Jewish/Christian text.
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
45,062
Reputation
8,164
Daps
122,315
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
ab.aspectus said:
And then, Muslims believe the actual third person of Trinity to be Muhammad himself, based off the exchanges in this thread.

https://www.thecoli.com/threads/ive...for-20-years-ama.433022/page-20#post-33710902

I thought I corrected him in that thread. Musta overlooked it.

The 'Comforter' is actually the Holy Spirit, but they tend to overlook that part of the verses they quote.

Also, Muhammad is mentioned nowhere in the texts, so they have to do amazing ad hoc reasoning to place him there.....which makes no sense since they claim the text was corrupted. So, they trust ONLY the parts that conform to their beliefs and distrust everything that contradicts them.​
 

kaldurahm

All Star
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
4,530
Reputation
758
Daps
12,333
Some of y'all need a hobby or something. Unless you're genuinely interested in history and religion. But doesn't seem like it.
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
45,062
Reputation
8,164
Daps
122,315
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Ghost Utmost said:
This is alot like comic nerds debating details of how super powers work

Holy Books are books of poetry. Not textbooks

Well, you gotta consider the simple fact that NONE of these texts were written for US.

We in the present-day are not the intended audience for these.

Also, the OT/NT wasn't written to disprove Evolution/Science/etc. None of those existed and no one at the time would have understood it anyhow.​
 
Top