Ask a Pagan

[Porknpie]

The bible as it pertains to Jesus and his miracles was firstly written by people who did not know Jesus.

No Skadi, a number of the books of the bible were written by people who knew Jesus (Gospel of John, Gospel Of Matthew and history has the Gospel of Mark written by Mark who was a scribe for St. Peter). In addition, Jesus appeared to St Paul (previous name was Saul) and Luke was a disciple of St Paul who himself was taught by the apostles.

The books included in the bible were decided hundreds of years afterwards, again by people who weren’t there.

Yes the Catholic Church discerned which books were inspired and inerrant as Christ said the Holy Spirit would lead the Church to all truth. Interesting though, that St. Peter calls St. Paul’s writings “inspired”.

Lastly, as Christians are apt to point out, early Christians including the apostles went to their deaths for Jesus.

Yes, 11 of the 12 apostles were martyred. Only St John was not. They all did so because they believed Jesus was the Son of God and not simply a prophet. The believed Jesus was the Son of God…they went to their death for him…as they knew he rose from the grave and appeared to them for some 40 days after his resurrection. Interestingly Skadi, if one wants to disprove Christianity, find the body of Christ. No one, anywhere lays claim to his remains.

These people were willing to do anything for him, and I believe that when Jesus didn’t return some of them plotted to fake a resurrection (or that someone died in Jesus’s place).

Skadi, think this one through: they faked the resurrection and 11 of the 12 went to their deaths by martyrdom (including by lions, by hot tar). Also, 19 of the first 20 popes were martyred, which means St. Peter and St. Paul did a pretty good job convincing their descendants that Jesus was the Messiah. What incentive did they all have to that? Another thing…the 12 split up and preached the one same faith wherever they went…all without cell phones to make sure that they were all on the same page.

Just as people today continue to cry that the rapture is approaching even after multiple failed predictions by their leaders,

Agree, there are a lot of people in error…but your premise here does not support the conclusion below.

so to was the early church lead on by someone with something to gain from the rise of Christendom.

You’ll have to find out who this was…it wasn’t 11 of the twelve apostles …nor was it the first 19 out of 20 popes. They were all martyred. No much to be gained when one is eaten by a lion or boiled in tar …or has one’s head removed.

Roman historians such as Tacitus, they are pretty secular, and record a prophet living in Judea who was put to death, and referred to y some as the king of the Jews.

Yes, Tacitus was a Roman who hated the Christians. Christian hating Romans were pretty common in the late 1st century. Better to read the Gospels, including writings of St. Paul who were in Jerusalem at the time of Christ. Tacitus writes this in 116ad…

“15.44.2. But, despite kindly influence, despite the leader’s generous handouts, despite appeasing the gods, the scandal did not subside, rather the blaze came to be believed to be an official act. So, in order to quash the rumour, Nero blamed it on, and applied the cruelest punishments to, those sinners, whom ordinary people call Christians, hating them for their shameful behaviour. 15.44.3. The originator of this name, Christ, was sentenced to torture by Procurator Pontius Pilate, during the reign of Tiberius, but although checked for a moment, the deadly cult erupted again, not just in Judea, the source of its evil, but even in Rome, where all the sins and scandals of the world gather and are glorified.”

 

[joe371]

Porknpie
Interestingly Skadi, if one wants to disprove Christianity, find the body of Christ. No one, anywhere lays claim to his remains.

Good point. And if they could of they would of, and the Jesus movement would have ended right then and there…

 

[joe371]

Skadi When northern Europe was converted, christian monks chose Hell as the word to use in local languages for the realm of Satan, in an attempt to convince the locals it was a bad place of evil. In fact Christian Hel and German Helhiem are totally different and just have purposely similar names in Germanic language’s.

Are you suggesting that the concept of hell (Gehenna) did not surface until christian monks chose Hell as the word to use in local languages for the realm of Satan? BTW, on this particular subject I hope that you are right, and that hell does not exist, in terms how Jesus used it.

 

[Skadi]

Are you suggesting that the concept of hell (Gehenna) did not surface until christian monks chose Hell as the word to use in local languages for the realm of Satan? BTW, on this particular subject I hope that you are right, and that hell does not exist, in terms how Jesus used it.

No, the concept of hell has alwase been part of Christianity. But the english word “Hell” is not from a latin root, rather than using say the latin word for hell when speaking to Germanic peoples they created the word Hell by adding one L to Hel.

 

[joe371]

No, the concept of hell has alwase been part of Christianity. But the english word “Hell” is not from a latin root, rather than using say the latin word for hell when speaking to Germanic peoples they created the word Hell by adding one L to Hel.

Oh…

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Firstly, I do make sacrifices. If it wasn’t illegal I would make animal ones on important days.

Secondly, There have been literally hundreds of Pagan cultures throughout history across the world, and throughout all of them child sacrifice took place only in a few.

My particular type of paganism did engage in Human sacrifice on occasion, using volunteers or prisoners of war, but never killed children. Id say its safe to say It wouldnt be practiced anymore if those religions had survived, as all religions undergo change and the world has become far more liberalized in the past 1000 years. Even before christianization Human sacrifice in northern europe was dying out.

I never said anything about Human sacrifice, although how can you possibly object to the pagan in the past that did such a thing? As far as infanticide is concerned its mainly due to Christian influence that such a practice was eventually viewed as the immoral action it was. It was fairly common to see a child abandoned and it was done fairly coldly as well.

Also to what end worship gods that do not exist or do nothing for you?

 

[PRmerger]

I never said anything about Human sacrifice, although how can you possibly object to the pagan in the past that did such a thing?

Indeed. And, Skadi, how could you object to a pagan who does practice human sacrifice today, if that is what the germanic gods demand? Did you not say that this is indeed something that they do demand?

 

[Skadi]

No Skadi, a number of the books of the bible were written by people who knew Jesus (Gospel of John, Gospel Of Matthew and history has the Gospel of Mark written by Mark who was a scribe for St. Peter). In addition, Jesus appeared to St Paul (previous name was Saul) and Luke was a disciple of St Paul who himself was taught by the apostles.

Yes the Catholic Church discerned which books were inspired and inerrant as Christ said the Holy Spirit would lead the Church to all truth. Interesting though, that St. Peter calls St. Paul’s writings “inspired”.

Yes, 11 of the 12 apostles were martyred. Only St John was not. They all did so because they believed Jesus was the Son of God and not simply a prophet. The believed Jesus was the Son of God…they went to their death for him…as they knew he rose from the grave and appeared to them for some 40 days after his resurrection. Interestingly Skadi, if one wants to disprove Christianity, find the body of Christ. No one, anywhere lays claim to his remains.

Skadi, think this one through: they faked the resurrection and 11 of the 12 went to their deaths by martyrdom (including by lions, by hot tar). Also, 19 of the first 20 popes were martyred, which means St. Peter and St. Paul did a pretty good job convincing their descendants that Jesus was the Messiah. What incentive did they all have to that? Another thing…the 12 split up and preached the one same faith wherever they went…all without cell phones to make sure that they were all on the same page.

Agree, there are a lot of people in error…but your premise here does not support the conclusion below.

You’ll have to find out who this was…it wasn’t 11 of the twelve apostles …nor was it the first 19 out of 20 popes. They were all martyred. No much to be gained when one is eaten by a lion or boiled in tar …or has one’s head removed.

Yes, Tacitus was a Roman who hated the Christians. Christian hating Romans were pretty common in the late 1st century. Better to read the Gospels, including writings of St. Paul who were in Jerusalem at the time of Christ. Tacitus writes this in 116ad…

“15.44.2. But, despite kindly influence, despite the leader’s generous handouts, despite appeasing the gods, the scandal did not subside, rather the blaze came to be believed to be an official act. So, in order to quash the rumour, Nero blamed it on, and applied the cruelest punishments to, those sinners, whom ordinary people call Christians, hating them for their shameful behaviour. 15.44.3. The originator of this name, Christ, was sentenced to torture by Procurator Pontius Pilate, during the reign of Tiberius, but although checked for a moment, the deadly cult erupted again, not just in Judea, the source of its evil, but even in Rome, where all the sins and scandals of the world gather and are glorified.”

1. Only one of the writers may have actually known Jesus, i dont remember exactly but I think it was John, and I was told that repeatedly in Theology class in high school. While first hand witnesses can be a good source of info for writing a historical record, it for instance cant hold up in court as it is here say. The reason people are so critical of this is because imagine if I sat down with you and told you a story about how 40 years ago my friend kevin started claiming he was a diety and then after being killed by the government came back and hung out with us for 40 days. that’s an outlandish story, thats why its called faith.
2. I dont believe in the holy spirit so to me the bible is just a collection of random books.
3. Do you remember the big rapture ruckus last year? how all these evangelicals were whipped up into a frenzy just by some men standing up and spewing some scripture and telling them that they would soon be chosen by god? And then on they day they claimed, nothing happened. But these folks wernt deterred just because the promise all these pastors had built up hadn’t been kept folks weren’t deterred. The priests simply crafted some excuse for the lack of final judgement and set a new date. They were wrong again. But still, after all this, people still follow these leaders.

So, its not insane to say that even after prophecies fail people will continue to go along with their leaders because they are conditioned to. If people continue to follow those rapture pastors after they were wrong multiple times, why would people not continue to follow the apostles after a failed resurrection or a faked one.

 

[Skadi]

“15.44.2. But, despite kindly influence, despite the leader’s generous handouts, despite appeasing the gods, the scandal did not subside, rather the blaze came to be believed to be an official act. So, in order to quash the rumour, Nero blamed it on, and applied the cruelest punishments to, those sinners, whom ordinary people call Christians, hating them for their shameful behaviour. 15.44.3. The originator of this name, Christ, was sentenced to torture by Procurator Pontius Pilate, during the reign of Tiberius, but although checked for a moment, the deadly cult erupted again, not just in Judea, the source of its evil, but even in Rome, where all the sins and scandals of the world gather and are glorified.”

Yes, Neros persecutions were outrageous and vicious. The poor Christians of that time were made his scape-goat when in fact he probably did torch Rome.

And he attests to the existence of Christ, not to his teachings. Dont cite him if u wana talk about the early church, cite him if you want to point to the existence of Jesus.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes, Neros persecutions were outrageous and vicious. The poor Christians of that time were made his scape-goat when in fact he probably did torch Rome.

And he attests to the existence of Christ, not to his teachings. Dont cite him if u wana talk about the early church, cite him if you want to point to the existence of Jesus.

Now, Skadi, what source did you use to state that Nero’s persecutions were outrageous and vicious?

Was it from someone who was an eyewitness to these persecutions?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Yes, Neros persecutions were outrageous and vicious. The poor Christians of that time were made his scape-goat when in fact he probably did torch Rome.

And he attests to the existence of Christ, not to his teachings. Dont cite him if u wana talk about the early church, cite him if you want to point to the existence of Jesus.

Why was it wrong for Christians to be persecuted? It was probably the will of the pagan deities that Christians be destroyed because they knew this new group was trouble. And Christians refused to offer sacrifices, doesn’t this put the empire in danger because it is not appeasing the gods? Surely the romans had every right to persecute these Christians. Unless sacrifices do nothing that is.

 

[Skadi]

Indeed. And, Skadi, how could you object to a pagan who does practice human sacrifice today, if that is what the germanic gods demand? Did you not say that this is indeed something that they do demand?

I have no problem with voluntary sacrifice. if a man wants to be sacrificed to his deity whos right is it to stop him. However I would object to people being sacrificed against their will.

 

[Skadi]

I never said anything about Human sacrifice, although how can you possibly object to the pagan in the past that did such a thing? As far as infanticide is concerned its mainly due to Christian influence that such a practice was eventually viewed as the immoral action it was. It was fairly common to see a child abandoned and it was done fairly coldly as well.

Also to what end worship gods that do not exist or do nothing for you?

Tacitus writes “[The Germani] hold it shameful to kill any unwanted child.” Infanticide was practiced in varying degrees across the entire ancient world, but generaly only in northern Europe in times of famine, when newborns had little chance of surviving. There is nothing connecting this practice to the gods.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I have no problem with voluntary sacrifice. if a man wants to be sacrificed to his deity whos right is it to stop him. However I would object to people being sacrificed against their will.

Why? Especially if that person is someone who might not believe. What is the wrong in killing a man (like me) who says the gods are nothing but deceitful demons or non existent entities that can profit people nothing?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Tacitus writes “[The Germani] hold it shameful to kill any unwanted child.” Infanticide was practiced in varying degrees across the entire ancient world, but generaly only in northern Europe in times of famine, when newborns had little chance of surviving. There is nothing connecting this practice to the gods.

There is nothing in them that inherently condemns it, why should it be wrong for a child to die? You would approve of abortion right?

 

[Skadi]

Why? Especially if that person is someone who might not believe. What is the wrong in killing a man (like me) who says the gods are nothing but deceitful demons or non existent entities that can profit people nothing?

Um because to sacrifice someone to the gods against their will would be wrong. It was done in ancient times to prisoners of war, but back in the day Christians wen on crusades and ordered the exterminations of pagan populaces like what Charlemagne.

And human sacrifice in Northern Europe was uncommon anyway. usually done only in times of famine or during wartime.

 

[Skadi]

There is nothing in them that inherently condemns it, why should it be wrong for a child to die? You would approve of abortion right?

I don’t agree with abortion but i do believe it should be an option in the case of rape. Still I would be furious if a woman tried to kill my child.

in ancient times when life was a constant struggle for survival, I can atleast understand it, as in times of severe famine the newborn children simply cant survive. However, in modern times in the industrialized world this simply isnt an excuse, like i’ve said the world has changed.

And like I said, that had nothing to do with religion, there is no teaching on the issue in German religion.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Um because to sacrifice someone to the gods against their will would be wrong. It was done in ancient times to prisoners of war, but back in the day Christians wen on crusades and ordered the exterminations of pagan populaces like what Charlemagne.

And human sacrifice in Northern Europe was uncommon anyway. usually done only in times of famine or during wartime.

Why is it wrong? Who declared it wrong? Immoral gods who do not obey the laws of morality and can do whatever they like? Or is morality an abstraction? In so far as the crusades are concerned what are you talking about? They were more or less concerned with fighting the muslims, the first crusade specifically about recapturing the holyland from Islamic control, and while I don’t think the crusades were perfect they ultimately did put at bay aggressive islamic expansionism, if that wasn’t stopped you probably might not be a pagan now, or you would be killed for being a pagan.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I don’t agree with abortion but i do believe it should be an option in the case of rape. Still I would be furious if a woman tried to kill my child.

in ancient times when life was a constant struggle for survival, I can atleast understand it, as in times of severe famine the newborn children simply cant survive. However, in modern times in the industrialized world this simply isnt an excuse, like i’ve said the world has changed.

And like I said, that had nothing to do with religion, there is no teaching on the issue in German religion.

But I’m asking why is it wrong? Because immoral gods said so?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Um because to sacrifice someone to the gods against their will would be wrong. It was done in ancient times to prisoners of war, but back in the day Christians wen on crusades and ordered the exterminations of pagan populaces like what Charlemagne.

And human sacrifice in Northern Europe was uncommon anyway. usually done only in times of famine or during wartime.

Are you saying Christians made an unwilling sacrifice of pagans to God? If so I would like to know the reason why you believe this.