Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 239
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,969
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM View Post
    That's an interesting thesis. But do you have any evidence? I Googled "Vishnu Ish Noah" and found this article which simply asserted it as fact without any evidence, which is very common on the internet. The online etymological dictionary says Vishnu is "probably from root vish- and meaning 'all-pervader' or 'worker.'". And the wiki says "The name has no certain etymology; it is unattested in Iranian (but Iranian Rašnu is perhaps an indication that the name existed in Indo-Iranian and was replaced in Iranian). The most common interpretation is as vi-snu- from vi- "apart, across" and the zero grade of sānu "summit, ridge, mountain-top", as in "he who steps across / spreads out the mountains", c.f. RV 1.62.5c (of Indra):"

    But more importantly, I don't really know what you mean when you say that "mythology is derived from astrology and reality." How does that relate to it being true? Do you believe all mythologies and all religions? Are you saying that Christianity is no different than Hinduism or astrology?
    The Vishnu interpretation was from Alexander Hislop's Two Babylons.

    But in Romans 1 Paul explains it:
    Romans 1
    18
    For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
    19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.
    20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
    21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
    22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
    23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
    24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
    25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
    26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
    27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
    29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
    30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
    31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
    32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
    So from the beginning people knew about God but like Sodom they wanted to keep God out of their lives.
    Last edited by gilgal; 08-11-2011 at 02:34 PM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,192
    Quote Originally Posted by gilgal View Post
    Oh come on. Unless proven with forgery how can Peter a fisherman have such knowledge of Greek Mythology?

    What do you think of the book of Enoch? I haven't read it but have heard from it. It talks about angels who have left their first estate. I'm also thinking that the song of Moses in Deuteronomy may possibly come from that book?
    Well, now that you bring it up, nearly all biblical scholars other than the most doctrinaire fundamentalists agree that 2 Peter was not written by a first-century Galilean fisherman. The Greek in it is polished and sophisticated, whereas the Bible says that Peter was "unlearned and ignorant" (Acts 4:13). But if it is legitimate, then obviously Peter would have learned the Greek mythology from the same people who taught him the polished and sophisticated Greek he used when writing it. So either way, you have your answer.

    As for the Book of Enoch. I think it is a typical example of first century mythology. In other words, I think it is full of baseless speculations and outright falsehoods and I do not believe anything it says about fallen angels, especially the idea that they had sex with humans. The fact that it was quoted by Jude only proves again that the Bible is infected with pagan mythology.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,192
    Quote Originally Posted by gilgal View Post
    The Vishnu interpretation was from Alexander Hislop's Two Babylons.

    But in Romans 1 Paul explains it:

    So from the beginning people knew about God but like Sodom they wanted to keep God out of their lives.
    Thanks for the info. I found the reference in Hislop's book here. I very much doubt he is correct, but I'll check into it more before coming to any firm conclusion.

    As for Romans 1 - that is a broad general statement. It says nothing about any specific relation between Noah and Vishnu.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,969
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM View Post
    As for Romans 1 - that is a broad general statement. It says nothing about any specific relation between Noah and Vishnu.
    Not in specific but it does liken deities to the form of corruptible beings: men, animals, insects...

    Coming back to Peter's epistles, I'm not that knowledgeable to approach as a scholar but it is possible that Peter simply dictated and someone else wrote it. Maybe that's why he didn't write too many epistles compared to Paul. Then again I doubt Paul actually penned his epistles but through Silvanus or someone else.

    But my experience in this kind of talk can go on for a lifetime. There are always doubts, heresies but I can't go on researching all the time to prepare an answer. I just read my bible and move on with life with faith.

    You're not going to find better answers elsewhere than the bible.

    Hislop: You found the right spot. "Vishnu is just the Sanscrit form of the Chaldean name Ish-Nu" 25th line.

    I enjoyed reading that book because Hislop is referring to historians who have spoken of the pagan rituals and tries to trace the origin of certain rituals. Though I might not remember everything because I read it a while ago and have given the book to someone else.

    Here's one thing I remember. Revelation 12 the red or fiery dragon resembles to Molech who was offered children for sacrifice. His fire devours them.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,192
    Quote Originally Posted by gilgal View Post
    Hislop: You found the right spot. "Vishnu is just the Sanscrit form of the Chaldean name Ish-Nu" 25th line.

    I enjoyed reading that book because Hislop is referring to historians who have spoken of the pagan rituals and tries to trace the origin of certain rituals. Though I might not remember everything because I read it a while ago and have given the book to someone else.
    I'm confused. Hislop's book "The Two Babylons" purports to show that the Catholic Church is evil because it is a veiled continuation of the pagan mythology that started in Babylon. But we've seen that there is pagan mythology in the Bible. So why is it bad if it's in the Catholic Church, but good if it's in the Bible?
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,192
    I was reading the wiki article on Hislop's Two Babylons - it's pretty ugly:

    Quote Originally Posted by wiki

    The Two Babylons is an anti-Catholic religious pamphlet produced initially by the Scottish theologian and Presbyterian Alexander Hislop in 1853. It was later expanded in 1858 and finally published as a book in 1919. Its central theme is its allegation that the Catholic Church is a veiled continuation of the pagan religion of Babylon, the veiled paganism being the product of a millennia old conspiracy.[1][2] Christian Book Reviews November 12th, 2005</ref> It has been recognized by scholars as discredited and has been called a "tribute to historical inaccuracy and know-nothing religious bigotry" with "shoddy scholarship, blatant dishonesty" and a "nonsensical thesis".[3][4]


    Although scholarship has shown the picture presented by Hislop to be based on a misunderstanding of historical Babylon and its religion, his book remains popular among some fundamentalist protestant Christians.[1]
    The book's thesis has also featured prominently in the conspiracy theories of racist groups such as The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord[5] and other conspiracy theorists.[6]


    Although extensively footnoted, giving the impression of reliability, commentators (in particular Ralph Woodrow) have stated that there are numerous misconceptions, fabrications and grave factual errors in the document, and that this book follows the line of thought of works like: Martin Luther - On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church (1520), Titus Oates - An Exact Discovery of the Mystery of Iniquity as it is now in Practice amongst the Jesuits (1679), Conyers Middleton - Letter from Rome (1729).[7]
    I wanted to see what Ralph Woodrow had to say in his book refuting Hislop, and while looking at his site www.ralphwoodrow.org I found this article:

    The Coming of Elijah - Future or Fulfilled?
    [PDF]

    He very clearly points out what the Bible says on this matter, and I don't see how anyone could disagree with his argument or conclusion.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,969
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM View Post
    I was reading the wiki article on Hislop's Two Babylons - it's pretty ugly:



    I wanted to see what Ralph Woodrow had to say in his book refuting Hislop, and while looking at his site www.ralphwoodrow.org I found this article:

    The Coming of Elijah - Future or Fulfilled?
    [PDF]

    He very clearly points out what the Bible says on this matter, and I don't see how anyone could disagree with his argument or conclusion.
    I believe in the futuristic fulfillment of the real Elijah. Jews leave an empty chair at the Passover Seder in case Elijah decides to stop by.

    I've read the Two Babylons myself. He goes through old poetries, historical writings comparing or drawing similarities with the Roman Catholic practices/philosophies the pagan mythology and the bible.

    His conclusion is that (as mentioned in Romans) that man had the knowledge of the truth but in time introduced lies. The truth is liberating but the lies lead to allowing man to rule over man. It's far worse than making money off them. Revelation 18 says that the Mystery Babylon system traffics the souls of men. How can we control men? Religion!!! But as Peter said do not be lords over God's heritage.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,192
    Quote Originally Posted by gilgal View Post
    I believe in the futuristic fulfillment of the real Elijah. Jews leave an empty chair at the Passover Seder in case Elijah decides to stop by.
    The Jews leave the empty chair because they reject Christianity which says that John the Baptist was the "Elijah to come." I find it very curious that you would side with them on this issue and deny Christ's testimony that John the Baptist was the "Elijah to come."

    Don't you see how everything confirms everything else? The final prophecy in the OT said that God would send Elijah before "the great and terrible day of the Lord." Jesus said that John the Baptist was Elijah. John the Baptist warned the Pharisees of the "wrath to come." If you don't believe all that, it makes me wonder if you believe anything in the Bible. It is things like this that make me think that the Bible is totally meaningless. Nobody agrees about anything, no matter how plainly stated. What good is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by gilgal View Post
    I've read the Two Babylons myself. He goes through old poetries, historical writings comparing or drawing similarities with the Roman Catholic practices/philosophies the pagan mythology and the bible.

    His conclusion is that (as mentioned in Romans) that man had the knowledge of the truth but in time introduced lies. The truth is liberating but the lies lead to allowing man to rule over man. It's far worse than making money off them. Revelation 18 says that the Mystery Babylon system traffics the souls of men. How can we control men? Religion!!! But as Peter said do not be lords over God's heritage.
    OK - but what do you think about the refutations of his book that I quoted? For example:
    It has been recognized by scholars as discredited and has been called a "tribute to historical inaccuracy and know-nothing religious bigotry" with "shoddy scholarship, blatant dishonesty" and a "nonsensical thesis"
    I have to say that I got the same impression when I checked his footnotes on just one point, namely, the meaning of "Vishnu." I think he's a crank who makes up a bunch of junk. Have you ever attempted to verify any of his claims?

    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,969
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM View Post
    The Jews leave the empty chair because they reject Christianity which says that John the Baptist was the "Elijah to come." I find it very curious that you would side with them on this issue and deny Christ's testimony that John the Baptist was the "Elijah to come."
    No. John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah but not Elijah himself. Elijah's big role was to shut up heaven and make fire come down from heaven for his sacrifice in 1Kings 17-18. Did John do that? No but he did preach repentance. And because he preached repentance his role was just that: turning the hearts of men to God which is common with Elijah's. But you'll notice in Revelation 11, a future period where the 2 witnesses shut up heaven, make fire come down, die and rise again to turn the hearts of men towards God. So the real Elijah hasn't showed up yet.

    And don't forget. When Jesus was on the cross and cried out, "Eli, Eli" people thought that he's calling for Elijah. In other words Elijah's role hasn't been fulfilled yet.
    I have to say that I got the same impression when I checked his footnotes on just one point, namely, the meaning of "Vishnu." I think he's a crank who makes up a bunch of junk. Have you ever attempted to verify any of his claims?
    I haven't read that many literature on the subject to have an accurate judgement. I have a very small library of books. But I find that discrediting someone without correcting is not good. It leaves you lost and wondering what the truth on that matter. If there is refutation I need to see proof:
    Where does Hislop go wrong? What is the right interpretation of Vishnu then?

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Not from this world...from the other side
    Posts
    3,229
    Quote Originally Posted by gilgal View Post
    No. John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah but not Elijah himself. Elijah's big role was to shut up heaven and make fire come down from heaven for his sacrifice in 1Kings 17-18. Did John do that? No but he did preach repentance. And because he preached repentance his role was just that: turning the hearts of men to God which is common with Elijah's. But you'll notice in Revelation 11, a future period where the 2 witnesses shut up heaven, make fire come down, die and rise again to turn the hearts of men towards God. So the real Elijah hasn't showed up yet.

    And don't forget. When Jesus was on the cross and cried out, "Eli, Eli" people thought that he's calling for Elijah. In other words Elijah's role hasn't been fulfilled yet.
    Good point gilgal,

    I would like to add that John the Baptist himself denied he is Elijah:

    John 1:21
    They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.”


    Even Jesus seems to say John the Baptist is not the real Elijah,

    Matthew 11:14
    And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.15 Whoever has ears, let them hear.


    It's like saying,"Well, in a sense, you can say He is Elijah who was to come but he is actually not".

    There are double confirmations that
    John is not the Elijah who was to come by the messenger, one by Jesus Himself and one by John the Baptist, What could be clearer?:

    Matthew 11:This is the one about whom it is written:

    “‘I will send my messenger ahead of you,
    who will prepare your way before you.’[c]

    John 1: 23 John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.’”[d]



    Let Elijah comes, Amen.
    Last edited by CWH; 08-13-2011 at 06:46 AM.
    Ask and You shall receive,
    Seek and You shall find,
    Knock and the door will be open unto You.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •