₦airaland Forum

^^ Who blasphemed against God? Mohammed who was dubiously ascribing words to allah when he knew he was plagiarising from Christians/Jews/arabic fairy tales or Christians who are trying to lead you to eternal knowledge of God?

abuzola; must you show the level of your stupidity on every thread?

Ehn??

. . . I wonder why we like pretending, we have been living with power failure for long, but una no want make the visitors know say power failure dey Naija? who we want deceive?

^^ Can you point out any corrupt deal she was involved in, whether in or out of service? You people just hide under the guise of internet to discredit people who are more than you. I am not going to fall for any pro-Nuhu Ribadu comment, the guy that disregarded all our democratic norms to frustrate people opposed to the OBJ 3rd term agenda . . . . rubbish!!

The importers are been owed by the FG, that is why their were exempted.

^^ Dont you think she could have frustrated the case if she wanted? useless comment.

Are you married to him . . . . ?

What kinda thread is this?

I thought it is the man's duty to make out time to visit you first. Or are you the one prodding him?

Isaiah 9:6
For a child has been born to us,
a son has been given to us.
He shoulders responsibility
and is called:
Extraordinary Strategist,
Mighty God,
Everlasting Father,
Prince of Peace.


@ all Christians in the house;

You can bring out verses in the Old Testament that prophesied about Jesus and quote the New Testament scripture where the prophesy was fulfilled so that we shall educate ourselves on this thread.

Prophecy:

Isaiah 7:14
For this reason the sovereign master himself will give you a confirming sign. Look, this young woman is about to conceive and will give birth to a son. You, young woman, will name him Immanuel.

Fulfillment:

Matthew 1:18-23
, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit,
, "and they will call him Emmanuel," which means "God with us."

Prophecy:

Zechariah 11:12-13
12 Then I said to them, "If it seems good to you, pay me my wages, but if not, forget it." So they weighed out my payment - thirty pieces of silver.
13 The LORD then said to me, "Throw to the potter that exorbitant sum at which they valued me!" So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them to the potter at the temple of the LORD.

Fulfillment:

Matthew 27:3,7
Now when Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus had been condemned, he regretted what he had done and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders,
, they bought the Potter's Field with it,

Old Testament Prophecy:
Zechariah 9:9
Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion!
Shout, daughter of Jerusalem!
Look! Your king is coming to you:
he is legitimate and victorious,
humble and riding on a donkey -
on a young donkey, the foal of a female donkey.

Fulfillment

Matthew 21:7
They brought the donkey and the colt and placed their cloaks on them, and he sat on them.

The sources of the Jesus-is-Mithra conspiracy myths

Acharya S
Acharya S is the pen name of D. M. Murdock, who holds the general belief that religions are built upon earlier myths. Her only notable work is her writing, which consists largely of attempts to show that Christianity is just modern day Roman mythology. To answer the question, "Who is Acharya S?", her own website speaks more about the college she attended than it does about her. Most of the alleged "borrowings" addressed on this page come from her book The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold. She claims that many religions have a common source; the myth of a sun god. From her book:

The sun 'dies' for three days at the winter solstice, to be born again or resurrected on December 25th, The sun enters into each sign of the zodiac at 30 [degrees]; hence, the 'Sun of God' begins his ministry at 'age' 30.

She seems to perhaps practice some dishonesty. While readily replying to one e-mail, she gave absolutely no response to a subsequent e-mail asking her for the source of her claim that Mithra had 12 disciples. It is also worth noting that her schooling focused on subjects such as Greek civilization and classics, mythology, and history. There seems to be little credibility to much of what she says and no reason to take her seriously (much like the Jesus Seminar), yet because self-proclaimed free-thinkers love to cite her arguments as if they proved Christianity to be false, it seemed good to me to research and respond to the claims.

About the Mithras
There are several Mithras, including Iranian, Indian, Roman, Greek, and Persian versions. The basic story of Mithra (though any given version will differ) involves the god-figure Mithra's birth from a rock, after which he struggled against evil in a sun-and-stars oriented, mythological story. He eventually slew a divine bull, whose blood brought plants and animals into existence.

Mithra's sacred day was Sunday, had a festival which became Easter
It's true that Iranian Mithraism had several festivals, but none of them were Easter. Iranian Mithraism had a festival each season, and while there was a festival held during the Spring equinox, that hardly counts as being Easter.

As for Sunday being a sacred day, this appears to be true. But only for Roman Mithraism, which means that the sacred day would have been borrowed (if any borrowing occurred at all) by the Mithraists from the Christians, not the other way around. In other words, the skeptics are still grasping at straws.

Mithra sacrificed himself for world peace
As has already been mentioned, Mithra never even died. Mithra killed the divine "bull of the sun" (purposefully phrased by intellectually dishonest folk to make it sound more similar to Christianity), but Mithra was not the bull, Mithra did not die, and Mithra didn't do this to bring about world peace. Not that Jesus died for "world peace" either, but that's just more of the skeptics' ignorance showing.

Mithra reference plagiarized in 1 Corinthians
It has been said that a verse in 1 Corinthians is a word-for-word quote from Mithraic scriptures. Here's the verse in question:

and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were all drinking from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.1 Corinthians 10:4

Skeptics claim that this is the exact text used in Mithraic scriptures, only the word "Christ" is used in place of "Mithra". The problem is that we have barely any ancient texts that tell us about Mithraism, and we have absolutely no Mithraic scriptures. In other words, this claim is absolutely baseless. On a side note, when Paul wrote those words, he was referring to the Old Testament. Are the Old Testament and Judaism rebranded Mithraism?

Mithra had 12 disciples
As far as I can tell, there's no factual basis for the claim that Mithra had 12 disciples.

Roman and Greek versions of the Mithra myth did have companions. One version had a single companion named Varuna, the other version had two helpers who were like him, called Cautes and Cautopatres. Neither of these Mithra myths included 12 companions, however. So where does the idea of 12 Mithraic disciples come from?

Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, in their book The Jesus Mysteries (1999), base their claim off a post-Christian carving of Mithra slaying a bull. On either side of the scene is a vertical row of 6 figures (that makes 12 in all). Two things should be kept in mind here. First, any commentaries I can find on this carving (besides Freke and Gandy's) clearly identifies the 12 figures as representing the zodiac (in fact, the top two faces are the sun and moon). Second, this carving is significantly post-Christian. If there were any "borrowing" from one religion to another, it was from Christianity to Mithraism, not the other way around.

Mithra had his own eucharist with flesh-bread and blood-wine
He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved.

The above quote is attributed to Mithra and is supposedly found in the Vatican's tomb of Peter.

When I looked this quote up, I found no evidence linking it to Mithra, but rather to Zarathustra (founder of Zoroasstrianism), who lived about 2000 BC. But even that connection is weak, since the only link between this quote and Zarathustra is actually in a medieval document (again, significantly post-Christian). This supposed similarity between Christianity and Mithraism is more questionable than a Catholic priest at a boyscout meeting.

I did find commentary about Mithraists having "fellowship meals" which naturally included bread and meat, water and wine. The same commentary made no significance of this fact, but did mention that such meals were completely commonplace in the Roman world and in no way originated with Mithraism.

Mithra performed miracles
I couldn't find any reference to direct parallels between Mithra's works of wonders and those of Christ. If they're out there, let me know. But as far as I can tell, Mithra didn't miraculously feed multitudes, walk on water, raise the dead,

Of course the fact that Mithra is credited with some sort of supernatural power shouldn't surprise us, as absolutely any deity, true or false, will almost by definition have supernatural power and activities attributed to him. After all, what is a god if not supernatural? But this hardly shows a connection or dependence between Christianity and Mithraism.

Mithra buried in tomb, raised 3 days later
Amazingly, I could find no story of Mithra that involved his death, and obviously not then his resurrection, either. In fact, Richard Gordon wrote in Image and Value in the Greco-Roman World that there was "no death of Mithras". So where did this idea of Mithra's death come from?

Freke and Gandy, who I mentioned earlier, claim that new Mithraists acted out a resurrection scene. The footnoted source is chapter 40 of Tertullian's Prescription Against Heretics, which says, "If my memory still serves me, Mithra there, (in the kingdom of Satan), sets his marks ont he foreheads of his soldiers; celebrates also the oblation of bread, and introduces an image of a resurrection, " My response is twofold:

1.The argument is based on Tertullian's memory (post-Christian), not on any actual Mithraic source.
2.Freke and Gandy claim that initiates acted out a resurrection scene, but the source says nothing of the sort! It says that Mithra is the one who does the celebration and introduces an image of resurrection!
Acharya S actually claims that Mithra was crucified. Not only can I again find no actual source for this, but my search results indicate that it was another figure--Attis--who was crucified. Perhaps Acharya is just confused?

Mithra's sacrifice of eternal blood gave immortality
Apparently there is no real source for the claim that Mithra offered his followers immortality. Of course, it's not a far stretch to make, since religious figures generally offer some ultimate prize for following them. Immortality tends to be the ticket. Otherwise, why follow them?

But the sacrifice of eternal blood is yet another pathetic claim by skeptics. It comes from some graffiti, dating well over a century after the completion of the New Testament, on the Santa Prisca Mithraeum, which reads, "And us, too, you saved by spilling the eternal blood." All scholars I've read are positive that this refers to Mithra's spilling of the bulll's blood (remember, Mithra never even died!), and that it does not in any way refer to salvation in a sense familiar to Christianity.

Mithra's resurrection celebrated annually
The only original source I could find making the claim that Mithra's resurrection was celebrated every year is Esme Wynn-Tyson's claims in Mithras: The Fellow in the Cap. But Wynn-Tyson references Firmicus, who 1) wrote over 200 years after the completion of the New Testament, 2) wrote about celebrating the image of a dead Mithra, and 3) actually didn't write anything about it at all (that I could find)!

Mithra's yearly passover sacrifice a symbolic atonement for physical and moral regeneration
This is a little confusing, since Mithra never made a sacrifice (as mentioned earlier on this page). What's more, there's no record of a yearly rememberance of it (of course, since there was no Mithraic sacrifice). The worst part of this claim is that it deliberately uses Christian terminology to create the false notion of a connection between the two. Why are words like "atonement" and "passover" used when no such words are used in Mithraic texts, and certainly don't accurately describe any events in Mithra mythology? It's dishonest and deceitful to manipulate words this way.

Mithra called the "good shepherd", identified as lion and lamb
I can't find anything to support these claims. Mithra's totem was a lion, but that's about it. Aside from this being a stretch and purposefully distorted by skeptics, it ignores all the other sources for the Christian symbolism of Christ as a lion. There is a later story about Mithra which involves him as a child killing a lion, but again, I don't see the connection here.

Mithra called the "Messiah", "Savior", "Redeemer", "Mediator"
The only reference to Mithra as any of these is that found in modern skeptics' writings. Skeptics will use phrases like "sun of righteousness", but this is only a dishonest attempt to make Christianity appear more like a counterfeit. While Mithra is a type of "sun god" myth, that title is never used of him, and certainly "sun" is not the same as "son". There appears to be no connection between these titles and Mithra, at least not outside of the skeptics' imaginations. The only role that Mithra played was a "mediator" (though, again, he was never called that) between the good and evil gods.

Mithra was born on December 25th
This claim shows just how desperate/ignorant skeptics can be. While Mithra is said (by some traditions) to have been born on December 25th, no one claims that Jesus was actually born on December 25th. In fact, when atheists go around during the holidays shouting, "Christmas is based on a pagan holiday! December 25th is a pagan holiday!" it's a bit like a hippie vegan running around screaming at the top of their lungs that McDonalds' Chicken McNuggets are not, in fact, real chicken. In summary, Nowhere in Scripture is December 25th even mentioned, so this point is completely irrelevant.

Also of note: December 25th used to be the Winter solstice and was commonly seen as sacred or religious by various groups. None "borrowed" or "stole" the idea from any of the others. Anything notable, such as the full moon or black skin, was often the object of curiosity and given significance in a number of belief systems, and the solstice is no different. The fact that Christmas is celebrated on December 25th means absolutely nothing.

Mithra's birth was attended by shepherds
This one is actually true. Mithra's birth was attended by shepherds. More than just attending, they helped him out of the rock and offered the first of their flock to him. In contrast, the shepherds were not even present at Jesus' actual birth. Interestingly, the commentaries on Mithra's birth almost all point out the contradiction between claiming that Mithra's birth was attended by shepherds and claiming that Mithra was born before mankind was even created. But as with most of the skeptics' claims, the source material for this part of Mithra's story comes from over a century after the New Testament was completed. Christianity was well-established long before the story of Mithra's birth showed up.

Mithra was a great traveling teacher and master
Two things. First, we would expect any leader to be called a great teacher, especially in a religious context! Can you imagine a god coming to earth and people saying, "No, he didn't teach us or lead us. He didn't do much of anything"? And what does it mean that Mithra was a "master"? Master of what? What makes Mithra the source upon which the master-teacher myth is based rather than, say, Airstotle? Or Moses?

But the second (and key) thing is, I can't actually find any reference to Mithra being called a great teacher or master ("traveling" or not), except the claims of those who assert that Jesus is a myth based on Mithra. But even these imaginative folk don't cite any sources for their claims. So, I suppose we should just ask the question, "Where was Mithra ever called a great teacher or master? What were his teachings? Who did he teach?"

@shakers;

What are you babbling about? Really, the God or the Man God you fight for is just a cheap plagiarism of Mithra. The religion that preceded Pauline Christianity,

Since you copied this from a site, you have not allowed anybody to rest, pasting it on nearly all threads you commented on. For your information, I will reproduce the fallacies in your claims:

Jesus and Mithra have almost nothing in common.


Mithra was born of a virgin in a cave
This is one of many factually inaccurate claims. The story of Mithra says that he was born, as a fully-grown man, out of solid rock. It's a bit muddy, but from what I can tell, this is where the "cave" part of the story comes from--Mithra left behind a large cavity on the rock when he was "born". I also found that Perseus was said to have been born, according to some versions, in an underground cavern, and his birth shares some similarities with that of Mithra. Perhaps this is where the idea of a cave comes from. Of course, Jesus wasn't born in a cave, so I'm not sure why skeptics mention this in the first place.

I suppose technically the rock could be considered a virgin, but it's a bit of a stretch. Nevermind the Old Testament prophecies dealing with the virgin birth, or the fact that the earliest reference to even the rock birth of Mithra is over a century after Christ. The other story of Mithra's birth I came across is from a Persian tradition which says that Mithra was born through an incestuous relationship between a god and his mother. Again, no virgin is involved here. What's more, part of the virgin birth of Christ is a focus on Christ's true humanity. This is quite a contrast from a rock-birth or a birth to incestuous deities.

babaearly:
[size=18pt]Its funny how the shitloads abuzola and olabowale structure dem posts.
The first starts with 'Compiled by, ' and the later writes lengthy rubbish exhibiting his senile dementia (he is an old man).
They both think they have Landed. Then arrives noetic, david and co (Watchmen) to remind them how many brain gay-gots they got in their near empty skulls.[/size]

yeah @ longfem.

Do you forget that it was largely as a result of Paul's effort that Christians came to be persecuted and hated so much by the Roman empire? muslims all hate Paul today because he did not allow God's truth as preached by Jesus to be forgotten, atheists now accuse Paul of creating Christianity simply because he did not allow this Gospel to be forgotten, I wish to appreciate the Holy Spirit for the great work he did in the life of brother Paul.

Just about everything.

Climate change is real, dude.

Nezan, I hope you do wash your's sometimes. Otherwise your stench will be ying-yang by now

Tufiakwa!!!! Jesus blood is sufficient for me!!!

^ *sighs*

The funnier stuff is thinking that somebody's blood will save you! There was no transfusion of the blood into your vein and its been long any how; 2000 years, it should have caked by now. No? And he was not willing to shed any blood for anyone, in the first place and by every account, it does not help you, if you belief in it,

You will not know because you worship one of the idols in the kaaba then, one idol called allah, who did not create the world, who did not know that man falled into sin through Adam, one who did not know that it was necessary to save man from satan since the fall, who did not know that since sin came into the world through one man, it was necessary for a blood sacrifice from a blameless man to be offered to attone for our sins? how will you know when you wash your private parts, thinking that it will free you from sin?

without worshipping The Creator in the way He says He prescribe for you; Jesus himself worship that God. And the God worshipped by Jesus said in the Quran was not killed and was not crucified!

If mohammed could not know his destiny after the hereafter, why should I care about the lies he wrote in the koran anyway?

^^ cheaper by how much?

This make any sense to you? The church that did not come from the mouth of Jesus, who knew Jewish Temple/ synagogue only? If God is Unseen, how is Jesus a clearly seen entity man is termed to be God to you? Whats the first born of the new creation, when there is a continuum of the creation of man, without any interruption from Adam till now and I predict, inshaAllah a no interruption, until the last generation. This is completely ridiculous!

Dont you know Jesus taught that our hearts are God's temple? Jesus clearly taught that God's temple is not in synagogues or as you ignorantly believe . . . our hearts are God's Temple.

Why are you so obsessed with Jesus, the Christ and his Deity? will mohammed be able to under go a quater of what Jesus did? no, because his paedophillic, murderous, lying etc etc self was too sinful before God. If Jesus was man, why did He claim to be God? a muslim mind will never fathom that it was necessary for Christ to come in human form to be killed for our sins . . . a blameless sacrifice from God, the Father for the salvation of mindkind.

Read the response, above. He was not the only one God Spirit ever lived in. Moses was a clear example, yet he died and you can not say that God's Spirit died with him! How many Spirits of God were or are there, except the One  which is indivisible? I thought the "another" Comforter would be different from Jesus? And if one was already living inside Jesus, while he was promising a future one, then did that one living inside him get out and come back as another? This will show that there will be a time, based on your statement that Jesus would have no God's spirit inside him, at least when he the another was here, and while he was talking promising the another, that spirit was right there with him; a proposal that opposes the other and the OT belief that there is always that spirit of God in existence, while you may have to tell us there are many spirits of God around, my other reason for labelling you as a multigod worshipper!

Moses never claimed equality with God . . . . because he was not Deity as Jesus, he never claim ability to forgive sins . . because he was not Deity as Jesus. . .

. . . and did mohammed ever claim to be the holy spirit? did he forgive sins? definately not, because he knew his claims to prophethood were based on falsehoods!!

The guy wan hammer within the service year

And I know a lot of Jews, including Rabbis of ultra conservative, no one of them will accept your premise, the reason they, according to the Bible stoned him, since "spirit in Him" is not the same blasphemous statement "are one" as it was taken to mean equating himself to the "Unseen, Irresistable, Supreme being", while they saw through him as a human being who could "not do anything out of his own power!"

How do you expect any Rabbi to accept this fact when the Jews killed Jesus 2000 years ago for this same fact: claiming equality with God?

That is the uniqueness about Jesus . . . no living soul, before or after Him has ever claimed this!!