Question for those who believe the bible.

by seven006 82 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Farkel


    : The large drain pipe makes sense also but the dinofest answer is completely stupid.

    You're right and I take responsibility for not explaining how they got there. Obviously, before the flood there were no water masses like we have now. So it is possible that before the flood, "The Canary Islands" were not yet islands and were probably known simply as "The Canary." Even so, those big ol' dinosaurs were too lumbering and slow to have all made the trip to "The Canary." Now we all know that Unicorns were destroyed in the flood, because the Bible makes no mention of them getting on the Ark. From these indisputable facts we can rightly conclude that a huge herd of flying invisible purple unicorns flew all the dinos to "The Canary" for their fest.

    I'm sorry for any confusion I may have caused for not stating all the facts in my first reply.


  • seven006


    Your comment about where we were born influencing what kind of theology we lean toward is something I have been trying to get across for many years. You are exactly right.

    I have not said once that a supreme being or as interpreted is as "god" does not exist. My mind is not closed to that possibility. Where I point out the mythological aspects of the belief in god is purely related to its religious interpretations handed down throughout history. As I have stated in other posts it is a known fact that most of the European and Asian countries had very active trade routes that met at a half way point in Persia. At that time and at that place most of the world news was traded just as goods were. As the traveling merchants returned to their homeland with goods from other countries they also brought back with them the news as well as stories that were loaded with myth. This was the main source of information about things outside a persons own country. This is how the myths of one religious culture was added to and embellished by another and also why they have very similar and specific story lines.


    From the best research it has been determined that he story of Buddha "in written form" goes back at least 250 to 300 years before Christ supposedly walked the earth. The calculation for the time that Buddha supposedly walked the earth dates back to over 600 years before Christ supposed birth. The supposed existence of Krishna was at least two to three hundred years before Buddha. The Pitakas [sacred books containing the legends of Buddha] now present in Ceylon are substantially identical with the books of the Southern Canon, as settled at the Council of Patna about the year 250 B.C. As no works would have been received into the Canon which were not then believed to be very old, the Pitakas may be approximately placed in the fourth century B.C., and parts of them possibly reach back very nearly, if not quite, to the time of Gautama (Buddha) himself.

    It is known by historians that the Fo-pen-hing [legends of Buddha] was translated into Chinese from Sanskrit (the ancient language of Hinduism) as early as the eleventh year of the reign of - Wing-ping (Ming-ti) of the Hans Dynasty, i.e., 69 or 70 A.D. We may, therefore, safely suppose that the original work was in circulation in India for some time before this date.

    The paralleling similarities I have posted about Buddha and Christ previously are just scratching the surface. One incredibly undeniable similarity of the two is the account about the woman who came to Jesus asking him to bring her son back to life. Jesus then sends her out to the local neighborhood to find a house where they had not experienced any death in their family. She is asked to bring back a mustard seed from each house who had a relative die. She came back with a hand full of mustard seeds. There is an account about Buddha doing the same "exact" thing and the stories are translated into many languages almost word for word. The only difference is one account says it was Jesus and the other account says it was Buddha.

    Another is feeding multitudes with a few loves of bread. Again, the stories are identical except one says Buddha did it and another Jesus. The same goes for dividing believers and non believers up as sheep and goats and It goes on and on and on with the very same myths and identical stories about the two different mythical beings. The first myths were about Krishna and passed down a few hundred years and attributed to Buddha and then several hundred years later it is the same stories told about Jesus.

    Since you already know these stories about Jesus reading about the same identical stories of Krishna and then Buddha will blow your mind. You might now begin to see why Christian religions tell their followers not to read so called pagan theology. Just as the JW's have done to their people telling them not to listen to who they call "apostates" it is the same with Christian religions. Hinduism and Buddhism are considered pagan and evil. Once you persuade your followers not to investigate those teachings they will never know the truth about where the Christian belief got most of their stories about Jesus.

    It's a hell of a scam and it has been working for centuries. If people were to find out this information and it is commonly known within each religious faction they would loose followers by the millions. Keeping their followers in the dark is one of the main reasons religion has so many rules. Keep them ignorant to the truth and you keep them. Let the truth be known and it's all over.

    I do admonish you not to simply take my word for it. You can begin your own investigation into what I say by either going to the library or typing in Jesus, Buddha, and Krishna in a search engine on the Internet. The information is fascinating.


    I'm sorry, I do not understand what you are trying to say. What am I missing here? Could you please restate your comment. I'm not sure what you are getting at.


    That is a book that I have been meaning to read but have not as of yet. I have read some exerts from it but never the entire book. I lost interest in these things a few years back after reading many other things. Until my good buddy Alan F. conned me into getting more involved with exJW issues I completely quit reading anything with a religious nature.

    Now that this subject has peaked my interest I might pick it up and read it. Thanks for pointing it out.


    It is all starting to make sense to me now. I have always admired your insight and when you finally decide to start your own religion count me in as an alter boy. Just make sure you have a good supply of sacramental scotch.

    Take care all,


  • Doc_jedd

    WOW Dave thanks,and yes I am blown away! I feel like somebodys taken dark glasses off my eyes. I am definatly going to get some books tommorow and start my research, this is something I have suspected for quite a while but could never let myself look into it.
    Thank you very much for your time...............Jedd

  • Xander

    Doc: While you are at it, check out 'The Jesus Mysteries'. It explores the parallels between the life and ministry of the christian messiah and ancient pagan teachings.

    From the cover:

    What if . . .
    * there were absolutely no evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus?
    * for thousands of years Pagans had also followed a Son of God?
    * this Pagan savior was also born of a virgin on the twenty-fifth of December before three shepherds, turned water into wine at a wedding, died and was resurrected, and offered his body and blood as a Holy Communion?
    * these Pagan myths had been rewritten as the gospel of Jesus Christ?
    * the earliest Gnostic Christians knew that the Jesus story was a myth?
    * Christianity turned out to be a continuation of Paganism by another name?
    Xander F
    (Unseen Apostate Directorate of North America - Ohio order)

    A fanatic is one who, upon losing sight of his goals, redoubles his efforts.
    --George Santayana

  • patio34

    Hi Dave, You said

    I'm not sure your statement about all the dinosaurs is true. Some were still around when humans walked the earth. If they were not, how do you explain many of the cave paintings found in Europe? Several of them depict men throwing spears into woolly mammoths.

    To begin with here is some info i looked up for my son:

    Did people and dinosaurs live at the same time?
    No! After the dinosaurs died out, nearly 65 million years passed before people appeared on Earth. However, small mammals (including shrew-sized primates) were alive at the time of the dinosaurs. Many scientists who study dinosaurs (vertebrate paleontologists) now think that birds are direct descendants of one line of carnivorous dinosaurs, and some consider that they in fact represent modern living dinosaurs. This theory remains under discussion and shows that there is still much we don't know about dinosaurs.

    When did dinosaurs become extinct?
    Dinosaurs went extinct about 65 million years ago (at the end of the Cretaceous Period), after living on Earth for about 165 million years. If all of Earth time from the very beginning of the dinosaurs to today were compressed into 365 days (1 calendar year), the dinosaurs appeared January 1 and became extinct the third week of September. (Using this same time scale, the Earth would have formed approximately 18.5 years earlier.) By comparison, people (Homo sapiens) have been on earth only since December 31 (New Year's eve). The dinosaurs' long period of dominance certainly makes them unqualified successes in the history of life on Earth.


    Wooly mammoths weren't dinosaurs, i'll allege. They were simply many of the extinct creatures, most of which were hunted to extinction by humans. There were giant guinea-pig like creatures the size of a rhino, etc. In North America, 73% of the animal species became extinct after humans migrated here from over-hunting.

    All intelligent people are confrontational.--HBO's Winston Churchill

  • Solace

    That is very interesting.
    So many similarities.
    Could God be incarnating himself into different beings?

  • seven006


    Thanks for the info. I will now refer to woolly mammoths as harry elephants. I just don't know how to break it to the boys who run the Lebrea Tar Pits. One mans dinosaur is another mans antique I guess. I have not studied this subject enough to come off like I completely know what I am talking about so I won't add to my comment.

    Thanks for the link and for the information. Like you, I have learned a lot about certain things helping my kids school projects. I usually learn more than they do and I don't even get a damn grade for it.

    Take care.


    If you are asking my opinion I would have to say no. If there is a god I do not think he has changed into anything. The only thing that changes is mans interpretation of god and his representatives based on their particular theology. Depending on what is the popular thought of the day dictates how those of that time see things. That fact is also heavily influenced by geography. You do not read about the ancient Japanese discussing Zeus or Ra and neither do you read about the ancient Greeks and Egyptians discussing the Kami of early Shinto belief. Geography and who conquered who has an extremely large influence on what form of religion a certain country or people of a certain time period worshipped. As time goes on religious theory and myth change to fit and compromise. If there is an all powerful being that we interpret as god, I am sure he/she/ it does not change. People do the changing.

    You might want to ponder things outside of what many see as tangible existence. Why would god need to come to earth in the first place? Why would he show up as different people at different times to start different religions? Why do you need to feel that he is anything that is interpreted by religious leaders? What has religion done for mankind through out history?
    Why does your thoughts of god need to be packaged in an easy to identify box? If you feel you know god what is that feeling based on? Is it based on how you feel or what you have been told to feel? Why do you think god is part of any earthily organization and why would he need to be? Would he be any more real or unreal if he did not? Why do you feel that religion has the only acceptable interpretation of who god might be?

    I'll stop here, this gives you a little to think about.

    Take care,


  • Dawn

    These are some really good questions. I would like to try and answer them, but I'll need some time to research it. Hopefully I can find an answer for you - and for me now that I'm so intrigued!!

  • Lindon

    thats very interesting! But were they both the "Savior" for the world? I'm confused

  • Solace

    Lindon, "Im confused".

    Join the club.

    Sevens posts always make me think. I guess thats better than others thinking for you, huh?

Share this