He is based off of the aryan model Zarathustra. Why do you think he's almost identical to Buddha? Everything you like about Christianity, its morality, doesn't fucking come from Jews. All ancient societies were obsessed with morality and understanding the spirit. Jews took aryan morality and attached their global domination plot to it, with usury as the designated tactic. It didn't work. They were conquered. Around the exact time they lose.. wow, what a surprise, a new religion of theirs appears, just when they desperately need a new strategy. This time they work on giving aryans their religion by making necessary temporary concessions while modelling the whole thing on aryan morality and pagan beliefs but attaching their history to it and several subtle verses that entrap you, protect the jews, rebuild zion and ensure all usury goes to them. How obvious can it get at this point?
None of you like christianity because of revelations, the end times, all of which stand in stark contrast to what aryan jesus represents, nor the OT, the conflictions and certain rules which don't quite make sense. You like Christianity because of its morality and how it works to calm your spirit and gives you guidance. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JEWS OR CHRISTIANITY. Understanding how to maintain your spiritual health in concordance with a just society predates both of them by a long way.
"All ancient societies were obsessed with morality and understanding the spirit."
That's a strange claim. Quite a few ancient societies would be regarded as immoral or unconcerned with morality particularly as it is normally understood. Etruscans, Germanic or Celtic societies, even Greek or Roman. Babylonian and so on. I think Nietzsche even pretty convincingly argued that morality is a Christian, or Jewish, innovation. Certainly sin is as Europeans came to understand it in adopting Christianity.
It's not a strange claim, it just shows how ignorant you guys are that such a simple claim is even objected to. I mean literally every ancient texts goes on about it... so to not understand this means you have 0 knowledge on the subject. Yes well done, different groups have some different standards, even within their groups, especially over such long periods of time. Cycles change from severe morality to loose morals and back again. Tell me, which moral did Jews introduce into the world? Sin is just a word. The concept already existed, the knowledge that certain behaviours or indulgences impact the spirit negatively and others calm it. You can't answer this question because there isn't a single one. Greeks and Romans did the most to end human sacrifice, not jews like the Torah you idiots worship wants to claim. Christians did the most to end animal sacrifice, but they weren't the first to try.
You argue in a very negative, insulting way. Casually calling people "idiots" as you do is not endearing. But you probably need to read Nietzsche as you probably wouldn't ask some of this if you had. And you seem to be muddling cultural norms or expectations with morals, or sin, which is intertwined with a guilt culture that in modern terms was pretty absent in much of the ancient world.
ahh yes crying about being insulted, typical tactic of the loser when they can't argue the point. waa waa. i've already read Neitsczhe. guilt culture was just transformed from external to both. obviously this did strengthen it, but internal shame is almost as strong and nigh the same concept and extremely prevalent in ancient societies.
No, you nimrod. I am of course operating with an expectation you will display the bare basics of civility. You apparently don't even intend to persuade. This is just an ego driven exercise for you as you explicitly insult your audience.
But then you don't even have the advantage of parading knowledge. As what you just said is mostly nonsense. First, if you have read Nietzsche it is not at all evident. Certainly not the Genealogy of Morals. In it he equates morality with belief in good and evil. That is to say that the ancient world's concept of good, which emphasized honor, pride, strength, etc., was in some sense inverted by exhaulting the weaker or more humble, the botched or inferior, while the ancients had no real concept of evil at all. Bad, yes, but not evil as Christians understand it. Christianity was a new religion and inevitably emphasized different values with its guilt culture of punishment for sins, especially in the afterlife, and a much greater emphasis on concepts like fairness. Guilt culture wasn't transformed at all. It supplanted a different culture altogether. Pagans were often much less concerned with divine wrath and social expectations were more functional or what best worked for the betterment of the tribe. In anthropological terms shame and guilt are not complimentary as you are characterizing them. But opposites. Or nearly so. Certainly very different.
lol. good and evil comes from Zoroastrianism. well that is where it is most prominently coded. in reality even the most primitive tribes have bad demons and benevolent spirits. the concept of your good and bad deeds being weighed in the afterlife to decide where you will go is in many prominent ancient societies. and they were certainly concerned with divine wrath, they acted like total idiots about it trying to appease the gods and curry favour.
what a total fail. it's quite obvious you just don't want to hear the truth so you're arguing no matter what. you're just plain wrong dude. everything i said in the OP is correct. you've got to learn let go and accept that.
What an obtuse response. I suspect you are deliberately mischaracterizing what I have said as I have only been speaking of some ancient societies, whereas you are responding as if I am speaking to all of them. It's an open question if you are even honest. What Christianity did was to more generalize these basic concepts though. For good and bad I might add. But the underlying argument you are making, that pagans and Christians had basically the same values, betrays the fact that you really haven't studied this is in any depth at all. You clearly have a very beginner level knowledge of comparative religion. That's all.
it's actually way longer than that, i just explained that? the same basis is there for you to use indefinitely... and most of the basis for our organization is greco-roman... why are you christians are so blind and stupid about these basic facts? and you really don't think people have already tried? here's one a 14th century philosopher came up with that the church burned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemistos_Plethon#Nomoi
new cults and supporting texts pop up all the time, but they're never backed by power. christianity was backed by jewish power and an extreme desperation.
Josephus created kikestainity because he was the prophecied jewish messiah. He came to fulfill the Abrahamic covenant and give jews dominion over the earth. He succeeded.
Buddha came later. He can't save anybody. He died and didn't come back to life. His teachings are a dead end. Liberals embrace them.
Jesus is the only one that can save you. He died and came back to life as witnessed by many. His disciples refused to deny him and received torturous deaths in return.
he came later?... lol. the link between low iq and falling for christianity is so obvious. not only do you almost never come across an intelligent christian, they're totally ignorant of the most basic facts and argue 100% like leftists.
wow you pointed out some minor differences. they are the same general character retard, that's what the word 'similar' means.
Okay, I got mixed up with his birth date. That's the only thing you can argue. Still you are too blind to see that these are big differences. You don't debate you just go to low tier name calling. With your username and the way you attack Christians, you come off as a jew. You try too hard. Try researching instead of spouting off your mental masterbation nonsense.
ahh yes the other low iq rebuttal every christian on these sites use.. when you can't form any counter argument, just call them a jew so u can dismiss it all from your fragile mind and proceed without having to consider you might be wrong and have been duped.
Okay, I got mixed up with his birth date. That's the only thing you can argue. Still you are too blind to see that these are big differences. You don't debate you just go to low tier name calling. With your username and the way you attack Christians, you come off as a jew. You try too hard. Try researching instead of spouting off your mental masterbation nonsense.
christians always use the same low iq argument.. 'without christianity, where would u get ur system of morals from.. look at what's happening to the world without it'. that was the whole fucking point of christianity destroying every other religion and monopolising the market you idiots. we can easily remake a new one ourselves.
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:52:58 ago (+1/-1)
That's a strange claim. Quite a few ancient societies would be regarded as immoral or unconcerned with morality particularly as it is normally understood. Etruscans, Germanic or Celtic societies, even Greek or Roman. Babylonian and so on. I think Nietzsche even pretty convincingly argued that morality is a Christian, or Jewish, innovation. Certainly sin is as Europeans came to understand it in adopting Christianity.
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 14:04:00 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 14:13:09 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 14:52:49 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 16:12:16 ago (+0/-0)*
But then you don't even have the advantage of parading knowledge. As what you just said is mostly nonsense. First, if you have read Nietzsche it is not at all evident. Certainly not the Genealogy of Morals. In it he equates morality with belief in good and evil. That is to say that the ancient world's concept of good, which emphasized honor, pride, strength, etc., was in some sense inverted by exhaulting the weaker or more humble, the botched or inferior, while the ancients had no real concept of evil at all. Bad, yes, but not evil as Christians understand it. Christianity was a new religion and inevitably emphasized different values with its guilt culture of punishment for sins, especially in the afterlife, and a much greater emphasis on concepts like fairness. Guilt culture wasn't transformed at all. It supplanted a different culture altogether. Pagans were often much less concerned with divine wrath and social expectations were more functional or what best worked for the betterment of the tribe. In anthropological terms shame and guilt are not complimentary as you are characterizing them. But opposites. Or nearly so. Certainly very different.
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 18:12:40 ago (+0/-0)
what a total fail. it's quite obvious you just don't want to hear the truth so you're arguing no matter what. you're just plain wrong dude. everything i said in the OP is correct. you've got to learn let go and accept that.
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 18:33:30 ago (+0/-0)*
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:44:47 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] -1 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:48:18 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:38:57 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:47:19 ago (+0/-0)
new cults and supporting texts pop up all the time, but they're never backed by power. christianity was backed by jewish power and an extreme desperation.
[ + ] Master_Foo
[ - ] Master_Foo 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 15:36:26 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:10:59 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Tsar
[ - ] Tsar 1 point 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:09:48 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:27:27 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Tsar
[ - ] Tsar 2 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:41:40 ago (+2/-0)
Buddha came later. He can't save anybody. He died and didn't come back to life. His teachings are a dead end. Liberals embrace them.
Jesus is the only one that can save you. He died and came back to life as witnessed by many. His disciples refused to deny him and received torturous deaths in return.
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 13:51:22 ago (+0/-0)
wow you pointed out some minor differences. they are the same general character retard, that's what the word 'similar' means.
[ + ] Tsar
[ - ] Tsar 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 14:03:57 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 14:05:18 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Tsar
[ - ] Tsar 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 18:30:27 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 18:34:57 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Tsar
[ - ] Tsar 0 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 19:14:07 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] lord_nougat
[ - ] lord_nougat 1 point 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 12:17:41 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod [op] 2 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 12:04:03 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 2 points 2.8 yearsJul 14, 2022 12:18:39 ago (+2/-0)