Was the cult of Great Mother exchanged with Jesus?

Perpetuated&Eternal sky matches also....Zodiac signs are part of Night Sky also.

Edited by medenaywe - 17-Dec-2013 at 08:29

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis Originally posted by Nick1986 Actually INRI is the abbreviation of Jesus of Nazareth King (Rex) of the Jews. The bible itself verifies this   Correct.   Given by the Romans not Jews... as a title of respect and or derision (depends on viewpoint and interpret) at his crucifixion...as a means of identifying what they viewed as a political criminal. This in turn based on his professions and the manipulation of his words by the Elders. Not necessarily as the council id' ...as an apostate-blasphemer etc.   The leap is to far to assume he is related as a mother cult replacement or that his mother was his superior.  For one thing he was male not female consequently an identification of him as a replacement for a maternal figure is an oxymoron at best....revisionist at worst.  As for his mother... Scripture deny's this.   She is not worshipped.. she is venerated. There is a significant difference.

Yes Mary is worshipped! Are you a Roman Catholic? I think not!

So, just how do Roman Catholics say it? I think it goes like this?
"Holy" (venerated) Mary, Mother of God...." HUH? It seems to me that she was a little more than "venerated?" How can the "Mother of God" be less than a "Goddess?" Or do you usually put women in their place?

But this idea presents a conundrum! So whom was the father and mother of Mary?   Smile!

Certainly the word "God" here meant a "god like king", from an esteemed family and nothing more.

Wake up old man! Come and enjoy the fun, again?

Regards, Ron

Edited by opuslola - 14-Dec-2013 at 21:26

?!?no answer!Just say:

VaISTiNuRi-i=Wrough iron presence&existence is corrected&accured&perfected&gotten innocent by&with&in beginning resurrection.

Wrough iron presence&existence corrects&accures beginning resurrection.It is Vai not Va!

NOTE:It sounds like propaganda slogan for SLAVERY,Ron!

http://www.eudict.com/?lang=croeng&word=okov

Edited by medenaywe - 24-Dec-2013 at 15:23

nadenaj(j=y)=Divine original&genuine,as Prometheus made us!

Edited by medenaywe - 20-Dec-2013 at 11:46

Do not forget:God&Goddess never rests with both eyes closed!

My keen is truth from words we use today!I dare to ask about it:How did our languages origin?It comes that it was one language in the beginning!More spectacular is that we still speak the same!? Same syllables,once words,build our words-languages today!(Phonetically speaking of course!)But

Moving the centuries around? Could not "paganism" really mean "Arianism?" That could even answer all of the other problems!

Originally posted by Sidney There is the occasional mention of 'pagan' that make you wonder whether the actual religion was 'heresy' - ie a Christian belief the established Church did not condone. Arianism would fit. But this occurs in later retellings of the history - there is no evidence that I've read from contemporary sources that 'pagan' meant a form of Christianty. For early Christian writers there were four religious stances - pagan/idol worship, Jewish, Christian and heretic. Everyone fitted into one of those groups. (When Islam arose, Christian commentators were divided as to where to place it - some called it pagan, others viewed it as a form of heretical Christianity.)

Sidney, actually you may well be looking at the problem incorrectly?

You wrote above; "For early Christian writers there were four religious stances - pagan/idol worship, Jewish, Christian and heretic."

Thus the 1st religious stance was; "pagan/idol worship."
It seems to me somewhat difficult to accept this notion when "idol" worship, which can include "Icon" worship still exists within Christianity today, thus the Western Catholics venerate human representations of saints, etc., as well as Holy Relics, clothes, bones, rings, etc.. Eastern Catholics abhor human idols, but love their precious "Icons!"

The 2nd religious stance was; "Jewish". But the so called Old Testament clearly mentions dozens of Kings, and religious figures fighting with each other over Idol worship, even from the days of Moses and the "Golden calf!" "High places" and "groves" were also alternatively reviled or praised. Religious objects were certainly venerated, statues were probably worshiped, and the great object of the early Jewish society was the veneration of or the fear of the "the Ark of the Covenant" and especially the Holy stone tablets, carried within it!!

The 3rd religious stance was then, the Christians consideration of themselves. Just which early Christian stance is to be considered? We have already seen that the two largest or most successful sects, were the Western and Eastern divisions. Arianism must also be considered, as should various other representations of Christianity such as the Ana-Baptists, etc., most all of which were also considered as Heretical.
Which is, of course, also considered the 4th religious stance. There also probably existed Bacchanalian Christian sects. especially in the West.

Of course no one can mention Islam as existing during this "early Christian" four part division, since this sect seems to have developed centuries afterward. But one thing can be said about Islam, it seems to have almost always(?) been anti to any representations of Allah/God and his followers.

Indeed these followers led by Muhammad PBUH, seem to have spent centuries destroying any and all statues, carvings, paintings, icons, etc. that they could find. These actions would be common in Western Europe during the times of Martin Luther, and later Napoleon, and even later during the French Revolution!

Interestingly the followers of Allah, did venerate a few things. These are eerily seen as "pieces of stone", and are revealed only once a year. You do remember that Moses reportedly broke into pieces the "Original Tablets of the Law of God", and had to go back and get a duplicate!! Smile So, what became of the original shards/sherds? And, in the same vein, it appears those "stones" supposedly residing in the "Ark" were reportedly captured by their enemies and kept by them until they returned them, whereby mention of them seems to have disappeared. So, just what happened to both sets of "stones?"

Just a few things for one to consider. Ron   



Edited by opuslola - 01-Mar-2014 at 11:58

Nice response Sidney, but it seems you ignored a lot of my rather long post. Is there a reason why you did so?

Regards as always, Ron

Iconoclasm - the destruction of Christian icons and statues in certain Christian countries/denominations due to a review of those images as being idols, is a reoccuring event. 8th Century Constantinople was a notable period, as was Reformation Europe, and the English Civil War. Many Protestant based religions consider Catholicism as idolatry due to the veneration of the saints and relics of saints. Other Christian religions even reject the image of the cross or fish as a form of idolatry. I guess this boils down to perspective - my enemy worships idols; my ally venerates icons.

I think it is important to note that having a holy object is not the same as worshipping that object. The Bible is holy, but the book itself as a physical object is not worshipped. It might be respected and given special care (as the Torah is in the synagogue) but that is not worship.

As to idol worship in the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel. Idol worship was condemned in Mosaic law, and the kings who adopted it were continually encouraged to abjure and desist. Kings who came to the throne and threw down the idols were highly praised. Idol worship in Israel was blamed on Canaanite infiltration, due to political marriages or the influence of moral weakness.

As to the tablets of of the law - only the unbroken set are recorded as being in the Ark at the time of King Solomon:
I Kings 8:9 - There was nothing in the ark except the two stone tablets that Moses had placed in it at Horeb, where the Lord made a covenant with the Israelites after they came out of Egypt.

Are you suggesting that the Black Stone at Kaaba is made up of the fragments from the original stone tablets? I think if that were so it would be an important part of Islamic tradition. Is there such a link made within Muslim belief? The Qu'ran itself is silent about the original tablets being broken, and implies that Moses only put them down when he reprimanded Aaron for the Golden Calf, and then picked them up again:
Sura 7:150-154 - When Moses returned to his people, angry and disappointed, he said, "What a terrible thing you have done in my absence! Could you not wait for the commandments of your Lord?" He threw down the tablets, and took hold of his brother's head, pulling him towards himself. Aaron said, "Son of my mother, the people took advantage of my weakness, and almost killed me. Let not my enemies rejoice, and do not count me with the transgressing people." Moses said, "My Lord, forgive me and my brother, and admit us into Your mercy. Of all the merciful ones, You are the Most Merciful. Surely, those who idolized the calf have incurred wrath from their Lord, and humiliation in this life. We thus requite the innovators. As for those who committed sins, then repented thereafter and believed, your Lord is Forgiver, Most Merciful." When Moses' anger subsided, he picked up the tablets, containing guidance and mercy for those who reverence their Lord.