Not everything in the Bible is true...

[CoDer]

City: I have no problem with people debating about religion.

Islam ideology is different.

[Flagg]

Sir Coder, kaw naman, Koran was written by his god Allah. Konting tolerance lang pow.

Sir Luap, pede po kausapin nyo nalang mga bankers ko? Si Mobutu N'Gabebe, deputy minister of public works, Nigeria. OK yun, magdedeposit pa sya funds into your account.

[CoDer]

Sir Coder, kaw naman, Koran was written by his god Allah. Konting tolerance lang pow.

Salamat for reminding me kapatid.

[niky]

Ay... yung manna? There have been reports of similar rains of organic substances... sometimes oily, from the sky... they're very rare, but could occur as a result of one natural disaster or another.

[city]

Ay... yung manna? There have been reports of similar rains of organic substances... sometimes oily, from the sky... they're very rare, but could occur as a result of one natural disaster or another.

hehehehe....keyword: "fossilized manna"......got ya!

[theveed]

Manna, diba yun yung Magic the Gathering hehe

[pajerokid]

The romans actually conquered a lot of barbarian tribes before christianity.

[oldblue]

The romans actually conquered a lot of barbarian tribes before christianity.

well yes, the old romans also considered the Jews as pseudo barbarians that's why a Roman legion was in place at the time of Christ.

the thing is was it just coincidental that the Romans were there when Christ appeared? what if it were another army? would they have done what the romans did or would they just brush off Christ as another false prophet and move on?

[niky]

Ah... that's a philosophical paradox that has no answer. The question is, would you be questioning the divine providence of such an occurence if the Romans hadn't had administrative power over the Jews at the time?

We would possibly be talking instead about the *** life of Aphrodite...

This is one of those paradoxes where you can only philosophically muse about the event because it actually happened.

[oldblue]

Ah... that's a philosophical paradox that has no answer. The question is, would you be questioning the divine providence of such an occurence if the Romans hadn't had administrative power over the Jews at the time?

We would possibly be talking instead about the *** life of Aphrodite...

This is one of those paradoxes where you can only philosophically muse about the event because it actually happened.

true. and I agree very much with Aphrodite concept. but I dont like to consider it a paradox. but it would be interesting to trace the roots of the Romans before the Holy Roman Empire. The ancient Romans were of Greek origin. Their culture can be characterized with greek arts, designs, language, politics, educational systems, philosophy etc .... kumbaga the Romans are what we might call refined or "mutated" Greeks. hehehe

but who were the Greeks? Ancient Greece is considered by most historians to be the foundational culture of Western Civilization -> modern Europe. They were the first migratory settlers. but from where? but just like the bible, the mahabharata of India and other ancient books, historians cant go as far din. all they have are literary works of ancient writers like Homer's Iliad and the 3 famous philosophers.

[Flagg]

The romans were just quelling a mounting revolt po. They wouldn't give a flying f**k abt Jesus nung time na yon. What did Jesus in was his claim to be the Messiah... very dangerous to the established Jewish politico-religious hierarchy.

Tingnan po natin available forces ni Jesus... 12 apostles and about 5,000 well fed listeners pre-entry to Jerusalem. By the time nag-enter sya into Jerusalem, nagkakagulo na the whole city, courtesy of some agitations by Zealots (Judas po was a Zealot and true believer that Jesus is God, he betrayed Christ in the hopes na Christ would get on with his Messiah-ness and start zapping Romans, instead of preaching peace).

Sa Romans naman: 1 Roman legion = approx 20k men. + 3 more legions over at Caesarea Philippi (3 days march). Pero nung nagpa-choose si Pilate, they only had mga 300-500 men available in-city, naghahabol yata ng mga Zealots outside Jerusalem the rest of the legion at the time. Ergo, they better remove the cause of the gulo (innocent or otherwise) before di na ma-control ng 300 men lang. Of course, the Temple priests convinced them na si Jesus yung nanggugulo.

Christianity did not become official in the Roman Empire until Constantine decided it was a very useful political and unifying tool. In hoc signo vinces (by this sign you shall conquer). Before Constantine, Christians were either streetlamps or lion food.

[niky]

:D Very interesting political perspective, and pretty much correct.

[oldblue]

:D Very interesting political perspective, and pretty much correct.

Constatine the Great may have some political agenda (like Roman empire is to Christianity, and the US empire is to democracy) but it is also interesting to know that he had a vision:

"This vision seen by Constantine was made up of two events. Firstly, while marching with his soldiers he saw the shape of an ambigram cross with the words "in this sign you will conquer" in front of the sun. After seeing that he had a dream instructing him to put a new sign (☧) as the standard. It is said that after this event Constantine was immediately converted to Christianity .......

In his later life he even turned to preaching, giving his own sermons in the palace before his court and invited crowds. His sermons preached harmony at first, but gradually turned more confrontational with the old pagan ways

[Flagg]

Constatine the Great may have some political agenda (like Roman empire is to Christianity, and the US empire is to democracy) but it is also interesting to know that he had a vision:

That's right the "in hoc signo vinces vision." Si Constantine garapal na pulitiko din yan... he forcefully baptized everyone in the Empire to be Christian, siyempre to continue his unification thing.

Why do I say garapal? He was a devoted priest of Sol Invictus up to his deathbed. Nung pamatay na sya ay dun lang sya na-baptize, you know, just in case. harharhar

Btw, the birthday of Sol Invictus is Dec. 25. Sounds familiar? ;)

[oldblue]

btw, did you know that spain was once an entire Muslim nation? they got converted to Muslims after the fall of the Roman Empire. the Arabs conquered and successfully converted the ancient Spanish people to Islam.

kinda ironic dont you thinkk? we owe our Christianity to them but little that we know that they too were converts from Islam. the same way they converted the early pre-spanish Filipinos like Rajahs, Sultans who was btw, on their way to becoming Muslims.


what happens when you cross white and arab/indian features? mestizas/mestizos

[city]

wasn't jesus really a revolt leader? they wanted the romans out of their country right?

[oldblue]

continue ka lang:

with Ancient Greeks and philosophy (Plato/Aristotle's Atlantis), the Bible and the Indian epic of Mahabharata all speaking about destruction of ancient cities. three independent civilizations but with an almost similar view of what happened in the past,
it's not difficult to see the pattern.

[Flagg]

Sir oldblue, re Aphrodite (or should I say Venus) umm... married to a lumpo named Vulcan, tapos had affairs with a bunch of other gods, wakekek that's Western culture for you.

All I know about the Greeks was that they had 2 distinct phases: they began as Myceneans (supposedly wiped out by something like the Flood) then began again as Hellenes (which they still claim to be today). The Romans adopted Hellenic culture because it was dominant at the time due to it's liberalism and goal of seeking knowledge (of course, Alexander the Gay conquered everything from Greece to a part of India, including the Levant and Egypt, except Rome cuz it was worthless). At that time, Romans were rednecks from the 7 hills and of course they'd wanna be just a little bit more cono, growing empire and all.

[niky]

At that time, Romans were rednecks from the 7 hills and of course they'd wanna be just a little bit more cono, growing empire and all.

wekekeke... I wanna be coño, too... let's get greeky!

The empirical war and the cultural war often go hand in hand, but the winners aren't always the same. The stronger empire can crush the weaker empire, but if the weaker empire has a more advanced theology/culture/civilization, this will supplant the current culture of the stronger empire.

Roman religion isn't very strong. With so many different Gods, there really was no central worship or strong theological basis for the Romans before Christianity. Tama nga si Constantine, Christianity was a good tool for a conqueror, iconic, relevant to the people, and very easy for people to pick up. The dichotomy of the personally forgiving God and the vengeful militant God meant that it was easy to use to pacify populations, and then afterwards, use them for martial purposes.

Oh, it was also a good excuse to persecute Jews... sadly. Thank God that part is behind us now.

[oldblue]

ever wondered why Rome's better half -> the whole of Italy, joined the axis powers? and Hitler never sacked the Vatican State for being anti-Nazi???