I don't know if you all have dealt with this topic before but a friend of mine actually told me Jesus christ was not born Dec 25th,
How true is that?
I don't know if you all have dealt with this topic before but a friend of mine actually told me Jesus christ was not born Dec 25th,
How true is that?
You are a genius! You solved this thread and didnt even know it.
Jesus probably did exist as an individual because there is great history behind that name in the middle east; however your (European and Arabian) ancestors did steal/transfer Egyptian divinities into Islam and Christianity.
A collection of ancient Egptian religious text commonly known as "the book of the dead" is definately where most of the quaran and the bible got there content from.
Now back on the topic of the Christ, this is the greatest known case of identity theft historians refuses to record; Horus is one of ancient Egypt's (around 1550 BCE to around 50 BCE) popular deities and his mother was known as Isis. I think you can figure where this is going,
Yes you are right, the story of Isis and Horus is (sparing insignificant detail) but a carbon copy of Jesus and Mary or Isa and Maryam.
Infact most of the "revelations" chapter in the king James version of the bible is a direct copy of the text in the "book of the dead"
@op It would be hard to prove beyond doubt that Jesus was or wasnt born on this particular date or even Horus for that matter, but given all the evidence if anyone was born on the 25th of december my money would be on Horus the son of Osiris.
what is your point? they are still worshipping the moon god slim-fit. they probably abandoned the other gods, but they still kept their old moon god very intact. which happens to be Allah till this day! did the yoruba transfer their old gods to christians deities? I don't think so. did my ancestors in egypt and northern sudan transfered their old gods to islam or christianity, i don't think so! In fact,there is evidence that mary and jesus in christiandom is actually isis and horus, however that is another issue altogether, since me and you are on the subject about islam. islam is as paganistic as christianity and hindism. as this article mentioned, muslims still practice what the pre islamic sabeans did before them, and that is a fact that you cannot deny. Allah is one of many gods that the ancient sabians believed, they just abandoned the other gods and kept that moon god alive.
What you wrote is quite funny, But if you dont understand somethings why not ask some muslim scholars and it should be clear to you instead of going through some anti islamic sites and pasting whatever you have read,
Am not Impressed, Get more findings right because we all knew moon worshipping has been in existence before islam and incase you dont read the side of the story,he destroyed all the idols saying theres only One God, I dont think theres anywhere have come across seeing a muslim bowing down for a crescent, hmmmm if they truly worshipped it i dont think they should be shy about it, Atleast we know alot of well known religion worshipping their idols with grace and without a feelings of shame,
Now a question for you,
If you claim the muslim worship the moon because you find moon in all the mosques you have seen(Mind you it isnt only the moon but along with the star as well), Does that mean that the xtian worships the cross because we can also find that in all the churches?,
Please for the sake of human reasoning please get your fact right, Nobody is worshipping the cross or the moon its just a symbol for both religion,
abuzola1:Xtrians re idolaters muslim are idolaters as well, my hausa friend.
The religion of Islam has as its focus of worship a deity by the name of "Allah." The Muslims claim that Allah in pre-Islamic times was the biblical God of the Patriarchs, prophets, and apostles. The issue is thus one of continuity. Was "Allah" the biblical God or a pagan god in Arabia during pre- Islamic times? The Muslim's claim of continuity is essential to their attempt to convert Jews and Christians for if "Allah" is part of the flow of divine revelation in Scripture, then it is the next step in biblical religion. Thus we should all become Muslims. But, on the other hand, if Allah was a pre- Islamic pagan deity, then its core claim is refuted. Religious claims often fall before the results of hard sciences such as archeology. We can endlessly speculate about the past or go and dig it up and see what the evidence reveals. This is the only way to find out the truth concerning the origins of Allah. As we shall see, the hard evidence demonstrates that the god Allah was a pagan deity. In fact, he was the Moon-god who was married to the sun goddess and the stars were his daughters.
Archaeologists have uncovered temples to the Moon-god throughout the Middle East. From the mountains of Turkey to the banks of the Nile, the most wide-spread religion of the ancient world was the worship of the Moon-god. In the first literate civilization, the Sumerians have left us thousands of clay tablets in which they described their religious beliefs. As demonstrated by Sjoberg and Hall, the ancient Sumerians worshipped a Moon-god who was called many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen and Asimbabbar. His symbol was the crescent moon. Given the amount of artifacts concerning the worship of this Moon-god, it is clear that this was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the Moon-god was the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia. The Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Akkadians took the word Suen and transformed it into the word Sin as their favorite name for the Moon-god. As Prof. Potts pointed out, "Sin is a name essentially Sumerian in origin which had been borrowed by the Semites. "
In ancient Syria and Canna, the Moon-god Sin was usually represented by the moon in its crescent phase. At times the full moon was placed inside the crescent moon to emphasize all the phases of the moon. The sun-goddess was the wife of Sin and the stars were their daughters. For example, Istar was a daughter of Sin. Sacrifices to the Moon-god are described in the Pas Shamra texts. In the Ugaritic texts, the Moon-god was sometimes called Kusuh. In Persia, as well as in Egypt, the Moon- god is depicted on wall murals and on the heads of statues. He was the Judge of men and gods. The Old Testament constantly rebuked the worship of the Moon-god (see: Deut. 4:19;17:3; II Kngs. 21:3,5; 23:5; Jer. 8:2; 19:13; Zeph. 1:5, etc.) When Israel fell into idolatry, it was usually the cult of the Moon-god. As a matter of fact, everywhere in the ancient world, the symbol of the crescent moon can be found on seal impressions, steles, pottery, amulets, clay tablets, cylinders, weights, earrings, necklaces, wall murals, etc. In Tell-el-Obeid, a copper calf was found with a crescent moon on its forehead. An idol with the body of a bull and the head of man has a crescent moon inlaid on its forehead with shells. In Ur, the Stela of Ur-Nammu has the crescent symbol placed at the top of the register of gods because the Moon-god was the head of the gods. Even bread was baked in the form of a crescent as an act of devotion to the Moon-god. The Ur of the Chaldees was so devoted to the Moon-god that it was sometimes called Nannar in tablets from that time period.
A temple of the Moon-god has been excavated in Ur by Sir Leonard Woolley. He dug up many examples of moon worship in Ur and these are displayed in the British Museum to this day. Harran was likewise noted for its devotion to the Moon-god. In the 1950's a major temple to the Moon-god was excavated at Hazer in Palestine. Two idols of the moon god were found. Each was a stature of a man sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest . The accompanying inscriptions make it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god. Several smaller statues were also found which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god. What about Arabia? As pointed out by Prof. Coon, "Muslims are notoriously loath to preserve traditions of earlier paganism and like to garble what pre-Islamic history they permit to survive in anachronistic terms."
During the nineteenth century, Amaud, Halevy and Glaser went to Southern Arabia and dug up thousands of Sabean, Minaean, and Qatabanian inscriptions which were subsequently translated. In the 1940's, the archeologists G. Caton Thompson and Carleton S. Coon made some amazing discoveries in Arabia. During the 1950's, Wendell Phillips, W.F. Albright, Richard Bower and others excavated sites at Qataban, Timna, and Marib (the ancient capital of Sheba). Thousands of inscriptions from walls and rocks in Northern Arabia have also been collected. Reliefs and votive bowls used in worship of the "daughters of Allah" have also been discovered. The three daughters, al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat are sometimes depicted together with Allah the Moon-god represented by a crescent moon above them. The archeological evidence demonstrates that the dominant religion of Arabia was the cult of the Moon-god.
In Old Testament times, Nabonidus (555-539 BC), the last king of Babylon, built Tayma, Arabia as a center of Moon-god worship. Segall stated, "South Arabia's stellar religion has always been dominated by the Moon-god in various variations." Many scholars have also noticed that the Moon-god's name "Sin" is a part of such Arabic words as "Sinai," the "wilderness of Sin," etc. When the popularity of the Moon-god waned elsewhere, the Arabs remained true to their conviction that the Moon-god was the greatest of all gods. While they worshipped 360 gods at the Kabah in Mecca, the Moon-god was the chief deity. Mecca was in fact built as a shrine for the Moon-god.
This is what made it the most sacred site of Arabian paganism. In 1944, G. Caton Thompson revealed in her book, The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha, that she had uncovered a temple of the Moon-god in southern Arabia. The symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple. An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered. This was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists.
The evidence reveals that the temple of the Moon-god was active even in the Christian era. Evidence gathered from both North and South Arabia demonstrate that Moon-god worship was clearly active even in Muhammad's day and was still the dominant cult. According to numerous inscriptions, while the name of the Moon-god was Sin, his title was al- ilah, i.e. "the deity," meaning that he was the chief or high god among the gods. As Coon pointed out, "The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God." The Moon-god was called al- ilah, i.e. the god, which was shortened to Allah in pre-Islamic times. The pagan Arabs even used Allah in the names they gave to their children. For example, both Muhammad's father and uncle had Allah as part of their names.
The fact that they were given such names by their pagan parents proves that Allah was the title for the Moon-god even in Muhammad's day. Prof. Coon goes on to say, "Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah, became Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being."
This fact answers the questions, "Why is Allah never defined in the Qur'an? Why did Muhammad assume that the pagan Arabs already knew who Allah was?" Muhammad was raised in the religion of the Moon-god Allah. But he went one step further than his fellow pagan Arabs. While they believed that Allah, i.e. the Moon-god, was the greatest of all gods and the supreme deity in a pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not only the greatest god but the only god.
In effect he said, "Look, you already believe that the Moon-god Allah is the greatest of all gods. All I want you to do is to accept that the idea that he is the only god. I am not taking away the Allah you already worship. I am only taking away his wife and his daughters and all the other gods." This is seen from the fact that the first point of the Muslim creed is not, "Allah is great" but "Allah is the greatest," i.e., he is the greatest among the gods. Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the "greatest" except in a polytheistic context? The Arabic word is used to contrast the greater from the lesser. That this is true is seen from the fact that the pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshipped. This "Allah" was the Moon-god according to the archeological evidence. Muhammad thus attempted to have it both ways. To the pagans, he said that he still believed in the Moon-god Allah. To the Jews and the Christians, he said that Allah was their God too. But both the Jews and the Christians knew better and that is why they rejected his god Allah as a false god.
Al-Kindi, one of the early Christian apologists against Islam, pointed out that Islam and its god Allah did not come from the Bible but from the paganism of the Sabeans. They did not worship the God of the Bible but the Moon-god and his daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat and Manat. Dr. Newman concludes his study of the early Christian-Muslim debates by stating, "Islam proved itself to be, a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry." Islamic scholar Caesar Farah concluded "There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslims from the Christians and Jews." The Arabs worshipped the Moon-god as a supreme deity. But this was not biblical monotheism. While the Moon-god was greater than all other gods and goddesses, this was still a polytheistic pantheon of deities. Now that we have the actual idols of the Moon-god, it is no longer possible to avoid the fact that Allah was a pagan god in pre-Islamic times. Is it any wonder then that the symbol of Islam is the crescent moon? That a crescent moon sits on top of their mosques and minarets? That a crescent moon is found on the flags of Islamic nations? That the Muslims fast during the month which begins and ends with the appearance of the crescent moon in the sky?
The pagan Arabs worshipped the Moon-god Allah by praying toward Mecca several times a day; making a pilgrimage to Mecca; running around the temple of the Moon-god called the Kabah; kissing the black stone; killing an animal in sacrifice to the Moon-god; throwing stones at the devil; fasting for the month which begins and ends with the crescent moon; giving alms to the poor, etc.
The Muslim's claim that Allah is the God of the Bible and that Islam arose from the religion of the prophets and apostles is refuted by solid, overwhelming archeological evidence. Islam is nothing more than a revival of the ancient Moon-god cult. It has taken the symbols, the rites, the ceremonies, and even the name of its god from the ancient pagan religion of the Moon-god. As such, it is sheer idolatry and must be rejected by all those who follow the Torah and Gospel. moongod.htm
Further information: thoroughly study the links in this file and also in The Cult of the Moon God The Vatican and Islam
Yeshua Communications Network.
Copyright 1997-8, All Rights Reserved.
@ abuzola u better stop been a ''satan'' ok and dont speak on what you dont even have the slightest idea of.
Jesus wasnt born on the 25th cos from proof if you study your Bible, during the birth we were told that shepards were outside with their flocks, and with thes you cant imagine how cold it will be then and besides no good sheapard will allow his flocks to go outside cos there isnt no fresh grass.
Nobody is certain about his birth, just the roman catolic inflict the 25th of december as his birth into christianity and these to me is not very right.
@wirinet: You have responded. I will not respond to what you have said because it will turn into a hot, useless argument. I do not have a habit of arguing with the truth - I simple present the evidence and let others judge.
So, everyone else, I invite you all to consider our arguments objectively and arbitrate.
The disappointment is mutual, I had always respected your deep analysis of Christianity from the theological angle. But i was disappointed that you are not different from My Olaadegun, you just type in a query into Google and then copy and past from a website without even digesting relevant issues and then incorporating your own personal opinions. You do not even bother to check to see if what you copied and pasted contradicts your arguments, as done in this case.
And your are right that is called laziness.
The Bolded part is the fallacy is the century, or is it the last 20 millennia?, How many pages of historical books has even the mention of your Jesus out side the New Testament. Any historical mention at all are referenced from the Bible or followers of Jesus and not the personality of Jesus itself.
I know wikipedia can be quite resourceful but i do not think one can base all his arguments from wikipedia arguments, because the articles are can be posted, edited and updated by anybody. So the articles most of the time reflect the personal opinions of the contributor.
Even this article you rely so much on has a Caveat, right in the middle of the page;
Now lets analyze your quote;
Please furnish us with evidence that written evidence of Jesus was available before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
Again this quote is very dishonest. The writing were dated at AD116 and was was referring to superstitions of the people and not to the fact of the story itself. If youd id not cherry pick what suit your argument you would have noticed that he called this superstition of "the Christians", Mischievous and evil.
If the alleged reference to Jesus by Flavius Josephus is not relevant, why use it in the first place to support your argument. On further reading of the complete passage, you will find out that the passage was not even referring to your Jesus of Nazareth. It was taking about another Jesus who was a brother to James and the son of Damneus. Unless you now say that Jesus alleged father is no longer Joseph. Jesus was a very common name then, so the talk of any Jesus does not imply your own Jesus.
You above quote is only stating the obvious - the fact that early Christians worshiped Jesus and not a proof of a personality called Jesus.
This also talk of Christians and not a historical Christ.
Read it properly and see if the writer was talking about your Jesus.
Sadly, most modern day Christians think that Jesus was born on December 25, a date established by Pope Clement VII (1478-1534 A.D.), a Roman Emperor. He became Pope in November of 1523-1534. With that, it became believable that Jesus was born on December 25, a winter month. But the mere fact that the shepherds were outdoors in the fields tending their flocks, which they only did in the summer months, Jesus son of Mary was in fact, based on the scriptures of Luke 2:8 born in the summer. In Jerusalem during the month of December, it is very cold, and there is no way this child could be born in the cold.
During the high point of the summer solstice between June 23 through the highest point being June 26, when the sheep would be brazing in the field, is when Jesus son of Mary was born.
Luke 2:8 “And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.”
Luke 2:12 “And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.”
Luke 2:15 “And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.”
So, this quote refers to Jesus as a babe and the Greek word being used here in the Bible is brephos for newborn or infant. So, as you just read, this proves that the baby Jesus was born during the summer, in the year 7 A.D. based on the death of Herod.
I am sorry to disappoint you. I am on my way out now, but i will respond when i get back and after reading your sources.
I have copies of translation of Flavius Josephus writings,and it had been acknowledged, even by biblical scholars that those quotes in reference to Jesus, were fraudulently inserted at a much later date. I am sure you know that, so i was surprised you still added it to support your arguments.
Anyway be back later
@wirinet: for once you disappoint me. I used to see you as someone who does accurate background research before making posts on Nairaland. The Man who is NOW called Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, came as the Son of Man, and there is evidence of his existence, even by non-Christian historians and authors. I am too lazy to type a lot right now cos I am busy but I will copy and paste from a site that summarizes my voluminous pages about the HISTORICITY of JESUS, which, fortunately is a course I took in theological school. It deals with the authenticity of Christ's existence as the Son of Man, as the Last Adam and the Second Man, in HUMAN FLESH.
And if you think the article above was biased, read from Wikipedia, the world's most comprehensive growing encyclopaedia (by common belief and acceptance)
The Wikipedia article is by far very comprehensive, but if you still want me to post from my personal notes, i will return to do that when I have some time to waste.
All these stories that Christ came is not correct. Are you aware that a personality with the name "Jesus Christ" had never existed in the history of the world?. The name Jesus Christ is just a title - a Roman title. The parents (supposing we believe the story in the Bible) could not have "Christened" him Jesus Christ at birth.
@Topic: Jesus may not have been born on December 25th. Personally, I give God thanks for the birth of Christ each and every day.
Let me give you an illustration: when we celebrate the "dead soldier" on the Armed Forces Remembrance Day a.k.a Veterans day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_Day on November 11th, and old Mrs Adamson remembers her father that died bravely defending his country during World War I, does that mean the man died on November 11th? In his family, each and every day they remember him, but ON THAT PARTICULAR DAY, the programme of events have been set aside to honour him
@wirinet: I have read a lot about Easter and Christmas practices and pagan similitudes and origins thanks to the early Roman Catholic Church, but does it nullify the fact that Christ came? I guess if I was a historian in Christ's day, I may have taken extra effort to document the exact day but since I was not; I am content with the fact that he came. The date is rather trivial, sorry.
25th of December had been celebrated for centuries before Christ in many European and eastern societies to commemorate the birth of the sun god. it was the day the sun is said to be reborn because the winter solstice is on December 24, that is when the sun stops dying (day stops getting shorter), and start its rebirth. So celebration starts on eve of 24th till the night of 25th, with wild jubilation, involving drinking, dancing and general merry making,
When Rome adopted Christianity, it incorporated most of its former rituals and celebrations into the new religion. which includes the worship and veneration of Venus and son Eros, as Infant Jesus and Mary, the adoption of patron saints from their past worship of numerous personal gods, and a host of others.
As the celebration of Christmas, spread through Norther Europe it acquired many other cultural practices, like Santa from the Nordic culture and Holly and mistletoe trees from England(not sure here). But the practice is still primary drinking, dancing and merrymaking as originally practiced by the Pagan Romans.
I DONT THINK WE HAVE TO BE MEAN ON THE POSTER. HE WAS POLITELY ASKING A QUESTION.
JESUS CHRIST DEFINATELY WAS NOT BORN ON DEC 25TH. ITS JUST A CEREMONIAL DATE FIXED BY THE ROMAN CATHOLICS. JESUS CHRIST WAS ACTUALLY BORN ON AUGUST 1ST. MANY PEOPLE WILL IMMEDIATELY DISAGREE WITH THIS BUT ITS TRUE.
IF I HAVE TO LAY DOWN THE PROVES, IT'LL TAKE ABOUT A SMALL BOOKLET. I'VE TAKEN TIME TO STUDY THE TIMELINE OF HISTORY FROM THE BIBLE OVER THE YEARS AND WE FIND INTERESTING AND PRECISE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS.