Re: Jesus = Lucifer = THE Devil
C. Marc Wagner -- Unix Systems Specialist (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 06 Aug 1996 15:29:55 -0500
> Vinodh Kumar <101352.2037@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
> >The christian bible, according to authors Leo Panakal and Vinodh
> >Kumar, is nothing less than a malignant fraud that went undetected
> >for two thousand years.
> For two thousand years, there has always been someone claiming that
> the Bible is a fraud. So if it were true, then "undetected for two
> thousand years" would certainly be false.
> >The bible comprises the self-expression of Lucifer, the fallen
> >rebel archangel and devil supreme, who affects himself in it as
> >the christian god, a conscious parody of Easwara of the Sanskrit
How in the World did this thread start in this group? No matter...
As most of us are acutely aware, most ancient Scriptures, regardless of
"religious origin" share their roots in legend (oral histories, passed
down for many generations, before they were ever written down.) We also
know that twenty people can sit in a room and whisper to each other, one
at a time, and by the time the story reaches the other side of the room,
it is vastly different than the original! Personally I am amazed that
Genesis does as good a job as it does at describing Evolution,
considering the scribes that recorded there "oral histories" knew very
lttiel aboiut the physical world around them!
To blindly compare Christianity to all of the other religions of the
World is to miss the point. If we look closely, all of the Scriptures
associated with our "belief systems" share a very anceitn yet common
It doesn't matter if you are a Christian or a Buddhist (sp?), a Jew or a
Hinduu. If you read the Scriptures in their proper context, you will
get the point, if you don't you won't. It is not always easy to
understand the context but it is essential to understanding the text.
Each and every religion has its zealots and those zealots miss the point
Any author which chooses to attack the figures found in a Scripture as
inherently evil based upon other figrues found in other Scripture are
themselves engaging in "circular argument" for no other purpose than to
"prove their own point."
Let's not waste our time labelling ancient texts as "good" or "evil" --
instead, let's explore the effects of ancient legends on ancient
populations. That's what were here for. Right?
C. MARC WAGNER -- UNIX Systems Specialist -- INDIANA UNIVERSITY