Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 That means, if the name for the day of the week for Sunday has been changed at this time, then it was possible to change it to a Christian name, as before everything official was pagan. but he made the sabbath day for christians on sunday..it was on saturday..read the early histories..they tried to differentiate from the judiac tradition... there were some x-tians who started worshippin on sunday in around 135 Ce..but this again was due to the persecution of the jews goin on at the time..they wanted to seperate themselves from their jewish antecedents... constatine later decreed "On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed." it was day of the sun..not day of the lord..... christians later amended it to domino, not solis..but remember, the catholic church took over many aspects of the roman empire, and felt they were perpetuating rome...why else was the mass and everything in latin ferever? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 - Peter Monday, April 12, 2004 10:54 PM Re: Re: Life After Death Hi Simon et al > The Vatican can't tell the worlds churches the real reason for the change...as the day would have to be put back to saturday. Y'know, maybe it's just that I'm not Christian, but I can't quite understand what difference it makes which day. I understand that Christians and Jews (and Muslims?) have a "day of rest" in honour of their belief that God rested on the 7th day... but who's to say that God started work on a Monday. As far as I remember, the bible just says days one to seven. Surely it doesn't make any difference *which* day you count as the seventh one? I agree it shouldn't make a different. But lets say you started an organisation and you wanted the meetings to be held on so and so day, and you said 'keep this day in one of your 10 guide lines'. then many years after you were gone someone from another organisation realised your oganisation was going to be more popular than theirs. If they wanted to steer people away from your organisation they might change your meeting day to theirs... subtly implement their teaching in with yours thus distorting your original aims. Simon To send an email to - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 - EBbrewpunx Monday, April 12, 2004 11:31 PM Re: Re: Life After Death In a message dated 4/12/04 2:23:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, simonpjones writes: well..sortaConstatine was into politcal expediency...he found that leadin an empire of radically different sects, cults, religions was burdensome...it would be easier if there was a movement toward a national religion..with him at the head..he was already a godhead, he was sol invictus on earth, in the invincible sun...christianity already had a, how do i put this, a leaning toward leadership worshipthats not exactly right...but..christianity pushed you toward obeying others(worship no god but me, obey thy father, etc and so forth)..and it had lots in common with his own mithraism...so it was easy for him to go "ok, this is wot we are going to do, we are going to consolidate this christianity thing, lets make certain *rules*"...constantine wasn't even baptized until he was on his deathbed.....> I'm sure he knew Christianity was going to topple his leadership...like it topples any way of life that doesn't have 'love' at it's core.he basically turned Christianity on it's head and turned it into a dictatorship religion. Baptizism by choice must be better than a forced Baptizism. Simon To send an email to - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 Just what I have written. Everyone who thinks, (s)he can thinks having something to write, but without prejudice. YannisHeartwork <Heartwork wrote: Can you explain what you mean in the following:- Every one who can say something correct is welcome.To send an email to - Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 Yes, but I didn't write here about English, Dutch and German. In all the languages I mentioned myself (Greek, Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, the word for Sunday means: Day of the Lord, not day of the sun, that is pagan: Greek: KYPIAKH (spoken: kiriaki (i=spoken as in bit) Italian: Domenica etc. So how can someone connect the change from Sabbath to Sunday as the weekly holiday with the pagans????????????????EBbrewpunx wrote: >In other languages we don't use pagan names for the days of the week. In Greek, Italian, French, Spanish, Portugese and more languages we use words meaning:> the day of the Lord (Jesus Christ).????i may be wrong..butmonday...moonday...montag...wednesday..wodensday...friday...freyaday...freitagseems pretty pagan in origin to me...the original anglo-saxons who invaded england were "pagans" To send an email to - Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 If you think it the name of the day of the week for Sunday was changed to "day of the sun" or something else pagan, why don't you tell us when it has been changed back to the "day of the Lord" again? Here I can tell you something better: Before Emperor Constantine in the 4th century the Roman state had a criminal intolerant policy against Christians, this is well know, isn't it? That means, if the name for the day of the week for Sunday has been changed at this time, then it was possible to change it to a Christian name, as before everything official was pagan. Just in Britain and in the germanic areas, i.e. not the most important areas of the Roman empire, people have kept using pagan names for the days of the week until today. In the most important areas of the Roman empire the names for the days of the week had been changed to Christian names at this time, not the opposite.EBbrewpunx wrote: In a message dated 4/12/04 12:08:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, metalscarab writes: Actually, it was changed by the Emperor Constantine in the early 5th century -4th century actually..he died in 337 CE..but..close enough:) To send an email to - Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 In a message dated 4/13/04 3:14:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time, metalscarab writes: The good ole English phrase "putting the cart before the horses" would seem to apply here. GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!! hahahahahahah Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 Hi Fraggle > i'm sure wars have started over less.... I'm sorry... but I think the colour of the hats is *very* important :-) BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 Hi Catherine > i read somewhere that the christians were still part of the jewish tradition until about 89AD I don't think anyone quite knows the early development of Christianity. Certainly the earliest known followers of Jesus, now referred to as the Jerusalem Church, were a Jewish sect - they were headed by Simon (?) who was killed when he was thrown from the walls of the Temple in 60 something CE if I remember rightly. BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 Hi Brii > i'd watch out for the reptilian gestapo from middle earth!!!! (this is not my invention; i READ it!)~brii I suspect you might be referring to the Annunaki :-) BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 Hi Yannis > In all the languages I mentioned myself (Greek, Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, the word for Sunday means: Day of the Lord, not day of the sun, that is > pagan: The important question when considering etymology is whether the name of the day is derived from the fact it is the Christian Sabbath, or whether the fact it is the Sabbath is derived from the name of the day. I suspect it was the former rather than the latter. To suggest that the Sabbath is celebrated on that day because of the name of the day, is a bit like saying your parents were given the names they have because you like those names! The good ole English phrase "putting the cart before the horses" would seem to apply here. BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 Hi Yannis > Just in Britain and in the germanic areas, i.e. not the most important areas of the Roman empire, people have kept using pagan names for the days of the week > until today. In the most important areas of the Roman empire the names for the days of the week had been changed to Christian names at this time, not the > opposite. Now we're getting somewhere... the Romans decided to move the Sabbath to what at the time was referred to as "day of the Sun" (pagan god), and then, later, decided to re-name it after the fact that they now celebrated the Christian Sabbath on that day. Unfortunately you're using circular logic. BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 13, 2004 > In all the languages I mentioned myself (Greek, Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, the word for Sunday means: Day of the Lord, not day of the sun, that is > pagan: The day that is called Sunday...was called that before Christianity existed. Sun-day... The day of the Sun'. Some Christians might want to call it 'Day of the Lord'. Like some Non-Christians might like to call it ' Day of the Sun'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 empires tend to topple...religion i think has very little to do with it.. all empires grind themselves into the dust eventually... Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. The British Empire toppled.. professing a false Christianity.Until people learn, love, compassion etc...all the little power houses in the world will topple. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 - fartybriivismeisteranushead ta-da! Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:50 AM Re: Re: Life After Death faith is not a science. it's speculative and subjective; felt but not proven. if anything is not logical, it's religion> Is science a faith. it seems so sometimes when theories that are treated as fact> .. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 - EBbrewpunx Tuesday, April 13, 2004 3:54 PM Re: Re: Life After Death That means, if the name for the day of the week for Sunday has been changed at this time, then it was possible to change it to a Christian name, as before everything official was pagan. but he made the sabbath day for christians on sunday..it was on saturday..read the early histories..they tried to differentiate from the judiac tradition...> Who are you talking about? who made the Sabbath day for Christians?....Jesus is quoted as saying "The Sabbath was made for us, not us for the Sabbath". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 - EBbrewpunx Tuesday, April 13, 2004 3:44 PM Re: Re: Life After Death In a message dated 4/13/04 7:12:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time, itsoucas writes: If you think it the name of the day of the week for Sunday was changed to "day of the sun" or something else pagan, why don't you tell us when it has been changed back to the "day of the Lord" again? i did in the orginal latin, it was SOLIS DIES...french, spanish et al sprung up as later languages...you know, romance languages, after the boot of christianity intolerence (sorry simon)had been laying on the area for years...> Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. The British Empire toppled.. professing a false Christianity.Until people learn, love, compassion etc...all the little power houses in the world will topple. To send an email to - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 well no offense but i think ya can learn to accept love, compassion, etc without embracing christianity... and i think the argument that "they failed because they weren't truly christian" is sorta..well..spurious... i can say the mayan empire failed because they didn't have ice cream....go ahead..disprove it.... or, the polish empire failed because they never landed anyone on one of jupiter's moons.... Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. The British Empire toppled.. professing a false Christianity.Until people learn, love, compassion etc...all the little power houses in the world will topple. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 - EBbrewpunx Tuesday, April 13, 2004 2:27 PM Re: Re: Life After Death In a message dated 4/13/04 1:58:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time, cait2 writes: hi alli read somewhere that the christians were still part of the jewish tradition until about 89AD more er less trueand even longer in some cases...it wasn't until the mass uprisings of 115 and 132 CE that caused most of the early x-tians to flee judea..this seperation from their Judiac homeland caused a break to appear, and allowed new ideas and beliefs to creep in.....> That's part of the whole problem...there should never have been a split...if the Jewish leaders and such had embraced Jesus..the world wouldn't be in such a mess as it is today. Even if they couldn't accept him as a leader...they could of at least accepted him as a wiser person than anyone else at that time. If he said he was of God that was that was because .... it looks like, he didn't see himself as a God unto him self like the religious leaders of that day and the similiar ones that reigh theses days...but as a humble servant of humanity to help us find peace with ourselves and with the world around us...and that we are not gods unto ourselves but that there is a greater force in nature, of nature, behind nature, that loves all. All credit to the man for trying! whether he was a deluded genius or the nearest guide we have to knowing the force that drove this existence into being. Who really knows?. Even if the writers of the Gospels used Jesus as a fictitious character to get their teaching across..what Moral minds they had?...there intentions had to be Good, almost like telling a child a made up story with a great moral to it...It seems the greatest morals we have in written literature. Ps Jesus is quoted as repecting Ancient Prophets before him. False prophets a no no. Simon Simon To send an email to - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 - EBbrewpunx Wednesday, April 14, 2004 2:49 PM Re: Re: Life After Death I think the only empires that will stand are the ones that advocate and practices sound moral teachings. Teachings that people want to embrace. The US tried to build an empire..even building the than tallest building in the world..calling it ..the empire state building. Without the practice of sound teaching it is toppling.> empires tend to topple...religion i think has very little to do with it..all empires grind themselves into the dust eventually... Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. The British Empire toppled.. professing a false Christianity.Until people learn, love, compassion etc...all the little power houses in the world will topple. To send an email to - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 Hi Simon > I know Christianity wasn't wide spread. But Christianity has to start with Jesus Christ much like Marxism had to start with Karl Marx, soism had to start with so and so > etc. OK, possibly quibbling over semantics here, but "Christianity" in the sense of the religion followed by the first followers of Jesus was a Jewish sect, and couldn't be considered Christian in any modern sense of the word. BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 Hi Fraggle > GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!!> hahahahahahah Sorry 'bout that.... I promise you, I don't go in for mind reading very often... just once in a while :-) BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 Hi Simon > Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire > tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. The British Empire toppled.. professing a false Christianity.Until people learn, love, compassion etc...all the > little power houses in the world will topple. I hope you're right, 'cos right now the false Christianity in the US seems to be supporting Bush's power rather than diminishing it :-( BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 Hi Simon (Apologies for doing 2 answers to the same post... second thought just struck me) > Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire > tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. It's an interesting question as to whether the Roman Empire ever actually did topple... someone, and I foget who right now, wrote a very interesting book how the Roman Empire simply transformed itself into the Catholic Church, and continued to run the world. Very interesting comparisons drawn between the political / legal / ethical make up of the later Roman Empire and the Early Catholic Church! BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 14, 2004 Hi Simon > That's part of the whole problem...there should never have been a split...if the Jewish leaders and such had embraced Jesus..the world wouldn't be in such a mess as it > is today. Even if they couldn't accept him as a leader...they could of at least accepted him as a wiser person than anyone else at that time. I don't think there's many people who would deny that the teachings attributed to Jesus are generally "good". I think the problem has been created by the doctrine put in place around that. BB Peter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
