AUTENTIČNOST vs DOGMA, (islam, Hriščanstvo, Judaizam itd.)

[Idemedosumom]

Više mi se sviđa medin stav o životu/vjeri/religiji

[Bloo]

Ali, kontrargument će biti da nema meni tu šta da se sviđa...neke stvari su takve kakve jesu.

Nije sve fun and games, odmah se oplače.

[Irsar]

Ljudi olako zaboravljaju da vjera nije tu da učini ovaj svijet ugodnim i veselim;

Ali nije tu ni da bi otežala svaki aspekt života:

"...Allah vam želi lahkoću, a ne želi vam teškoću..." 2:185

Kao što to nisam ni rekao.

Ali ako ljudi misle da mogu biti dobri vjernici i da istovremeno ne budu iskušavani, onda su u velikoj zabludi. Ako nam je Muhammed a.s. najbolji primjer kako treba ići kroz život, kao što bi valjda trebao biti, onda se treba pripremiti i za razna iskušenja. Zapravo, mogli bismo reći da vjera u biti olakšava, jer predstavlja duhovnu hranu koja je čovjeku svakako potrebna; no ne radi se o materijalnim blagostanjima i olakšanjima, primjer Muhammedov a.s. to zorno pokazuje. Dodatni efekat vjere bi trebao biti da u čovjeku stvori dozu... distanciranosti od Dunjaluka i da ga bolje pripremi za Ahiret; zar ljudi misle da će moći u Džennet ući bez obzira na stanje svog uma i odnos prema Dunjaluku? Bilo kako bilo, kao što vidiš, ne kontriram ti niti tvrdim da je vjera "teška", ali se treba razumjeti šta to sve znači, a ne znači da vjera treba donijeti materijalno bogatstvo i napredak, što mnogi danas liberalni "Muslimani" priželjkuju, pa usljed toga se krenu povoditi za Zapadom i njegovim uspjesima na materijalnom polju.

Kao primjer te zavisti i žudnje za imitacijom nevjernika je upravo i ova tema, kao i sve koje pozivaju na "reformu" Islama pri čemu pod tom "reformom" misle isto što i uništenje Islama.

[arzuhal]

Više mi se sviđa medin stav o životu/vjeri/religiji

[HardcoreMX]

Više mi se sviđa medin stav o životu/vjeri/religiji

To je To....

[Dogmano]

Lijepa narav je džennet, a ružna narav je džehennem...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZGghmwUcbQ

[Diwan]

Kralj



Thanks for listening )))

Dodatak na video

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/0 ... ar-claims/

Gospels don't say Jesus was crucified, scholar claims


There have been plenty of attacks on Christianity over the years, but few claims have been more surprising than one advanced by an obscure Swedish scholar this spring.

The Gospels do not say Jesus was crucified, Gunnar Samuelsson says.

In fact, he argues, in the original Greek, the ancient texts reveal only that Jesus carried "some kind of torture or execution device" to a hill where "he was suspended" and died, says Samuelsson, who is an evangelical pastor as well as a New Testament scholar.


"When we say crucifixion, we think about Mel Gibson's 'Passion.' We think about a church, nails, the crown of thorns," he says, referring to Gibson's 2004 film, "The Passion of the Christ."

"We are loaded with pictures of this well-defined punishment called crucifixion - and that is the problem," he says.

Samuelsson bases his claim on studying 900 years' worth of ancient texts in the original languages - Hebrew, Latin and Greek, which is the language of the New Testament.

He spent three years reading for 12 hours a day, he says, and he noticed that the critical word normally translated as "crucify" doesn't necessarily mean that.

"He was handed over to be 'stauroun,'" Samuelsson says of Jesus, lapsing into Biblical Greek to make his point.

At the time the apostles Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were writing their Gospels, that word simply meant "suspended," the theologian argues.

"This word is used in a much wider sense than 'crucifixion,'" he says. "It refers to hanging, to suspending vines in a vineyard," or to any type of suspension.

"He was required to carry his 'stauros' to Calvary, and they 'stauroun' him. That is all. He carried some kind of torture or execution device to Calvary and he was suspended and he died," Samuelsson says.

Not everyone is convinced by his research. Garry Wills, the author of "What Jesus Meant," "What Paul Meant," and "What the Gospels Meant," dismisses it as "silliness."

"The verb is stauresthai from stauros, cross," Wills said.

Samuelsson wants to be very clear about what he is saying and what he is not saying.

Most importantly, he says, he is not claiming Jesus was not crucified - only that the Gospels do not say he was.

"I am a pastor, a conservative evangelical pastor, a Christian," he is at pains to point out. "I do believe that Jesus died the way we thought he died. He died on the cross."

But, he insists, it is tradition that tells Christians that, not the first four books of the New Testament.

"I tried to read the text as it is, to read the word of God as it stands in our texts," he says - what he calls "reading on the lines, not reading between the lines."

Samuelsson says he didn't set out to undermine one of the most basic tenets of Christianity.

He was working on a dissertation at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden when he noticed a problem with a major book about the history of crucifixion before Jesus.

What was normally thought to be the first description of a crucifixion - by the ancient Greek historian Herodotus - wasn't a crucifixion at all, but the suspension of a corpse, Samuelsson found by reading the original Greek.

The next example in the book about crucifixion wasn't a crucifixion either, but the impaling of a hand.

Samuelsson's doctoral advisor thought his student might be on to something.

"He recommended I scan all the texts, from Homer up to the first century - 900 years of crucifixion texts," Samuelsson recalled, calling it "a huge amount of work."

But, he says, "I love ancient texts. They just consume me." So he started reading.

He found very little evidence of crucifixion as a method of execution, though he did find corpses being suspended, people being hanged from trees, and more gruesome methods of execution such as impaling people by the belly or rectum.

The same Greek word was used to refer to all the different practices, he found.

That's what led him to doubt that the Gospels specify that Jesus was crucified.

At the time they were written, "there is no word in Greek, Latin, Aramaic or Hebrew that means crucifixion in the sense that we think of it," he says.

It's only after the death of Jesus - and because of the death of Jesus - that the Greek word "stauroun" comes specifically to mean executing a person on the cross, he argues.

He admits, of course, that the most likely reason early Christians though Jesus was crucified is that, in fact, he was.

But he says his research still has significant implications for historians, linguists and the Christian faithful.

For starters, "if my observations are correct, every book on the history of Jesus will need to be rewritten," as will the standard dictionaries of Biblical Greek, he says.

More profoundly, his research "ought to make Christians a bit more humble," he says.

"We fight against each other," he reflects, but "the theological stances that keep churches apart are founded on things that we find between the lines.

"We have put a lot of things in the Bible that weren't there in the beginning that keep us apart. We need to get down on our knees as Christians together and read the Bible."

See also this article were it is explained that all the lexicons are in error, and we really don't know what a "stauros" (the word translated as "cross") was, or what "stauroun" (the verb translated as "crucify") really meant.


http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blog ... about.html

Last Friday Gunnar Samuelsson successfylly defended his thesis "Crucifixion in Antiquity: An Inquiry into the Background of the New Testament Terminology of Crucifixion" at Gothenburg University (supervisor Samuel Byrskog).

The external examiner Erkki Koskenniemi Professor of Åbo University, Finland, was drastic in his opening when he said that "if Gunnar Samuelsson is right, then all lexica will need revision on this point." "Koskenniemi also pointed out that "if Gunnar Samuelsson is wrong, he will from this moment be known as the Gunnar Samuelsson who wrote about the cross."

Abstract

This study investigates the philological aspects of how ancient Greek, Latin and Hebrew/Aramaic texts, including the New Testament, depict the practice of punishment by crucifixion. A survey of the ancient text material shows that there has been a too narrow view of the “crucifixion” terminology. The various terms are not simply used in the sense of “crucify” and “cross,” if by “crucifixion” one means the punishment that Jesus was subjected to according to the main Christian traditions. The terminology is used much more diversely. Almost none of it can be elucidated beyond verbs referring vaguely to some form(s) of suspension, and nouns referring to tools used in such suspension. As a result, most of the crucifixion accounts that scholars cite in the ancient literature have to be rejected, leaving only a few. The New Testament is not spared from this terminological ambiguity. The accounts of the death of Jesus are strikingly sparse. Their chief contribution is usage of the unclear terminology in question. Over-interpretation, and probably even pure imagination, have afflicted nearly every wordbook and dictionary that deals with the terms related to crucifixion as well as scholarly depictions of what happened on Calvary. The immense knowledge of the punishment of crucifixion in general, and the execution of Jesus in particular, cannot be supported by the studied texts.

Order the monograph from the department by sending an e-mail to: gunnar[dot]samuelsson[at]telia[dot]com

"Crucifixion in Antiquity: An Inquiry into the Background of the New Testament Terminology of Crucifixion"
ISSN: 1102-9773
ISBN: 978-91-88348-35-7

Update: Below I will cite the concluding chapter seven, "Answers to the basic questions of the investigation." I will cite the six questions and some significant parts of the answers (but not all - buy the book!):

1) "First, what is the ancient - pre-Christian - terminology of crucifixion? The answer is that there was no such terminology. There was only a terminology of suspension - a group of words and idioms that were used more or less interchangeably when referring to various forms of suspension ... The problem is that no specific terminology is linked to this particular form of execution - before the execution of Jesus.

When it comes to the individual terms, some conclusions can be drawn. A σταυρός is a pole in the broadest sense. It is not the equivalent of a 'cross' (†). In some cases, it is a kind of suspension device, used for the suspension of corpses, torture or in a few cases executionary suspensions. Very little or nothing is said about what it was made of or how it looked."

...

And so it goes on with (ἀνα)σταυροῦν and ἀνασκολοπίζειν, crux and patibulum. For example, Samuelsson says "crux is more firmly connected with the suspension of humans than σταυρός." "The ecclesiastically pregnant term crucifigiere did not evolve until the final years before the Common Era, and its usage is hard to define beyond denoting 'to attach in some way to a crux."

Then comes Hebrew/Aramaic terminology.

...

2) "Second, what can be said about the punishment that the term describes? The punishment consists in fact of punishments. There is a large group of terms and idioms which refer to varous acts of suspension, and this is almost all that can be said about 'the punishment' - it comprises various acts of suspension. ... What happened to Jesus on Calvary might then be only a momentary expression of local caprice. Previous and subsequent executions might have been completely different. What has become the solid image in the centre of the Christian faith might be just a freak of fate, not an expression of a well-defined and long-used execution form."

3) "Third, how do the New Testament authors depict the death of Jesus on the philological level? The New Testament authors are strikingly silent about the punishment Jesus had to suffer on Calvary ..."

4) "Fourth, how is the punishment of crucifixion defined by previous scholars?"

5) "Fifth, how do the insights from the present stud of the ancient texts cohere with the contributions of the major lexica and dictionaries? The outcome of the comparative study is that they are incoherent. At the heart of the discrepancy is the usage of the labels 'cross' and 'crucifixion' in the lexica and dictionaries. The label 'cross' is commonly applied to many more texts which contain σταυρός than those which - with at least a decent amount of certainty - can be determined to contain a reference to the punishment tool used in crucifixion in a traditional sense. In the same way, the label 'crucifixion' is applied to a large number of texts where the only qualifier is the occurence of, e.g., (ἀνα)σταυροῦν and ἀνασκολοπίζειν. In short, a lot of texts are identified as references to 'crucifixion' on the basis of a simple conjecture."

6) "Sixth, how has the punishment of crucifixion been depicted, and how should it be depicted in the light of the present investigation?"

Ako koga zanima cijela knjiga

Crucifixion in Antiquity: An Inquiry into the Background of the New Testament Terminology of Crucifixion pdf

http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/books/crux002.pdf

[Gojeni H]

Zivimo u eri hibridizacije vjera, a sve u cilju nastavka uzdizanja covjeka na nivo bozanstva.
Sumanuta potraga za srecom, barem na danasnji nacin, je relativno novi fenomen ... broj knjiga o "samopomoci" je diskutabilno indikacija pokusaja da nadomjesti prazninu koju je izazvalo "ubijanje Boga" u 19. vijeku, te potpuni poraz krscanstva.

Vjere nema bez prakse. "Razmisljanje" i "vjerovanje" je krscanstvo neminovno odvelo u deonizam i panteizam, koji su dovoljno impotentni da na kraju odvedu u nevjeru.

Kao sto smo mogli vidjeti, izbjegavanje namaza, posta, cinjenja dobrih djela i ostalih rituala dubokog odredjenja i vjere su nuzno, na primjeru nekoliko forumskih likova odveli u panteizam a onda kasnije i u nevjeru.

[dadinjo33]

Ahahahaha, cuj "ritual dubokog odredjenja".

[JVC]

Rimljani su obicno koristili jedan od cetiri oblika kaznjavanja tj. cetiri oblika u razapinjanju.

I – Crux Simplex
T – Crux Commissa
+ – Crux Immissa
X – Crux Decussata

Opsada na koju je Isus i upozorio svoje ucenike, a zapisana od ljudi koji nisu bili krscani:

“(The Jews caught outside the walls of Jerusalem) were first whipped, and then tormented with all sorts of tortures, before they died, and were then crucified before the wall of the city … the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest” (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 5.11.1).

“I see before me crosses not all alike, but differently made by different peoples: some hang a man head downwards, some force a stick upwards through his groin, some stretch out his arms on a forked gibbet” (Seneca the Younger, “To Marcia on Consolation”, in Moral Essays, 6.20).

Koga interesuje moze i ovdje naci vise informacija

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4782-crucifixion

[Bloo]

Rimljani su obicno koristili jedan od cetiri oblika kaznjavanja tj. cetiri oblika u razapinjanju.

I – Crux Simplex
T – Crux Commissa
+ – Crux Immissa
X – Crux Decussata


http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4782-crucifixion

Jewish bondage porn!
*Klik*

[JVC]

Jewish bondage porn!
*Klik*

Ovaj put te ne kontam

[Bloo]

Jewish bondage porn!
*Klik*

Ovaj put te ne kontam

Los pokusaj loseg humora

[JVC]

Jewish bondage porn!
*Klik*

Ovaj put te ne kontam

Los pokusaj loseg humora

Nesto na ovaj fazon

[Bloo]

Baldrick humor vise

[Gojeni H]

^Ovo gore je primjer relativizma i smatranja da nema nikakve fiksiranosti u istini, već da je "istina" nešto promjenjivo, "fluidno" i privremeno. Što je samo drugi način da se kaže kako istine niti nema, ništa se ne može znati, ništa nije komunikabilno kroz vrijeme i prostor, već prostor i vrijeme su jedino što i formira istinu kao takvu.

Postoji definitivna poplava knjizevnih djela koja se u knjizarama nalaze pod "samopomoc" sekciji (self-help, eng.), te dokumentarnih filmova koji obecavaju vrlim gledaocima da su otkrili tajnu ljudske srece.

Ovaj fenomen treba adekvatno istraziti, ali forum ne daje dovoljno prostora za takav poduhvat.
Ukratko:

1. Ucenje crkve koje u 17. vijeku pada u zamku takmicenja sa naukom u pokusaju objasnjavanja svijeta. Islam ce u ovu zamku djelimicno upasti kasnije.
2. 19. vijek, krscanstvo je dozivjelo klinicku smrt. Islam je u skoro potpunoj konfuziji izazvanoj padom skoro svih muslimanskih zemalja pod kolonijalnu cizmu. U ovom vijeku, neki tvrde da je "Bog mrtav".
3. 21. vijek, iako zivi u prosjeku duze nego ikada, iako su mu vece sanse da umre od pretilosti nego od gladi, iako ratuje mnog manje od svojih predaka kojima je mir bio pauza izmedju ratova, covjek je nezadovoljan. Nista nije uspjelo popuniti prazninu izazvanu "smrcu Boga".

"Sukob" religije i nauke desava se samo u monoteistickim religijama, vise u krscanstvu, nesto manje u judaizmu i islamu.
Ovaj fenomen nije tako prisutan u hinduizmu i shintoizmu npr. Japanci i dalje razvijaju robotiku, ne pitajuci se ni jednog trenutka da li treba dokazivati postojanje Amaterasu, boginje Sunca.

Vezujuci se za tvoj komentar, slazem se - istina je uvijek istina, a laz je - laz. To ne moze promijeniti ni vrijeme ni drustveni odnosi.
Medjutim, nacini funkcionisanja ljudskih drustava se mijenjaju i treba da se mijenjaju.

[Irsar]

Postoji definitivna poplava knjizevnih djela koja se u knjizarama nalaze pod "samopomoc" sekciji (self-help, eng.), te dokumentarnih filmova koji obecavaju vrlim gledaocima da su otkrili tajnu ljudske srece.

Ovaj fenomen treba adekvatno istraziti, ali forum ne daje dovoljno prostora za takav poduhvat.

To zato jer čovjek, po svojoj prirodi, ima i "nematerijalne" (duhovne) potrebe i glad za nečim višim od pukog tjelesnog užitka. Nakon dekadence i djelimičnog uništenja velikih religija, pojavila se praznina koju su religije nekada ispunjavale, rezultat čega i jeste da danas imamo "nikad više knjiga u historiji, a nikad manje znanja (prisutnog u širem društvu)". Pogotovo najvažnijeg znanja, a to je vjersko znanje i sve što s time ide (moral i etika, stvarno dobro, trajne istine i td.).

Plus, živimo u vremenu "vladavine kvantiteta", gdje se pukom količinom i brojem želi nadomjestiti kvalitet koji su ljudi nekada u svom životu imali, kvalitet neovisan (ili puno manje ovisan) o materijalnim dobrima i tjelesnim užicima.

iako ratuje mnog manje od svojih predaka kojima je mir bio pauza izmedju ratova

Možda, nisam historičar pa ne znam, a historiju svakako smatram prvo kao skup lažnih vijesti, a tek onda kao istinito viđenje prošlosti. No danas se vode daleko opasniji ratovi, gubici kojih vode u daleko veća zla. Rat protiv istine, protiv morala, protiv dobra, vjere i Boga. Svako će na ovom svijetu živjeti koliko mu je određeno, nema tog rata koji će to promijeniti, ali rat protiv istine je ujedno i rat protiv spasenja i svakog suštinskog i trajnog dobra. Takav rat se danas konstantno vodi, na čitavom svijetu nesmanjenom žestinom.

"Sukob" religije i nauke desava se samo u monoteistickim religijama, vise u krscanstvu, nesto manje u judaizmu i islamu.
Ovaj fenomen nije tako prisutan u hinduizmu i shintoizmu npr. Japanci i dalje razvijaju robotiku, ne pitajuci se ni jednog trenutka da li treba dokazivati postojanje Amaterasu, boginje Sunca.

Neka te ne zavaravaju naizgled "stabilne" istočnoazijske civilizacije ili nacije. I one su u dubokoj dekadenci, kao i čitav svijet, samo što se njihova dekadenca manifestuje na drugi način. Japanci nisu ništa religiozniji od primjerice prosječnog Evropljanina Zapadne Evrope danas, možda čak naprotiv.

Medjutim, nacini funkcionisanja ljudskih drustava se mijenjaju i treba da se mijenjaju.

Onda se postavlja sljedeće logično pitanje: da li ti načini funkcionisanja društva mogu biti bilo kakvi i da li svaka njihova promjena je dobra i poželjna? Ili čak neizbježna?

Ako uzmemo da je ljudska priroda jedna, u principu trajna i nepromjenjiva, iako u praksi mogu postojati određene (ali ograničene!) varijacije iste, te ako uzmemo da su načini organizovanja ljudskih društava ništa drugo doli manifestacija takve prirode, onda je jasno sljedeće:

1. čovjek svakako je ograničen u tome kakvu vrstu društva može da stvori, nebitno da li dobru ili lošu, i
2. čovjek svakako ne bi trebao da stvara vrste društva koje su po njega loše, poput npr. ateističko-sekularnih društava.

Čovjek je taj koji dolazi prvo. Potom ide društvo. Kakvo će društvo biti zavisi od čovjeka, a čovjekova priroda se ne mijenja (suštinski). Osim ako vjeruješ u evoluciju, u kom slučaju možeš baciti kroz prozor bilo kakvo poimanje ispravnosti bilo čovjeka ili društva koje organizuje. Naravno, više puta sam rekao, evolucija je totalna glupost ali kako god ovo nije tema niti me priča o ovome sada zanima.

[Sara03]

Kao sto smo mogli vidjeti, izbjegavanje namaza, posta, cinjenja dobrih djela i ostalih rituala dubokog odredjenja i vjere su nuzno, na primjeru nekoliko forumskih likova odveli u panteizam a onda kasnije i u nevjeru.

Srećom, još su među živima.

[dadinjo33]

Kao sto smo mogli vidjeti, izbjegavanje namaza, posta, cinjenja dobrih djela i ostalih rituala dubokog odredjenja i vjere su nuzno, na primjeru nekoliko forumskih likova odveli u panteizam a onda kasnije i u nevjeru.

Srećom, još su među živima.

"Allaha mi hin duboko odredjeno i nuzno gledo kako ne rade dobra djela".

[Diwan]

Interesantna poveznica između Satane, Baala, Jupitera, Zeusa ... pošto se radi o hrišćanskom autoru, naravno da je zaboravio da doda i image of Jesus poveznicu sa ovim prethodno nabrojanim i kao kajmak na sve, a koja je potrebna i služi kao grand finale drevnog plana velike prevare simbolizovane u liku Hrista-Antihrista prethodno napravljene scene o njegovom ponovnom povratku i uskrsnuću.

Satan, Zeus, Baal, and the Prince of Rome

http://docdro.id/qRgzC2z

[Diwan]

Još jedna velika priča sa drugačijim tumačenjem je priča o tzv. Egzodusu.

Grande falsifikacija i prevara ... i matrica, jedna od mnogobrojnih.

O Mojsijevom egipatskom porijeklu je pisao između ostalog i sam Frojd.

Knjige Mojsije i Monoteizam za preuzeti:
https://www.scribd.com/document/1246316 ... Monoteizam

Osnova priče i poenta je:

North of Egypt was occupied and the Egyptian suffered Harsh Slavery under the brutal barbaric nomads known as the Hyksos.
The Egyptians were enslaved by the Hyksos in the north and were forced to build the New city for the Hyksos known as Avaris.
The two great Brothers: Prince Ka Mose & Prince Ah Mose pursue the War of Liberation and deliver Egypt from the Wicked Hyksos.
King Ah Mose pursued the enemy to Sharuhen, a Hyksos stronghold in Palestine, which was reduced after a three-year siege.
NB: The auto biography of Pharaoh Ah Mose was the Ego Spirit behind the legend of the Exodus, which was changed by biblical writers who borrowed the story of the Expulsion of the Shepherd Kings into the Exodus

Gdje nema porobljenih jevreja već porobljenih egipćana od strane hiksa, gdje Mojsije ili Moses nije Jevrejski prorok već Egipatski vladar koji je izbacio hikse iz dijela zemlje kojim su vladali.

Da, da, postoji lafina koja kaže da su sa hiksima došli i jevreji i koji su nakon protjerivanja hiksa držani kao roblje, kako da ne.
Ne postoje uopšte arheološki tragovi biblijskog narativa, mada se sve može naštimati naravno, kao što se i štima, kada netko otkupi fabriku za siću i bude sam na tenderu i tome slično:

The consensus of modern scholars is that the Bible does not give an accurate account of the origins of Israel.[32] There is no indication that the Israelites ever lived in Ancient Egypt, and the Sinai Peninsula shows almost no sign of any occupation for the entire 2nd millennium BCE (even Kadesh-Barnea, where the Israelites are said to have spent 38 years, was uninhabited prior to the establishment of the Israelite monarchy).[33] In contrast to the absence of evidence for the Egyptian captivity and wilderness wanderings, there are ample signs of Israel's evolution within Canaan from native Canaanite roots.[34] While a few scholars discuss the historicity, or at least plausibility, of the exodus story, the majority of archaeologists have abandoned it, in the phrase used by archaeologist William Dever, as "a fruitless pursuit".

The exodus narrative
According to Exodus 12:37–38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children", plus many non-Israelites and livestock. Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up. It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[43] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[44] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a column 240 km long.[45] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[46][44] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[47] Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[48]

Neki bi se pozvali na ipuver papirus, ali:

Ipuwer and the Book of Exodus
Ipuwer has been often put forward in popular literature as confirmation of the Biblical account, most notably because of its statement that "the river is blood" and its frequent references to servants running away, but these arguments ignore the many points on which Ipuwer contradicts Exodus, such as the fact that its Asiatics are arriving in Egypt rather than leaving, and the likelihood that the "river is blood" phrase may refer to the red sediment colouring the Nile during disastrous floods, or may simply be a poetic image of turmoil.[10] The archeological evidence does not support the story of the Exodus, and most histories no longer consider it relevant to the story of the emergence of Israel

A sada pdf:

Pharaoh Ah Mose the Great

http://docdro.id/i9z9Mai

FAKING THE MOSES - The Biblical Events and the Truth

http://docdro.id/VQOlFpC

It is hard to believe that 600,000 families (which would mean about two million people) crossed the entire Sinai without leaving one shard of pottery (the archeologist's best friend) with Hebrew writing on it. It is remarkable that Egyptian records make no mention of the sudden migration of what would have been nearly a quarter of their population, nor has any evidence been found for any of the expected effects of such an exodus; such as economic downturn or labor shortages. Furthermore, there is no evidence in Israel that shows a sudden influx of people from another culture at that time. No rapid departure from traditional pottery has been seen, no record or story of a surge in population.

[Connaisseur Karlin]

Zivimo u eri hibridizacije vjera, a sve u cilju nastavka uzdizanja covjeka na nivo bozanstva.
Sumanuta potraga za srecom, barem na danasnji nacin, je relativno novi fenomen ... broj knjiga o "samopomoci" je diskutabilno indikacija pokusaja da nadomjesti prazninu koju je izazvalo "ubijanje Boga" u 19. vijeku, te potpuni poraz krscanstva.

Vjere nema bez prakse. "Razmisljanje" i "vjerovanje" je krscanstvo neminovno odvelo u deonizam i panteizam, koji su dovoljno impotentni da na kraju odvedu u nevjeru.

Kao sto smo mogli vidjeti, izbjegavanje namaza, posta, cinjenja dobrih djela i ostalih rituala dubokog odredjenja i vjere su nuzno, na primjeru nekoliko forumskih likova odveli u panteizam a onda kasnije i u nevjeru.

ti kriitikjes krscne , sto su uradili sa svojom religjom, a ne zelis reci da su i muslimani zabrljali sa Islamom i Alahom

[Gojeni H]

Zivimo u eri hibridizacije vjera, a sve u cilju nastavka uzdizanja covjeka na nivo bozanstva.
Sumanuta potraga za srecom, barem na danasnji nacin, je relativno novi fenomen ... broj knjiga o "samopomoci" je diskutabilno indikacija pokusaja da nadomjesti prazninu koju je izazvalo "ubijanje Boga" u 19. vijeku, te potpuni poraz krscanstva.

Vjere nema bez prakse. "Razmisljanje" i "vjerovanje" je krscanstvo neminovno odvelo u deonizam i panteizam, koji su dovoljno impotentni da na kraju odvedu u nevjeru.

Kao sto smo mogli vidjeti, izbjegavanje namaza, posta, cinjenja dobrih djela i ostalih rituala dubokog odredjenja i vjere su nuzno, na primjeru nekoliko forumskih likova odveli u panteizam a onda kasnije i u nevjeru.

ti kriitikjes krscne , sto su uradili sa svojom religjom, a ne zelis reci da su i muslimani zabrljali sa Islamom i Alahom

Upravo suprotno. Nastojim da uvidim (sve) probleme rigidne interpretacije islama, ali isto tako i svodjenja islama na temu akademsko-filozofskih razmisljanja i interpretacija. Obje stvari vode u neminovnu dekadenciju.

[Connaisseur Karlin]

Upravo suprotno. Nastojim da uvidim (sve) probleme rigidne interpretacije islama, ali isto tako i svodjenja islama na temu akademsko-filozofskih razmisljanja i interpretacija. Obje stvari vode u neminovnu dekadenciju.

Gojeni, religije se mjenjaju u skladu sa promjenama u drustvima, to je doslovno tako od pocetka razvoja svih relgija , zato prica o "povratku religija na pravi put" nema smisla.

mnoge relgije su nestale jer nisu vise bile potrebne drustvima

[zijancer]

mnoge stvari su nestale kada su prešle svoju prirodnu mjeru ili kada je nešto drugo prešlo svoj optimum/granice
šta li je optimum naše civilizacije