Also, it doesn't require the Bible to see that the past and the present are intimately connected through the control structures, which was the point of my post.
Except that it does. That is exactly what it signifies. That it signified that before the Catholic church appropriated it is not contested. You suggest that it signified something different for the Catholic church. I am saying it does not. I am trying to tell you that the Catholic church was created by and is run by the exact same people as those who used the obelisk for its original purpose. The evidence for that assertion is everywhere. Your apology was created by those with conflicts of interest.
What does that prove or negate?
You stated:
You either believe the Bible is a historical record or you don't.
My statement was to indicate that that is irrelevant (in the sense that it is an unnecessary requirement) to being able to see these connections between past and present. On the contrary, while I agree it is an excellent resource, it can interfere with that process, because in order to hold on to the belief that the Bible is absolute truth, every word exact as given to us by Source, you must ignore a great deal of evidence.
I told you what that one particular obelisk signifies for the Catholic church. The Catholic church is not pagan. It's topped with a cross and has been exorcized for a reason. Why bother if its all the same religion?
I am trying to tell you that the Catholic church was created by and is run by the exact same people as those who used the obelisk for its original purpose.
The Catholic church was started by Jesus Christ and while it may be infiltrated, that does not negate the fact that the Church is not pagan nor do we worship a pagan god.
Nope, nothing new under the sun as the Bible states.
The Bible says there is nothing new under the sun. You either believe the Bible is a historical record or you don't.
I'm pretty sure you didn't read what I wrote.
Also, it doesn't require the Bible to see that the past and the present are intimately connected through the control structures, which was the point of my post.
I read it a few times.
You opened with a false statement.
No, I have not been taught that the past and present are separate. I was taught there is nothing new under the sun.
And?
What does that prove or negate?
You made the claim:
Except that it does. That is exactly what it signifies. That it signified that before the Catholic church appropriated it is not contested. You suggest that it signified something different for the Catholic church. I am saying it does not. I am trying to tell you that the Catholic church was created by and is run by the exact same people as those who used the obelisk for its original purpose. The evidence for that assertion is everywhere. Your apology was created by those with conflicts of interest.
You stated:
My statement was to indicate that that is irrelevant (in the sense that it is an unnecessary requirement) to being able to see these connections between past and present. On the contrary, while I agree it is an excellent resource, it can interfere with that process, because in order to hold on to the belief that the Bible is absolute truth, every word exact as given to us by Source, you must ignore a great deal of evidence.
Prove it.
https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/basilica-of-saint-peter
I told you what that one particular obelisk signifies for the Catholic church. The Catholic church is not pagan. It's topped with a cross and has been exorcized for a reason. Why bother if its all the same religion?
The Catholic church was started by Jesus Christ and while it may be infiltrated, that does not negate the fact that the Church is not pagan nor do we worship a pagan god.