Natural law: Your "interesting site" also claims that Jesus is really the Archangel Michael and that Moses was really the Pharoh Tutmoses II for 22 of Tutmoses' 54 year reign. It sure appears your only "standard of evidence" is that it reflects negatively on the Church. If you were a Christian you should be embarrassed and ashamed for attempting such a smear. However, it looks like you are leaning towards the Jehova's Witnesses, so I am not holding my breath.
That's typical of Boatbum's and the like's posts -- they will ally themselves with anyone against the Church -- even those that claim that Jesus was the Archangel Michael. Of course, some may believe that...
I wonder if the same thinking would have it that Paul just renamed the pagan “unknown god” Jesus.
Speak for yourself. As I already told NL, I was posting the article that compared ancient pagan symbolism with that of the Catholic Church. I also showed that this was NOT fabricated information with additional sources. It's really too bad that no source BUT Roman Catholic ones are acceptable to you guys, but that is obviously too narrow and biased to be objective, as we know all too well. Your church has a history of destroying any and all "unapproved" documentation and usually the writers along with them. I thank God he saw fit to allow much to survive.
People like that actually believe that all information on the internet is created equal, endowed by its creators with an unalienable right to attack the Church with immunity from scrutiny and review. Somehow they have convinced themselves and each other that every site slapped together by the Rev. Cletus T. Wormwood and the fine ladies of the Burning Cross Congregation's Anti-Papist Society is equal in merit and as deserving of respect as the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, Saint Ambrose, Saint Augustine, Saint Jerome, and Pope Gregory I, and Saint Bellarmine so they choose to remain blissfully ignorant.
"Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing." - Luke 23:24