Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Daughters of Cain, Sons of Seth, Fallen Angels Oh My

page: 6
9
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: windword


Before the advent of Jesus, "Christ" was worshiped as the Aeon of God (LOGOS). After the advent of Jesus, early Christian taught that Jesus "Christ" was the Aeon of God.

Could you clarify the above statement?

Before Christ (Jesus) there was no Christ (Greek) in the Hebrew. The only equivalent meaning in Hebrew would be Meshiach (Messiah) meaning anointed. Logos is entirely Greek philosophy and is misused in its meaning. In Aramaic Hebrew theology they would never use logos in referencing the Meshiach. The future Meshiach of the non Christian Hebrews was the anointed one to come as a personage and not an era. The Meshiach would be simply another human from the seeds of David who would be endued with power from God. He would live and die as a man and his seed would produce another Meshiach. This process would continue till the last day of this creation.

Prior to Jesus, the Hebrews did not worship any so called logos. There simply was not any so called logos to worship by their understanding. A so called logos did not exist to them just as a Meshiach did not exist then or even today to their understanding. You can't mix Greek philosophy with Hebrew theology in Hebrew Christianity. It's like apples and oranges. I have the suspicion that you are trying to teach that Christianity stole the Christ concept from the Greeks and It simply is not applicable. You are using Greek wording in trying to espouse Hebrew. This is exactly why the translators of Greek to English used the word "Word" in John instead of the Greek Logos. If you would have had the original Aramaic/Hebrew letter of John you would not have seen this logos even suggested. Its bad interpretation on your part.




posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

As every priest and High Priest must know Torah, to read from it, what were they reading from before the Septuagint translation? You realize that the Septuagint was translated from an earlier Torah.

Unfortunately one must see the archaeology before they want to see. So let's see what is available in extra-Biblical sources...


The Ketef Hinom silver scroll, that was written in Paleo-Hebrew and dated by SECULAR scientists from the time of Jeremiah, and it is the Aaronic blessing. The original Torah was written in Paleo-Hebrew.

Please look at the first sentence in your source


Torah translated into Greek (246 BCE)
[/quote}.Translated from an earlier Torah.

Did I say I believed the Chinese were? No, I said they do. Would you be the one to tell them they are wrong about deeply embedded dragon culture? Wouldn't that be insensitive?



edit on 9/12/2014 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede




Prior to Jesus, the Hebrews did not worship any so called logos. There simply was not any so called logos to worship by their understanding.


Yes, the esoteric Hebrews did. Every time the Old Testament refers to the "Angel of the LORD", that's a reference to the LOGOS, and, go ahead and google it, Christians insist that that Aoen, "The Angel of the LORD" WAS Jesus.

Again, I don't believe these accounts are meant to be taken literally, but are allegorical for our individual archetypal vision quest.



Before Christ (Jesus) there was no Christ (Greek) in the Hebrew.


King Saul, King David and Cyrus the Great are all referred to as "Christ" in the septuagint. Further, the Essene were awaiting the return of their Teacher of Righteousness. Hebrews had been waiting for the "Christ" for centuries, and many zealots popped up claiming to be "The One." Even Jesus warned of others, who had come before, claiming to be "The One".

Further, since the Ptolemaic influence and push to unite the religions of Egypt and Greece, there were many "Christ" cults, and every town had their own "Christus" initiates. The Elysian Mysteries, the Egyptian Therapeutics, the Pythagorean/neo-platoists all had their versions of the LOGOS.

ETA:

Here's a writing of Plutarch, who was a first century philosopher and Historian, on the LOGOS


THE PROPER REASON ACCORDING TO PLUTARCH

LIII. 1. For Isis is the feminine [principle] of Nature and that which is capable of receiving the whole of genesis; in virtue of which she has been called “Nurse” and “All-receiving” by Plato, 1 and, by the multitude, “She of ten-thousand names,” through her being transformed by Reason (Logos) and receiving all forms and ideas [or shapes].

2. And she hath an innate love of the First and Most Holy of all things (which is identical with the Good), and longs after and pursues it. But she flees from and repels the domain of the Bad, and though she is the field and matter of them both, yet doth she ever incline to the Better of herself, and offers [herself] for him to beget and sow into herself emanations and likenesses, with which she joys and delights that she is pregnant and big with their generations.

3. For Generation is image of Essence in Matter and Becoming copy of Being.

LIV. 1. Hence not unreasonably do they say in the myth that [while] the Soul of Osiris is eternal and indestructible, Typhon often tears his Body in pieces and makes it disappear, and that Isis seeks it wandering and puts it together again.


Read more here

edit on 12-9-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy

As usual, I have no idea how any of your post related to what I've presented. I think you're projecting all over the place, trying to prove something I've never said. And, I have no idea what you're trying to prove!



Would you be the one to tell them they are wrong about deeply embedded dragon culture? Wouldn't that be insensitive?


Is that what this is about?

edit on 12-9-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

If you expect us to accept Plutarch, then why can't you accept Josephus?

You know, Plutarch wrote about Heracles (Hercules) as if the man were real. Was Heracles a real person? And I reject Plato because Plutarch lived long after and quoted something he heard Plato said. And you know, Plutarch was a priest at the temple of the Oracle at Delphi. We don't know there were actual Oracles, there's no bodies to prove it.

And not only that, his writings were tampered with by later people.


Some of the Lives, such as those of Heracles, Philip II of Macedon and Scipio Africanus, no longer exist; many of the remaining Lives are truncated, contain obvious lacunae or have been tampered with by later writers.


Good though, yank an ancient writer who said Hercules was real. And you have a problem with the historicity of Jesus.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim


After I wrote that reply to you I sat down and put together a thread I called The Seven Millennial Days The Seven Days and God's Plan to share my view on the Plan of God or whatever we should call it. The numbers are rough estimates, I believe the different days vary in length, I simply put in rough estimates to show how I interpret this system. I'd love to hear your views on it.

Yes Utnapisjtim, you deserve lots of flags and stars for that unique work. Very fascinating read. Took me awhile to read the clock calendar and OT but it is a great piece. Will have to check these forums more often. The dates will vary from one perspective of one person to another but you and I both know that everyone will never agree to same dates. Even the most brilliant scholars will not agree and it really makes some critical thinkers re think. I believe ATS has some brilliant people on their forums and I also consider you in that class. Will re read this and try to absorb your thoughts. Thanks



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy




If you expect us to accept Plutarch, then why can't you accept Josephus?


I'm not using Plutarch to prove the existence of Jesus or anyone else. Apples and oranges. I was using Plutarch to show another way the LOGOS was viewed, through his comparison of the LOGOS in the mythology of Horus, Isis, Osiris and Typhus.

It interesting how similarly it mirrors the Jesus, Mary, God the Father and Satan, mythology of Christianity.



You know, Plutarch wrote about Heracles (Hercules) as if the man were real.


Plutarch goes out of the way to explain the meaning of the symbolism of mythological characters, and he goes in depth in explaining why people need to think that gods and demi gods are real.

edit on 12-9-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: windword


Yes, the esoteric Hebrews did. Every time the Old Testament refers to the "Angel of the LORD", that's a reference to the LOGOS, and, go ahead and google it, Christians insist that that Aoen, "The Angel of the LORD" WAS Jesus.

And who were these (Greek word) esoteric Jews that we were not talking about? The discussion was in reference to the Hebrew national concept of a Christ before Jesus came upon the scene. You have nothing new to bring to the table. A Christ is strictly Greek and not Hebrew origin nor even understood by a Hebrew. A Christ is only understood after Jesus came upon the scene. The followers of Jesus were called Christians first in Antioch according to most bibles. It is mentioned only once more in Acts 26:28 --


Yes, the esoteric Hebrews did. Every time the Old Testament refers to the "Angel of the LORD", that's a reference to the LOGOS, and, go ahead and google it, Christians insist that that Aoen, "The Angel of the LORD" WAS Jesus.

Jesus was born about 3760 years after Adam. Jesus was not an angel nor a messenger of the Lord God and had not come in the flesh till 3760 years after Adam. He did not exist before He was born in this terrestrial world. Impossible theology. Prior to the Greeks your logos philosophy did not exist. It is entirely Greek philosophy. Esoteric can be any small group of hundreds of small groups of different Hebrew tribes. Give the names of these esoteric Hebrews. Even decent theology will have some fact and this does not even qualify.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede




And who were these (Greek word) esoteric Jews that we were not talking about?


You do know that the Jews had a priestly caste right, the Levites? These men, and their sons did nothing all day but study and pontificate on God's law and scripture. Jewish scholars traveled to debate and discuss religion and science, meeting with Greeks, Egyptians, Roman and eastern philosophers and holy men. Ideas were shared and mythological stories were melded.


The discussion was in reference to the Hebrew national concept of a Christ before Jesus came upon the scene. You have nothing new to bring to the table. A Christ is strictly Greek and not Hebrew origin nor even understood by a Hebrew.


You do know that Jesus last name wasn't Christ right? The concept of Christ wasn't born with Jesus.

You do understand that when the Hebrew scripture was translated in to what we call the Septuagint, it was translated into the Greek language. Do you think that Jewish concept were impossible to express in Greek words and letters?

When the Old Testament refers to the "Angel of the Lord" that was a translated reference that was equivalent to the Greek concept of the LOGOS. The same LOGOS that Plato and Pythagoras opined on and the same LOGOS that John uses to deify Jesus and give him the pagan title of "Christ".

Did Jesus Preexist as “the Angel of the LORD”?


Your right. I'm not bringing anything new to the table. This is all documented history.



. Prior to the Greeks your logos philosophy did not exist.


Yep, Greek, Egyptian and Jewish mythology all mixed into one book called the Septuagint.


edit on 12-9-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 06:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Utnapisjtim


After I wrote that reply to you I sat down and put together a thread I called The Seven Millennial Days The Seven Days and God's Plan to share my view on the Plan of God or whatever we should call it. The numbers are rough estimates, I believe the different days vary in length, I simply put in rough estimates to show how I interpret this system. I'd love to hear your views on it.

Yes Utnapisjtim, you deserve lots of flags and stars for that unique work. Very fascinating read. Took me awhile to read the clock calendar and OT but it is a great piece. Will have to check these forums more often. The dates will vary from one perspective of one person to another but you and I both know that everyone will never agree to same dates. Even the most brilliant scholars will not agree and it really makes some critical thinkers re think. I believe ATS has some brilliant people on their forums and I also consider you in that class. Will re read this and try to absorb your thoughts. Thanks


Thanks, and yes the times and dates are general and approximations, but also chose to tie them up with certain regular astronomic events that seemed to fit in nicely. After I had started putting together the new thread I was completely captivated by the subject (as usual with the first lines of Genesis), and I ended up making illustrations and reading up on traditional Hebrew astronomy, and before I knew it, it was sunrise and I had been sitting through the whole night. That's what I love about the Book. It's a gem of many facets.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: windword


Yep, Greek, Egyptian and Jewish mythology all mixed into one book called the Septuagint.

You still do not understand. The Septuagint consisted only of Torah. The first five books of the present Tanakh. The Greeks were not empowered till about 323 B.C.E. and the Torah was translated in the late second century B.C.E. -- The original Septuagint was added to in the following three centuries and revised several times. Meanwhile the original Torah from which the Septuagint came from became lost and has not been recovered as yet. When the Tanakh became codified is not known but was in CE era.

Now for you to say that the Septuagint was Greek, Egyptian and Jewish mythology shows me that you absolutely have no comprehension of what you have said.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede




You still do not understand. The Septuagint consisted only of Torah.


But none of that matters to my argument.



Now for you to say that the Septuagint was Greek, Egyptian and Jewish mythology shows me that you absolutely have no comprehension of what you have said.


Yes, the many of the mythical stories of the Torah and the Old Testament reflect and adopt the myths of Egyptian, Greek and other cultural societies of the area.

You keep trying to change the subject to something that doesn't concern the topic that I've been addressing. You're the one who brought up the subject of Jesus being the LOGOS, in an attempt to explain to me how Jesus fits into "the fallen angels are responsible to all kinds of havoc" theme of this thread.

I merely showed you the the LOGOS theme is older that the advent of Jesus, and that it was adopted by "Christians" when John endowed the pagan title of the LOGOS on Jesus "Christ". The title was already being used, and had been used by pagans and Hebrews alike. That's FACT!

FACT: Christians claim that Jesus appeared as the LOGOS whenever the Bible mentions "The Angels if The LORD".

You are the one insisting that the soul is the physical body, which is dead until God makes it alive. I said, and rightfully so, that the Jewish people see the flame as representative of the soul, which is an extension of God's fire and God's breath. Not separate. The body is the candle, the soul is the flame.

Ancient Hebrew also had a means of expressing their belief in their version of the LOGOS. Regardless of whether or not you believe the Angel of God of the OT was Jesus or some other angel, the Angel of God was a reflection of God itself, in Hebrew mythology.

The LOGOS, which is the divine reflection of God, can be found in the divine spark of every living creature. You can see it in your lover's eyes, the sunrise, the sound of a song bird, etc. etc.........

If Jesus was so divine that the people he was with thought he was the light of the world, fine. He's not here now. But, the LOGOS, "Christ" consciousness, is always with us, and has always been with us.


edit on 13-9-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: windword


Yep, Greek, Egyptian and Jewish mythology all mixed into one book called the Septuagint.

You still do not understand. The Septuagint consisted only of Torah. The first five books of the present Tanakh.


I'm afraid your wisdom has fooled you. The Septuaginta held between 46 and 53 OT books, however, the name Septuaginta may infact refer to 70 or 72 Books. Surviving codexes like Codex Vaticanus, contain the complete Hebrew canon and a selection of deuterocanonical books similar to the present day Catholic Bible, including Tobit and Wisdom etc. It was written in Greek and and according to some, it came to be as a result of Ptolomy II assigning 72 (or 70 depending on the source) Greek speaking Jewish elders in Alexandria to write down copies of the Torah. Looks like he got plenty more than he asked for. It may be this that has tricked you into thinking the Septuagint was only the Torah.

ETA: The LXX actually contained more books than modern Protestant bibles.
edit on 13-9-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: eta



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Utnapisjtim


It was written in Greek and and according to some, it came to be as a result of Ptolomy assigning 72 (or 70 depending on the source) Greek speaking Jewish elders in Alexandria to write down copies of the Torah.

There ye go. You finally got it. The OT as you see it now in most English bibles came from one or two sources. Either Greek or Hebrew. Take your pick. Either one came as a result of over four hundred years evolving into what you see today from the added materials from about 200 B.C.E. to about 200 C.E. Now the literature which was added in the Common Era (about 200 C.E.) was not there when the Septuagint was translated into Greek (about 200 B.C.E.)-- the OT as you see it today in your bible did not exist when the original translation took place. In other words Tanakh was not codified when the Septuagint was born. Impossible.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

I finally got it? Judging from the text of Codex Sinaiticus, containing a fragmented LXX from the forth century and a "complete" NT, and in addition 'The Epistle of Barnabas', and portions of 'The Shepherd of Hermas' according to the linked wikipedia article. Though with lots of omitted passages and phrases, a few interpolations and showing obvious signs of editing and tampering.





new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution