It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Deuteronomy 32:8 Yahweh a Son of God (The Most High)

page: 23
13
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: BobbyMachiavelli69
a reply to: Azzezza

Ah, here's your biggest issue. This book, or at the times, a # load of stories. Written by people we can not trace and source their content. The subjectivity of your post indicates you believe the story to be true without being 1st, to prove the deity of this story to be true. To date, with tech, no one has one smidgen of empirical proof "it is written" then you bolster the fella with "he was of god" blah blah blah. Basically, every claim you make is based out of the fallacy of claim from ignorance/


You are wasting your time I don't have a biggest issue because I amnot arguing that this is history. I have just been into religion and mythology for a long time and find it entertaining. You should find a fundamental Christian to spew your angry rants to. Your arguments are all moot to me because I know the difference between history, religion and mythology and am not trying to say that these things happened.

Just interpretations dude,you literally sound like the pseudo-scientific version of a fundamental Christian passionately trying to get other people to think like him.




posted on Mar, 20 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Azzezza

Jesuits don't believe in what's written in The Urantia Book because it supports the ether theory and so rejects Einstein's "E=mc^2" error. The Urantia Book doesn't have to be suppressed because very few people even know what it's about, unless the suppression is by undermining that book by calling it a "hoax," "fantasy," or a New Age drivel. The funny thing is that today the New Age is a corrupted movement just as capitalism is corrupted from the top now. Both the roots of the New Age (Blavatsky's theosophy, The Urantia Book, and Drunvalo's sacred geometry) and capitalism's roots (Locke and Jefferson) are pure, but now many people hate both New Age and capitalism. And for what? For the drivel that the deceived elect converted it to? Hating what was originally good can be considered a way of suppression, no?

I mentioned the Protocols as an example that a hoax can have some truth to it. For a more related example, The Urantia Book includes science that is now accepted as fact.


Going beyond a general description of the formation of the continents and mountain ranges, The Urantia Book also gives specific details about the sinking of a peninsula off the eastern coast of the Mediterranean some 33,000 years ago. Sonar technology had not developed sufficiently at the time of The Urantia Book's publication to provide a clear picture of the topography of the eastern Mediterranean basin. Today's more advanced sonar mapping reveals a topography between Cyrus and the coast of Syria that not only aligns with Urantia Book's description, but also is located at the convergence of three highly active plates that produce an unusual crosscurrent of pressures. (source)


Additionally, I like this book's description of the strong force and the alternative interpretation of Young's experiment in contrast to today's attempts to break rather than understand the strong force and the incomplete interpretation of the experiment in the Copenhagen. I know that this all seems as diverging from the topic, but it's not, because you seem to reject an alternative explanation from The Urantia Book of the theological problem that you bring up and only take the Canaanite and Ugaritic texts as facts while rejecting everything else. You need to first understand that the book you are rejecting is not completely false, in fact no more false than the imagination of ancient peoples recorded in their primitive stories in the texts you claim to be so true as if they are above the Truth.

Then you bring up that Judaists call Melchizedek Shem. And? In Talmud, for example,

Shem is believed to have been Melchizedek, King of Salem whom Abraham is recorded to have met after the battle of the four kings (source).
That's evidence that they called someone who is known as Melchizedek (specified by name as Machiventa in the Book so neglected by you) by a different name just as they renamed other gods in their own language. Your jumping from Ugaritic texts to Torah is interesting because it shows that you would use anything if it contradicts your opponent's point of view, even if it's something you are trying to disprove! Just remember for the sake of consistency in your argument that you are saying that Canaanites and Israelites had different beliefs, even so as to be contradictory!

Here is something you wrote that could also apply to what you found in the Ugaritic texts:

It's a 2000 [~4000] year old myth based off SOME [potentially] real people.

edit on 20-3-2016 by ilstar because: some clarity



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Shayo




Sorry don't mean to offend in anyway


You're not offending, I have little patience for people who flood threads asking if its a banned member and adding nothing to the discussion. Speaking of the material you quoted - what if we're only reincarnated back to this same planet again and again. Just soul food for the Controllers?



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede




“The Word?” Does this not teach that the Word is the celestial YHWH who created the heaven and earth? Most are confused as to separate El and the creator YHWH. Both are the same and yet both are not to be understood. We cannot understand that which we cannot see, touch or smell. The only way we can comprehend YHWH was through His appearing to us as Yahusha (Jesus.) YHWH is our Creator God and El is His and our Most High God.


So you're taking the oral torah and the written torah and bringing some convoluted thinking to conclude that they are the same god. I dont mean to sound harsh but if you can see it why cant millions of Jews accept that Jesus is the the pre-existing triune god, or that he died and was risen? Or am I reading your conclusion wrong

The following seems to me that El was a common god adopted by between various tribes/religions
en.wikipedia.org...(deity)


ʾĒl (or 'Il, written aleph-lamed, e.g. Ugaritic: 𐎛𐎍, Phoenician: 𐤀𐤋,[1] Hebrew: אל‎, Syriac: ܐܠ‎, Arabic: إل‎ or إله, cognate to Akkadian: ilu) is a Northwest Semitic word meaning "god" or "deity", or referring (as a proper name) to any one of multiple major Ancient Near East deities. A rarer spelling, "'ila", represents the predicate form in Old Akkadian and in Amorite.[2] The word is derived from the Proto-Semitic archaic biliteral ʔ-L, meaning "god". Specific deities known as El or Il include the supreme god of the Canaanite religion,[3] the supreme god of the Mesopotamian Semites in the pre-Sargonic period,[4] and the god of the Hebrew Bible.


Further more it wasn't until the Babylonian captivity that Judaism became strictly monotheistic.



By the way my opinion is that YHWH is the Word and Creator and that El is Most High God of all creations.


So we are back to pluralities of gods? What of the Roman Pauline christianity as opposed to James of the New Testament.
Or what about the Gnostics view that YHVH is the demiurge?

The whole house of cards is certainly precarious.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn




You don't think your actions grieve the Holy Ghost?


So now you are cursing and judging? I thought that honour was upto your god - in the afterlife, not by you in this life. If your theories about multiple accounts had any merit I'm sure others would have noticed. How about adding something to the topic other than your usual trolling.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

You're ignorance is showing again

en.wikipedia.org...


Rand extended her involvement with free-market andanti-communist activism while working in Hollywood.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Seede
Further more it wasn't until the Babylonian captivity that Judaism became strictly monotheistic.
...
The whole house of cards is certainly precarious.


I agree that the issue was complex in bringing Israelites from polytheism into monotheism. Yes, they were like the Canaanites before, but the fact remains that they became monotheist, yes, probably after Babylonian captivity or somewhere around that time even though the signs of the One God were much earlier, especially starting with Melchizedek and going on through Moses. The OP lost himself in the details of this transition and so argues that the Israelites were never monotheistic but are lying about their true religion. It's "precarious" chaos whenever we start arguing about years long past, especially concerning conflicting religious interpretations among different ancient cultures. We should concentrate on better understood concepts, such as the relationship of Jesus to God the Father. Or the whole universalizing of religions and abandoning the Christ-figure ("May his name and his memory be wiped out") that Pope Francis is trying to do today.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 12:05 PM
link   


originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight a reply to: Seede Further more it wasn't until the Babylonian captivity that Judaism became strictly monotheistic.


lol

Commandment one: there is only one god


Some scholars propose a date between the 16th and 13th centuries bc

www.britannica.com...

Babylonian captivity: 538 BCE Decree of Cyrus allows Jews to return to Jerusalem

Thousand years late there buddy



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

Yeah, except they didn't exactly follow the commandments.



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ilstar

some did not, some did, and only one of those groups made it, go figure



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: ilstar




We should concentrate on better understood concepts, such as the relationship of Jesus to God the Father. Or the whole universalizing of religions and abandoning the Christ-figure ("May his name and his memory be wiped out") that Pope Francis is trying to do today


Well we do - its quite simple Jesus was ready to take a physical kingship on earth- he was descended from David. They murdered him and created yet another "controller" religion (Old Roman Empire - now became Christianity). There is little scriptural proof for a Trinity or Blood atonement through sacrifice of an "innocent" (we're led to believe). The influences of Mithraism & Zoroastianism abound in the syncretistic new religion.

The Roman trojan Paul Of Tarsus hijacked a local new variant of Judaism and turned it into a Gentile Judaism flavoured with the above

All these major religions are created to control "man"; they all can be traced back to The Brotherhood of The Snake



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

A little twofold interjection real quick:




its quite simple Jesus was ready to take a physical kingship on earth- he was descended from David.


Not all of earth, David's turf




All these major religions are created to control "man"; they all can be traced back to The Brotherhood of The Snake


The brotherhood of the snake is a group of people who think the serpent in Genesis is Lucifer/Prometheus: it does control men and the Abrahamic religions are its antithesis, quite an important distinction to make really



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: wisvol




Commandment one: there is only one god


Yes Jehovah was a less than perfect "Jealous" god, such a perfect being; 2 sets of commandments, free will and yet Adam was punished when the perfect god had his back turned (omniscience-yeah?). But even without the free will Jesus was pre-existing just in the unlikely event that Adam would sin - so he could be the perfect sacrifice. Quite a few leaps of logic there.



lol Commandment one: there is only one god


It doesnt strike you as odd that man would constantly have to be reminded? Where was he hiding amongst his competitors?

Jehovah also came along at the right time for such serious transgressions as children calling Elisha "bald", 2 bears eating 42 children - real nice.

This is how its whitewashed - total cognitive dissonance
bible.org...


The event described in these verses may seem repulsive to many and totally out of character with the personality of Elisha, a man who was more peaceful and personal than Elijah. As Krummacher remarks, “A deadly burst of vengeance upon a troop of wanton youths; a curse pronounced upon them in the name of the Lord! How characteristic of the legal dispensation! But how opposite to all we have said of the character and call of Elisha, as a messenger of the kindness and love of God our Saviour!


hmmm



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: wisvol




it does control men and the Abrahamic religions are its antithesis, quite an important distinction to make really


Well it seems like they have had quite a sway in the affairs of humans for the last few thousand years, even so far as to corrupt all knowledge of Man & his godhood.

Try the "Gods OF Eden" by Willam Bramley, its a real eye opener - you can see for yourself and it fills the dots as to the deliberate lapses in the religious texts. They don't want you to be free or awakened - in a nutshell - soul food for the gods.



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight




Yes Jehovah was a less than perfect "Jealous" god, such a perfect being; 2 sets of commandments, free will and yet Adam was punished when the perfect god had his back turned (omniscience-yeah?). But even without the free will Jesus was pre-existing just in the unlikely event that Adam would sin - so he could be the perfect sacrifice. Quite a few leaps of logic there.


The demiurge theory comes from the BotS, but let's recap:

There are leaps in logic here, none of which are the scroll's author's, ut demonstratio

Jealous yes, in a vaguely translated way, perfect is an inference not found in the scroll

Free will is also an inference, this time by deduction: letting Adam eat the fruit of the tree of science of right and wrong is allowing free will to be placed above Adam's happiness: true freedom.
Omniscience, yep: Adam being in the image of his maker would then have to remake Eden through his generations, or any variation thereof as he sees fit (true freedom)

I don't see Jesus as pre-existing or as a sacrifice, I'm old school biblical so no answer for you there




It doesnt strike you as odd that man would constantly have to be reminded? Where was he hiding amongst his competitors?


Some men have to be reminded to breathe through the nose, so no, not surprising
God not being on your personal library's record does not equate hiding, or competitors




Jehovah also came along at the right time for such serious transgressions as children calling Elisha "bald", 2 bears eating 42 children - real nice.


You're mistaking the spirit of the lord (clear thinking) with the creator there: the actions of a man are his, and sometimes doing something that appears illogical turns out to be the right thing to do in hindsight.

The justification from Tony is of little value to me



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Free 'em BotS!!




posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: wisvol
...
Try the "Gods OF Eden" by Willam Bramley, its a real eye opener - you can see for yourself and it fills the dots as to the deliberate lapses in the religious texts. They don't want you to be free or awakened - in a nutshell - soul food for the gods.


I disagree with this passage from Gods of Eden (1993):

Some mystical religions teach that one's ultimate spiritual aim should be to permanently "merge with" or "rejoin" a Supreme Being. This appears to be a false goal. (p. 441).


The point is for our "unique" and seemingly independent perspectives to attain a higher and more widely encompassing perspective, i.e. a state of perfection of a Supreme Being. Otherwise, why would individuals like Jesus Christ even try to teach us ascension? Do you believe in ascension? By ascending higher we would be recovering our true (or original) "self-awareness and perspective" (ibid.).



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

Your link doesn't work.



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: ilstar

It is a link to a King Crimson bootleg, nothing fancy



posted on Mar, 23 2016 @ 02:05 PM
link   
You shall have no other Gods BEFORE me.

I am a Jealous God.

Doesn't sound like the Israelites believed in one God at all. It's apparent that they were aware of the existence of other Gods, but forbidden to put them before Yahweh.

If you were the only God, the Most High God and creator of the Universe, what could possibly make you experience the human emotion of jealousy?

The myth of a monotheistic Israel has been disproven by the facts of archeological excavations that prove El is a Canaanite deity.

Deuteronomy factually demonstrates that whoever wrote it makes it clear that Yahweh is a Son of El.

We can easily see the efforts that people have gone through to obscure this passage so it hides this inconvenient truth.

But who cares about the truth, right? Let's just pretend that everything we have ever been told is true, despite the fact that it isn't.

People will believe whatever they want no matter how much you prove they are wrong.




top topics



 
13
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join