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.

 

Virgin Mary Conspiracy

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   


Not only is it unbiblical, but in direct violation of Revelation 22:18.
There are only two people mentioned in scripture -- by name -- who "ascended" into Heaven without having tasted death: Enoch, and Elijah (Genesis 5:24, II Kings 2:11). It is my personal belief that these are the two "witnesses" that will appear during endtime events (Revelation 11:3-12). a reply to: Kromlech

Enoch is assumed, by some teachings, that he ascended to the third heaven but that is not what the KJV bible tells us. Also it is assumed that Elijah also ascended to the third heaven but that also is not what the scriptures tell us. Elijah was taken up in a whirlwind into this heaven of this earth but not the third heaven. Actually both men died the death of the flesh and descended to Sheol till the captives were released into the kingdom of heaven.

It is possible that both are in heaven today but they were not in the third heaven till after Jesus died and presented the kingdom of heaven to mankind. The release of the justified from Sheol was on the day of the death of Jesus before He was entombed.

This is why still alive and teaching, Jesus taught that --------
John 3:11-13
(11) Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
(12) If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
(13) And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

The NT and OT must be weighed as to their own understandings. The NT is riddled with rabbinical Judaic teachings of which some are not the doctrine of the Christ Jesus. If you read with understanding you will see that the apostles and disciples of Jesus were born and raised within rabbinical teachings and were constantly corrected by Jesus Himself. Everyone of them, with the exception of the apostle John, died without the knowledge of two resurrections or the celestial New Jerusalem as is taught in Revelation.
What do you think?




posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
The Talmud says Mary had relations with a Roman soldier and who was not her husband.

Jesus father was Roman.



posted on Jan, 11 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: CB328

You can't believe the Catholic Church that despite Matthew saying she had no relations with Joseph UNTIL Jesus was born, meaning after, she did,her virginity was perpetual.

The Church looks upon lying for the Churches gain as virtuous going back to the false apostle Paul whose lies "abound to God's glory."

Mariam is awesome though!
edit on 11-1-2017 by TerriblePhoenix because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Seede



Not only is it unbiblical, but in direct violation of Revelation 22:18.
There are only two people mentioned in scripture -- by name -- who "ascended" into Heaven without having tasted death: Enoch, and Elijah (Genesis 5:24, II Kings 2:11). It is my personal belief that these are the two "witnesses" that will appear during endtime events (Revelation 11:3-12). a reply to: Kromlech

Enoch is assumed, by some teachings, that he ascended to the third heaven but that is not what the KJV bible tells us.


The Book of Enoch and the tradition he walked with God and was no more seem to indicate that the tradition is not dependent upon the 1611 KJV, though it does say he didn't die and was taken, obviously like Elijah, to heaven.

A tradition alive in Christianity and Judaism regardless of Bible version used.

The Book of Enoch was Canon in first century Palestine, was quoted by Jude/Judah Thomas, IS Canon in Ethiopian Christianity so I think it's safe to say a valid tradition and its non Canonical status in Catholic Christianity a shame.

Then again some people can't handle it, it's too scary or enlightening regarding the ante deluvian world.



Also it is assumed that Elijah also ascended to the third heaven but that also is not what the scriptures tell us.


If the Talmud says third heaven, it's third heaven. It's the Jews religion, not Christians who reject the law of Moses and don't understand the Tanakh in general anyway so I don't know who is assuming third heaven but it is irrelevant anyway.

Who cares what heaven, he was taken up is all that matters?



Elijah was taken up in a whirlwind into this heaven of this earth but not the third heaven. Actually both men died the death of the flesh and descended to Sheol till the captives were released into the kingdom of heaven.


Now THIS is an assumption not in line with scripture.



It is possible that both are in heaven today but they were not in the third heaven till after Jesus died and presented the kingdom of heaven to mankind. The release of the justified from Sheol was on the day of the death of Jesus before He was entombed.


Where do you pick up such fabrications, like Elijah's whereabouts are or ever were known about by you?

Elijah was in heaven B.C. According to prophecy he would return before the Messiah, though he hasn't he has to return from the heaven he ascended to and not the Sheol you say he really went to, which is the Hebrew Tartarus and the underworld, which is what Sheol means/is.

This is where the Sons of God /Watchers are imprisoned until judgements day and NOT where Elijah went.



This is why still alive and teaching, Jesus taught that --------
John 3:11-13
(11) Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
(12) If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
(13) And no man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man which is in heaven.


You misinterpreted this heavenly information.

Jesus just said the son of man is in heaven.

Son of man is a Hebrew idiom for a human, so the son man is from heaven, which is us btw.

Which is why we RETURN to God from who we came.

So basically he is saying that we descended to come here, not that Elijah did not get taken up, it just waa different from ascension because it is a return from where he came.

Ascension is when you visit heaven and return to earth, like Enoch did and Enoch is a Metatron angel, not a man, the little Shaddai called youth.

Anyone who ascends is no longer a mere man.




The NT and OT must be weighed as to their own understandings. The NT is riddled with rabbinical Judaic teachings of which some are not the doctrine of the Christ Jesus. If you read with understanding you will see that the apostles and disciples of Jesus were born and raised within rabbinical teachings and were constantly corrected by Jesus Himself. Everyone of them, with the exception of the apostle John, died without the knowledge of two resurrections or the celestial New Jerusalem as is taught in Revelation.
What do you think?


New Jerusalem has 12 apostles and 12 of many things.

Paul is not an apostle according to this information, maybe you don't understand as good as you think you do.

How many times have I stumped you with a more accurate knowledge of the Bible?

At least two, yet you don't admit it you just stop posting in that thread and go on as if you were right.



posted on Jan, 12 2017 @ 03:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerriblePhoenix

The Book of Enoch was Canon in first century Palestine, was quoted by Jude/Judah Thomas, IS Canon in Ethiopian Christianity so I think it's safe to say a valid tradition and its non Canonical status in Catholic Christianity a shame.

Was Josephus a Catholic?

The Book of Enoch is an apocryphal and pseudepigraphic text. It is falsely ascribed to Enoch. Produced probably sometime during the second and first centuries B.C.E., it is a collection of extravagant and unhistorical Jewish myths, evidently the product of exegetical elaborations on the brief Genesis reference to Enoch. This alone is sufficient for lovers of God’s inspired Word to dismiss it.

In the Bible, only the book of Jude contains Enoch’s prophetic words:...
Many scholars contend that Enoch’s prophecy against his ungodly contemporaries is quoted directly from the Book of Enoch. Is it possible that Jude used an unreliable apocryphal book as his source?

How Jude knew of Enoch’s prophecy is not revealed in the Scriptures. He may simply have quoted a common source, a reliable tradition handed down from remote antiquity.

Source: Enoch Walked With God in an Ungodly World

Just as Jehovah inspired men to write, it logically follows that he would direct and watch over the collecting and preserving of these inspired writings in order that mankind would have an enduring canonical straightedge for true worship. According to Jewish tradition, Ezra had a hand in this work after the exiled Jews were resettled in Judah. He was certainly qualified for the work, being one of the inspired Bible writers, a priest, and also “a skilled copyist in the law of Moses.” (Ezr 7:1-11) Only the books of Nehemiah and Malachi remained to be added. The canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, therefore, was well fixed by the end of the fifth century B.C.E., containing the same writings that we have today.

The canon of the Hebrew Scriptures was traditionally divided into three sections: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings, or Hagiographa, contained in 24 books, as shown in the chart. By further combining Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah, some Jewish authorities counted 22, the same as the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. In his prologue to the books of Samuel and Kings, Jerome, though seeming to favor counting 22, said: “Some would include both Ruth and Lamentations among the Hagiographa . . . and thus would get twenty-four books.”

The Jewish historian Josephus, in answering opponents in his work Against Apion (I, 38-40 [8]) around the year 100 C.E., confirms that by then the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures had been fixed for a long time. He wrote: “We do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. . . . From the death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as king of Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life.”

Canonicity of a book therefore does not rest in whole or in part on whether some council, committee, or community accepts or rejects it. The voice of such noninspired men is valuable only as witness to what God himself has already done through his accredited representatives.

The exact number of books in the Hebrew Scriptures is not important (whether a certain two are combined or left separated), nor is the particular order in which they follow one another, since the books remained as separate rolls long after the canon was closed. Ancient catalogs vary in the order the books are listed, as, for example, one listing places Isaiah after the book of Ezekiel. What is most important, however, is what books are included. In reality, only those books now in the canon have any solid claim for canonicity. From ancient times efforts to include other writings have been resisted. Two Jewish councils held at Yavne or Jamnia, a little S of Joppa, about 90 and 118 C.E. respectively, when discussing the Hebrew Scriptures, expressly excluded all Apocryphal writings.

Josephus bears witness to this general Jewish opinion of the Apocryphal writings when he says: “From Artaxerxes to our own time the complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets. We have given practical proof of our reverence for our own Scriptures. For, although such long ages have now passed, no one has ventured either to add, or to remove, or to alter a syllable; and it is an instinct with every Jew, from the day of his birth, to regard them as the decrees of God, to abide by them, and, if need be, cheerfully to die for them.”—Against Apion, I, 41, 42 (8).

This long historical position of the Jews toward the Hebrew Scripture canon is very important, in view of what Paul wrote to the Romans. The Jews, the apostle says, “were entrusted with the sacred pronouncements of God,” which included writing and protecting the Bible canon.—Ro 3:1, 2.

Acknowledging but by no means establishing the Bible canon that God’s holy spirit had authorized were early councils (Laodicea, 367 C.E.; Chalcedon, 451 C.E.) and so-called church fathers who were substantially agreed in accepting the established Jewish canon and in rejecting the Apocryphal books. Examples of such men include: Justin Martyr, Christian apologist (died c. 165 C.E.); Melito, “bishop” of Sardis (2nd century C.E.); Origen, Biblical scholar (185?-254? C.E.); Hilary, “bishop” of Poitiers (died 367? C.E.); Epiphanius, “bishop” of Constantia (from 367 C.E.); Gregory Nazianzus (330?-389? C.E.); Rufinus of Aquileia, “the learned Translator of Origen” (345?-410 C.E.); Jerome (340?-420 C.E.), Biblical scholar of the Latin church and compiler of the Vulgate. In his prologue to the books of Samuel and Kings, after enumerating the 22 books of the Hebrew Scriptures, Jerome says: “Whatever is beyond these must be put in the apocrypha.”

The most conclusive testimony on the canonicity of the Hebrew Scriptures is the unimpeachable word of Jesus Christ and the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Though they nowhere give an exact number of books, the unmistakable conclusion drawn from what they said is that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures did not contain the Apocryphal books.

If there was not a definite collection of Holy Writings known and recognized by them and those to whom they spoke and wrote, they would not have used such expressions as “the Scriptures” (Mt 22:29; Ac 18:24); “the holy Scriptures” (Ro 1:2); “the holy writings” (2Ti 3:15); the “Law,” often meaning the whole body of Scripture (Joh 10:34; 12:34; 15:25); “the Law and the Prophets,” used as a generic term meaning the entire Hebrew Scriptures and not simply the first and second sections of those Scriptures (Mt 5:17; 7:12; 22:40; Lu 16:16). When Paul referred to “the Law,” he quoted from Isaiah.—1Co 14:21; Isa 28:11.
...

Source: Canon: Insight, Volume 1
edit on 12-1-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2017 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


TextYou misinterpreted this heavenly information. Jesus just said the son of man is in heaven.

You give me no sources that reject the KJV bible and being that you are not a certified linguist or translator of either Aramaic, Greek or Hebrew i would question your understanding of Christian scriptures. Your lack of knowledge is quite amusing to say the least and shows your ignorance of Christianity.

The following is a partial list of the many certified Christian bibles who have many many certified linguistic scholars of which you are not one. It would do you more justice to ask instead of showing your ignorance. You have no understanding of this matter at all.

(ABP+) AndG2532 no oneG3762 has ascendedG305 intoG1519 theG3588 heaven,G3772 exceptG1508 the oneG3588 from out ofG1537 theG3588 heavenG3772 descending --G2597 theG3588 sonG5207 G3588 of man,G444 the oneG3588 beingG1510.6 inG1722 theG3588 heaven.G3772

(ASV) And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man, who is in heaven.

(BBE) And no one has ever gone up to heaven but he who came down from heaven, the Son of man.

(CEV) No one has gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who came down from there.

(Darby) And no one has gone up into heaven, save he who came down out of heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven.

(DRB) And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven.

(EMTV) And no one has gone up into heaven except He who came down out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven.

(ERV) The only one who has ever gone up to heaven is the one who came down from heaven--the Son of Man.

(ESV) No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.

(GW) No one has gone to heaven except the Son of Man, who came from heaven.

(ISV) "No one has gone up to heaven except the one who came down from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

(KJV) And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

(KJV+) AndG2532 no manG3762 hath ascended upG305 toG1519 heaven,G3772 butG1508 he that came downG2597 fromG1537 heaven,G3772 even theG3588 SonG5207 of manG444 which isG5607 inG1722 heaven.G3772

(YLT) and no one hath gone up to the heaven, except he who out of the heaven came down--the Son of Man who is in the heaven.


1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

You do understand that your flesh must die do you not? You seem to be a very dense person.



posted on Jan, 12 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: CB328


Text Anyways, this is an obvious lie, one way or the other, and proves that Catholic teaching are bogus. Either Mary did die, and thus was not taken to heaven as they claim, or she was taken but they lied about it for centuries to make money off of pilgrims with fake relics.

Perhaps not a deliberate untruth but a traditional understanding. Not being a Catholic I still give them some room for traditional acceptance.

In the Harlein Manuscript in the archives of the British Museum, 38-59, f.193b, ( Extracts provided by Edward Hepburn, Monkridge, Sidcup, Kent, publ. By Lewis, Lionel Smithett, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, p.155-156) along with the historian Rabanus Mauraus's works which are in Qxford University England, there is much church history that can be gleaned.

Not going into the scholarly aspect I would encourage you to seek the following by Robert D. Mock.

What Happened to the Friends and Disciples of Jesus
Robert D. Mock M.D
September 19, 1998
Part One

In this information you will find the church traditions of Britain that will insist that Mary the mother of Jesus died in Britain and not in the Jerusalem area. There were twelve which were called the Bethany group or family that were banned to the sea and found Britain as their new home. This group of twelve included Joseph of Arimathea [younger brother of Mary's father] who was the uncle of Jesus, along with Mary, Lazarus and sister Martha, Mary Magdalene and others who were classified as the Bethany family and were banned by the Jews to die at sea. They drifted to Britain and settled in both Britain and France where their evangelizing spread to all of Europe.

The ancient church records of various churches from Britain to the shores of France are quite abundant with not only records but tradition as well. So in lite of this, it is believed by a great populace that there could be more history in Europe than any other location. But in all of this tradition it is cited that Jesus' mother did die a natural death and was entombed in Glastonbury Britain.




edit on 12-1-2017 by Seede because: computer error - lost information



posted on Jan, 12 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

Seede, lets be real.

You said Elijah was in Sheol, then the third heaven, don't understand what Jesus means by no man has ascended to heaven even though Elijah and Enoch did and you can't figure out what he means and made up some nonsense.

You don't know Elijah, where he is now or ever since he was taken to heaven.

And you have no idea what ascension means in the mystical sense.

I don't think you are a knowledgeable Christian, you say quite a bit of things that have no Biblical support and lose every debate you engage me in.

Do you really want to have it happen again and again?

I would wake up if I were you. You think you know so much and are angry like CJ and just as confused.

Which is what Christianity wants you to be.

Good sheep.



posted on Jan, 12 2017 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: CB328


Text Anyways, this is an obvious lie, one way or the other, and proves that Catholic teaching are bogus.


You would have no Bible or Christianity without Catholicism.

Christianity is a divisive and adcersarial religion that disrepects the Church because you know that they gave you the Bible and religion you belong to one way or the other.

By calling their teachings lies, when in the times of Athanasius, Jerome, Eusebius and Constantine they were worse liars than they are now.

You just admitted to the source of the Bible being liars, and therefore void the validity of the Bible.

You call yourself a Nazarene but use the scriptures of the people that persecuted them out of existence and follow a false apostle they hated even in the Bible.

Who do you think is going to take you seriously, someone who doesn't study history or know anything about the Bible?

Because no student or scholar of Abrahamic religions will.



Either Mary did die, and thus was not taken to heaven as they claim, or she was taken but they lied about it for centuries to make money off of pilgrims with fake relics.

Perhaps not a deliberate untruth but a traditional understanding. Not being a Catholic I still give them some room for traditional acceptance.

In the Harlein Manuscript in the archives of the British Museum, 38-59, f.193b, ( Extracts provided by Edward Hepburn, Monkridge, Sidcup, Kent, publ. By Lewis, Lionel Smithett, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, p.155-156) along with the historian Rabanus Mauraus's works which are in Qxford University England, there is much church history that can be gleaned.


Meaningless drivel avout MSS. of no authenticity? What point do you imagine you are making? Joseph of Arimithea is not who you think he is.

Arimithea wasn't a town or city, most likely he was Joseph the father and of Arimithea was added to hide the fact he was still alive.

He performed all the duties of a father with a son that died. Get rid of of Arimithea and you can see his identity is obvious and Nazarenes were friends of Pharisees like Nicodemus and Gamaliel, Jesus father was either a Pharisee, Sadduccee, Zealot or Essene so probably a Pharisee and an important man. An Architect would have been very important and he was no carpenter.

Either way none of those MSS. mean anything unless you can produce a link to what they say.

Why are you so obsessed with meaningless things?



Not going into the scholarly aspect I would encourage you to seek the following by Robert D. Mock.

What Happened to the Friends and Disciples of Jesus
Robert D. Mock M.D
September 19, 1998
Part One


This guy doesn't know anything more than anyone who reads Apocryphal scripture, there is no secret document he has private access to and anything he uses is public domain books without copyrights.

Read it yourself and don't depend on someone who makes a living telling Christians what they can find out themselves if they weren't intellectually lazy.



In this information you will find the church traditions of Britain that will insist that Mary the mother of Jesus died in Britain and not in the Jerusalem area. There were twelve which were called the Bethany group or family that were banned to the sea and found Britain as their new home. This group of twelve included Joseph of Arimathea [younger brother of Mary's father] who was the uncle of Jesus, along with Mary, Lazarus and sister Martha, Mary Magdalene and others who were classified as the Bethany family and were banned by the Jews to die at sea. They drifted to Britain and settled in both Britain and France where their evangelizing spread to all of Europe.


You actually believe this nonsense? Mary Magdalene, not the mother, is part of this grail legend nonsense.

No more valid than British Israelitism.



The ancient church records of various churches from Britain to the shores of France are quite abundant with not only records but tradition as well. So in lite of this, it is believed by a great populace that there could be more history in Europe than any other location. But in all of this tradition it is cited that Jesus' mother did die a natural death and was entombed in Glastonbury Britain.


Can you prove this with a link to the translations of these alleged MSS.?



posted on Jan, 12 2017 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

Not to mention Enoch visited multiple Heavens and returned before being taken up again.

So other than the b. s. argument it is not Canonical you have no idea what you are talking about by saying Enoch and Elijah didn't ascend.

Simeon ben Yohai also successfully ascended and returned.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


TextSeede, lets be real. You said Elijah was in Sheol, then the third heaven, don't understand what Jesus means by no man has ascended to heaven even though Elijah and Enoch did and you can't figure out what he means and made up some nonsense. You don't know Elijah, where he is now or ever since he was taken to heaven.

I have given you about fourteen Christian bibles and can, but will not, give you fourteen more Christian bibles which are written in very plain languages that say no man one has ever ascended into the realm of God while Jesus was alive. It is not a matter of me misinterpreting what all fourteen bibles tell us. I gave you the sources and in your ignorance you do not understand.

The Apostle John is credited with this passage of which I gave you and if you wish to argue that John did not write that passage then that is your problem. If you argue that the passage is not interpreted correctly then show your source. It is very grievous to most that you always spout a lot of hog wash without any sources. Bragging is not a source so you should refrain from that nasty habit.

Your lack of knowledge shows me that you simply do not understand Christianity and probably never will. If you wish to debate then debate one subject matter at a time with scholarly or biblical sources but not the rants that you use to derail a subject. You also confuse the many divisions of rabbinic doctrines with the doctrine of the Christ Jesus which is shown very clearly in most of your posts.

This is why still alive and teaching, Jesus taught that --------
John 3:11-13
(11) Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
(12) If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
(13) And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Debate? Give your sources ---------------------- I will wait for an answer and not your rants or personal insults.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


TextCan you prove this with a link to the translations of these alleged MSS.?

Another braggadocious rant.

I gave CB328 the non scholarly sources that may have interest to him/her.
Here they are again so that you may do as you always do with any source. My sources are translated to English.

In the Harlein Manuscript in the archives of the British Museum, 38-59, f.193b, ( Extracts provided by Edward Hepburn, Monkridge, Sidcup, Kent, publ. By Lewis, Lionel Smithett, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, p.155-156) along with the historian Rabanus Mauraus's works which are in Qxford University England, there is much church history that can be gleaned.

Not going into the scholarly aspect I would encourage you to seek the following by Robert D. Mock.

What Happened to the Friends and Disciples of Jesus
Robert D. Mock M.D
September 19, 1998
Part One

No I cannot prove theology and I have repeatedly told that to you. No one can prove theology as you seem to not understand. You need some serious teaching.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


TextCan you prove this with a link to the translations of these alleged MSS.?

Another braggadocious rant.

I gave CB328 the non scholarly sources that may have interest to him/her.
Here they are again so that you may do as you always do with any source. My sources are translated to English.

In the Harlein Manuscript in the archives of the British Museum, 38-59, f.193b, ( Extracts provided by Edward Hepburn, Monkridge, Sidcup, Kent, publ. By Lewis, Lionel Smithett, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, p.155-156) along with the historian Rabanus Mauraus's works which are in Qxford University England, there is much church history that can be gleaned.

Not going into the scholarly aspect I would encourage you to seek the following by Robert D. Mock.

What Happened to the Friends and Disciples of Jesus
Robert D. Mock M.D
September 19, 1998
Part One

No I cannot prove theology and I have repeatedly told that to you. No one can prove theology as you seem to not understand. You need some serious teaching.


I wasn't bragging and didn't rant.

You are just sensitive and always pretending to know things about Judeo-Christianity that nobody does.

I was highlighting that you said Elijah went to the 3rd heaven and Sheol, neither of which you could possibly know.

Sheol is oblivion, or was before being conflated with Tartarus which is the prison of the Watchers except Azazel who is in Dudael, a mountain in which he is chained upside down.

Elijah didn't go to Tartarus he was taken up to heaven similar to Enoch.

Enoch saw all of heaven or most at least, many levels, and it is quoted by Jude (Book of Enoch) and despite it currently only being Canonical in Ethiopia it is a legitimate tradition and as inspired as any book in the Tanakh, used to be in the Tanakh as it was among the books found in Qumran, quoted from in that era by Jude and its a technicality that it is not Canonical, as if one should care.

My point is if you make a claim like Elijah didn't go to heaven or just the third heaven and Sheol, be prepared to be questioned as to the source of the information.

And you don't have a source for Elijah going anywhere but Heaven, I DO have a source that says Enoch ascended to Heavens and returned to earth as well as ben Yohai.

My Joseph of Arimithea theory, which is a theory and I admit that.

It's plausible and makes sense though, unlike your (unacknowledged as) theory that Elijah went to Sheol.

And sorry you don't know the mystical meaning of ascension, I didn't think you would get offended and cry about me explaining it to you.

There are two kinds of ascension, resurrection and virgin birth that are all spiritual concepts taught by Jesus like having the Spirit in you will "give birth" to a new person in the fashion of Christ as a disciple.

Dying to the material world and ressurrecting as a Spiritual being is the first resurrection and happens in the material world.

As a Spiritual being no longer concerned with the material worlds temptations you can, by meditation, ascend to Heaven and return, though I don't recommend it you can read about Paul claiming to know someone who was caught up to the third heaven and though he is lying and talking about himself, the concept itself is real.

No need for hostility we are all living beings trying to find our way, I have mine and you have yours and different though we are I would like to see you for once act like a humble Christian so I could avoid your insults that hurt you and not me, I am still involved in making you behave childish and I don't need the bad Karma.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix




Seede, lets be real. You said Elijah was in Sheol, then the third heaven, don't understand what Jesus means by no man has ascended to heaven even though Elijah and Enoch did and you can't figure out what he means and made up some nonsense. You don't know Elijah, where he is now or ever since he was taken to heaven.

Now before you go off on another rant just settle down and digest what I will try to explain. It is not what Seede says that counts. It is what others of accepted authority says that counts.

There are 40 manuscripts of the works of Enoch and from those forty MSS are considered three books of Enoch. At this time there is only one complete rendition of the Enochian literature and that is the Ethiopian literature . Most Enochian scholars [of which I am not one] accept the original MSS to be Hebrew or Aramaic or Hebrew and Aramaic.

There are some bibles that translate with the interpretation that Enoch was taken [up] and some that do not interpret the word [up] but use the word translate. Why would some use the word up and some use the word translate? The reason is because of what other scriptures tell them. I showed you where Jesus is said to have taught that it is appointed only once to die and another scripture that Jesus teaches that Flesh and blood cannot enter His celestial realm. So in order to keep the scriptures from contradiction the interpreters cannot use the word [up]. If a translator used the interpretation that Enoch went up to the heaven of God then the translation that says no one had at that time gone up to heaven of God would be in contradiction would it not? That is why the KJV translators would not use the word [up] and instead used the word translated. This left it up to whatever you want to interpret.

Where would [up] be if not in the celestial realm? Could it be here in this terrestrial realm on a star or another planet? The interpreter can open up a can of worms if he/she does not interpret as the cultures permit. The KJV bible uses the word [translate] to keep order in the majority MSS.

Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated [not taken up] that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

My understanding from reading “The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha’ by “James H. Charlesworth volume 1” is that Enoch wrote his book before he was translated. Now that is the key to understanding translation because you only change substance [die] once according to Jesus. Enoch wrote his accounts while in a dream vision and gave these accounts to the antediluvian world. (Before the flood of Noah) After the dream visions were given to mankind it was then that Enoch was translated. Enoch did not die and visit heaven and then come back and then die again and again. He had dream visions before his being translated and had written those visions in his accounts before his being translated.

But now we have the question as to where Enoch was translated. Was he translated to heaven or to Sheol? That is where the interpreter uses his own understanding along with other NT scriptures. If Enoch was translated then that would mean that he could be translated into the celestial ream or Sheol. In this understanding is where the Christian must go to the NT doctrine of the Christ Jesus. [That is if one is inclined to Christianity.] We have nothing to show us what the belief of the Enochian period was and actually the author of Hebrews is very highly controversial also.

Rabbinical Judaism [at this time of Jesus] taught the theology that the nation Israel would collectively enter the abode of Sheol in the afterlife. Every one that was a Jew would eventually be in Sheol as a bodiless spirit. It was believed that Sheol had seven gates that led to seven divisions of either pleasant conscious existence or degrees of punishment. All of this varied under rabbinical authority from one group to another or from one rabbi to another but in this case we are
looking at the NT era of Jesus.

Jesus taught that

1Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Jesus also taught that

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Then again Jesus taught the people that the rabbis were wrong when they taught that David their king had ascended into the celestial realm and the bundle of life.

Act 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

Does not the OT scriptures teach that the conscious spirit of man was in Sheol?

1st Samuel 28:11 vc-115
(11) Then said the woman, Whom shall I bring up unto thee? And he said, Bring me up Samuel.
(12)) And when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with a loud voice: and the woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul.
(13) And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth.
(14) And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up; and he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself.
(15) And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am sore distressed; -------------------

And I ask you then, if Elijah and Enoch were both in heaven was Moses also in heaven? Moses is called to appear with Elijah in the transfiguration of Jesus. Were they both called up from Sheol or both from heaven?

Mat 17:1 -4
(1) And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
(2) And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
(3) And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
(4) Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

Now when you put all scriptures into context you can see that rabbinical teachings and the doctrine of Jesus does not agree. Enoch was not translated up to the heavens but was translated down to Sheol at the time of his translat6ion just as the OT shows and Jesus also declares.

In Christianity theology, the celestial realm was offered to the justified spirits after Jesus died. Then the first gathering of justified spirits who were in Sheol were delivered out of Sheol and into the kingdom of heaven. Those were the first to inherit the kingdom of heaven. The ones who were not justified are in still in Sheol. This is called hell by Greek philosophy.

Now by all of what I posted here will show you that the order of James [brother of Jesus] teaches this doctrine in that Enoch was therefore translated to Sheol and is now in the kingdom of heaven. The purpose of the Christ was to establish His heavenly kingdom of New Jerusalem known to us as the kingdom of heaven.

Now this is all Christian theology and not to be argued in anger. If you have other perspectives then I am willing to read them but not to argue or demean anyone.

edit on 14-1-2017 by Seede because: computer tranfere problem



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

Another rant?

Do you just not know what a rant is, or how to act like a gentleman?

I told you, tone down the hostility. Besides I read your message and my response is so what?

Do you have a source that says Elijah went to Sheol AND just (whatever you think that means) the third heaven?

It's all I want to know. I have read the Bible, don't need a refresher. I don't care about anything other than the fact that you constantly make claims without proof.

This is one instance I would like to discuss, because Elijah clearly was taken into heaven, not Sheol, which is again either the Hebrew version of Tartarus or oblivion, depending on the era of Jewish thought.

Supply me with the source of your information please, regarding ELIJAH AND SHEOL.

Thank you.

PS.

There is no question about where Enoch went, there is a whole book dedicated to it, one that was honored by none other than Jude as inspired even quoting it in his epistle.

One would have to reject it, and Jude for thinking it inspired, reject the fact that it was in use in the first century and then "lost" only to be discovered in Ethiopia and now not lost.

The only question is what is the source of your errant belief that Elijah went to Sheol, which contradicts the Tanakh, Jewish AND Christian tradition, as well as Islamic, all three Abrahamic worshippers of the One God?
edit on 14-1-2017 by TerriblePhoenix because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix




Seede, lets be real. You said Elijah was in Sheol, then the third heaven, don't understand what Jesus means by no man has ascended to heaven even though Elijah and Enoch did and you can't figure out what he means and made up some nonsense. You don't know Elijah, where he is now or ever since he was taken to heaven.

Now before you go off on another rant just settle down and digest what I will try to explain. It is not what Seede says that counts. It is what others of accepted authority says that counts.

There are 40 manuscripts of the works of Enoch and from those forty MSS are considered three books of Enoch. At this time there is only one complete rendition of the Enochian literature and that is the Ethiopian literature . Most Enochian scholars [of which I am not one] accept the original MSS to be Hebrew or Aramaic or Hebrew and Aramaic.

There are some bibles that translate with the interpretation that Enoch was taken [up] and some that do not interpret the word [up] but use the word translate. Why would some use the word up and some use the word translate? The reason is because of what other scriptures tell them. I showed you where Jesus is said to have taught that it is appointed only once to die and another scripture that Jesus teaches that Flesh and blood cannot enter His celestial realm. So in order to keep the scriptures from contradiction the interpreters cannot use the word [up]. If a translator used the interpretation that Enoch went up to the heaven of God then the translation that says no one had at that time gone up to heaven of God would be in contradiction would it not? That is why the KJV translators would not use the word [up] and instead used the word translated. This left it up to whatever you want to interpret.

Where would [up] be if not in the celestial realm? Could it be here in this terrestrial realm on a star or another planet? The interpreter can open up a can of worms if he/she does not interpret as the cultures permit. The KJV bible uses the word [translate] to keep order in the majority MSS.

Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated [not taken up] that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

My understanding from reading “The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha’ by “James H. Charlesworth volume 1” is that Enoch wrote his book before he was translated. Now that is the key to understanding translation because you only change substance [die] once according to Jesus. Enoch wrote his accounts while in a dream vision and gave these accounts to the antediluvian world. (Before the flood of Noah) After the dream visions were given to mankind it was then that Enoch was translated. Enoch did not die and visit heaven and then come back and then die again and again. He had dream visions before his being translated and had written those visions in his accounts before his being translated.

But now we have the question as to where Enoch was translated. Was he translated to heaven or to Sheol? That is where the interpreter uses his own understanding along with other NT scriptures. If Enoch was translated then that would mean that he could be translated into the celestial ream or Sheol. In this understanding is where the Christian must go to the NT doctrine of the Christ Jesus. [That is if one is inclined to Christianity.] We have nothing to show us what the belief of the Enochian period was and actually the author of Hebrews is very highly controversial also.

Rabbinical Judaism [at this time of Jesus] taught the theology that the nation Israel would collectively enter the abode of Sheol in the afterlife. Every one that was a Jew would eventually be in Sheol as a bodiless spirit. It was believed that Sheol had seven gates that led to seven divisions of either pleasant conscious existence or degrees of punishment. All of this varied under rabbinical authority from one group to another or from one rabbi to another but in this case we are
looking at the NT era of Jesus.

Jesus taught that

1Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Jesus also taught that

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Then again Jesus taught the people that the rabbis were wrong when they taught that David their king had ascended into the celestial realm and the bundle of life.

Act 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

Does not the OT scriptures teach that the conscious spirit of man was in Sheol?

1st Samuel 28:11 vc-115
(11) Then said the woman, Whom shall I bring up unto thee? And he said, Bring me up Samuel.
(12)) And when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with a loud voice: and the woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul.
(13) And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth.
(14) And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up; and he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself.
(15) And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am sore distressed; -------------------

And I ask you then, if Elijah and Enoch were both in heaven was Moses also in heaven? Moses is called to appear with Elijah in the transfiguration of Jesus. Were they both called up from Sheol or both from heaven?

Mat 17:1 -4
(1) And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
(2) And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
(3) And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
(4) Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

Now when you put all scriptures into context you can see that rabbinical teachings and the doctrine of Jesus does not agree. Enoch was not translated up to the heavens but was translated down to Sheol at the time of his translat6ion just as the OT shows and Jesus also declares.

In Christianity theology, the celestial realm was offered to the justified spirits after Jesus died. Then the first gathering of justified spirits who were in Sheol were delivered out of Sheol and into the kingdom of heaven. Those were the first to inherit the kingdom of heaven. The ones who were not justified are in still in Sheol. This is called hell by Greek philosophy.

Now by all of what I posted here will show you that the order of James [brother of Jesus] teaches this doctrine in that Enoch was therefore translated to Sheol and is now in the kingdom of heaven. The purpose of the Christ was to establish His heavenly kingdom of New Jerusalem known to us as the kingdom of heaven.


And you say I rant. How peculiar.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 04:57 PM
link   


In fact, they even claim that she, unlike all other humans, was born without "original sin".


The Jewish Rhabbi's would agree that Mary was born without original sin as they believe everyone is born with original purity. The Jewish Rhabbi's should know, after all, its their book that christains have misinterpreted.

Also two of the Gospels don't mention the virgin birth, neither did Paul/Saul. If someone was verified to be born of a virgin wouldn't that have been an exceptionally noteworthy event to preach? The Gospels that do mention the virgin birth sadly disagree with whom fathered Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). So if those Gospels cannot even get genealogy right, we can presume the inaccuracy occurred because they were written long after the event (aka folklore and not eye witness accounts).

With no virgin birth, no original sin, is Jesus still the son of GOD. Or does he face a demotion to an ordinary man that did extraordinary things. For me this is the greater message, that anyone can attain spiritual enlightenment by conquering their demons. This message has unfortunately been lost in TODAYS christianity. So one needs to ask themselves, is TODAYS Chrisitianity a religion that teaches enlightenment or a cult that denies it. Your call.
edit on 14-1-2017 by glend because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: glend


In fact, they even claim that she, unlike all other humans, was born without "original sin".


The Jewish Rhabbi's would agree that Mary was born without original sin as they believe everyone is born with original purity. The Jewish Rhabbi's should know, after all, its their book that christains have misinterpreted.

Also two of the Gospels don't mention the virgin birth, neither did Paul/Saul. If someone was verified to be born of a virgin wouldn't that have been an exceptionally noteworthy event to preach? The Gospels that do mention the virgin birth sadly disagree with whom fathered Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). So if those Gospels cannot even get genealogy right, we can presume the inaccuracy occurred because they were written long after the event (aka folklore and not eye witness accounts).

With no virgin birth, no original sin, is Jesus still the son of GOD. Or does he face a demotion to an ordinary man that did extraordinary things. For me this is the greater message, that anyone can attain spiritual enlightenment by conquering their demons. This message has unfortunately been lost in TODAYS christianity. So one needs to ask themselves, is TODAYS Chrisitianity a religion that teaches enlightenment or a cult that denies it. Your call.


I concur. Original sin was Paul's idea alone.

A man who never met Jesus and was not even liked or trusted by his friends the apostles, proclaimed himself one, and cursed the apostles Christi taught personally for teaching "another gospel than the on we (Paul's devotees) preached to you."

The gospel no man taught him that was a radical departure from Jesus' teachings and condemned by his brother James. In the Bible at that.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

Yes pauls companion wrote so himself - Acts 9:26..When he (Paul) came to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple.

So if the original disciples believed he wasn't a true disciple on what basis do todays christians believe differently? The man may have suffered from an delusional disorder (1 Corinthians 2:16... “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ) that manifested itself on the damascus road when on a mission to stone even more christians.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: glend


Also two of the Gospels don't mention the virgin birth, neither did Paul/Saul. If someone was verified to be born of a virgin wouldn't that have been an exceptionally noteworthy event to preach? The Gospels that do mention the virgin birth sadly disagree with whom fathered Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). So if those Gospels cannot even get genealogy right, we can presume the inaccuracy occurred because they were written long after the event (aka folklore and not eye witness accounts). With no virgin birth, no original sin, is Jesus still the son of GOD. Or does he face a demotion to an ordinary man that did extraordinary things. For me this is the greater message, that anyone can attain spiritual enlightenment by conquering their demons. This message has unfortunately been lost in TODAYS christianity. So one needs to ask themselves, is TODAYS Chrisitianity a religion that teaches enlightenment or a cult that denies it. Your call.

Please clarify the geneaology problem you have in your above post.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join