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.

 

The Anti-Christian conspiracy

page: 123
16
<< 120  121  122    124  125  126 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Now there's a spot for a conspiracy.

It isn't Rasi's fault nor Madness' fault. etc, but the real conspiracy happened when the pagan roman emperors decided to take over the belief of the followers of Yeshua (Christ), institute it as the same type of religious-state as the pagan one had been, and forcibly enforce - not the teachings of Yeshua, but the teachings of the pope (who was the emperor, even before the popes were named god emperors, their power was absolute). They weren't interested in maintaining christianity. They were interested in maintaing control over the hearts and minds of the people they ruled.

People who tell me that it was the first christian religion, have not done their homework.

Number one. Almost none of the teachings of the HRE (holyromanempire) were based on the bible. Almost none of the traditions were based on the bible. The bible doesn't say a blasted thing about catechism, prayer through an intercessor other than the Holy Spirit, praying to idol statues, saying hail marys, making religious pilgrimages, praying to dead people, beating yourself for your sins or bloodletting for your sins, confessing specifically to a man for the forgiveness of sin and so on, unless you harmed that individual. salvation is through christ, not through the priest or the pastor or the guy next door. although it does encourage you to confess, it says to confess to one another, and nowhere does it say that it must be to a priest. These ideas were all instituted by pagan men, who saw their power slipping away in the wake of teachings which were about loving, not killing, and etc. jesus was very hip and probably one of the first supporters of rights for women.

IT was easy to take a statue of jupiter and call it peter, or a statue of aphrodite/venus,etc, and call it mary and etc. it was easy to change up the days of observance originally established by the old covenant and make them into something else. it was easy to call the sabbath sunday, when all along it was saturday. jesus said to honor the sabbath day and keep it holy. err, when was the sabbath day? according to rome, it's sunday.

it's interesting to note here that the book of daniel in the old testament actually makes mention of a ruler that would come in his future, change the times and the seasons that had been established for at least 2000 years at that point and make them into something they were never meant to be. this was not a prophesy of
christ, who was already foretold by the prophets, but rather a prophesy of a ruler
who would literally change the times and the seasons, something christ never
promoted. but rome did. they didn't just change the observances of the hebrews, they also watered down the christian message and melded it with other belief systems so that it would gather more converts and less resistance as they continued their domination of the world. that's not what yeshua taught either.

in and of itself, there's no harm in acknowledging christ's birthday on christmas, even though originally, it was a pagan holiday and although originally, christ's birthday was more than likely in september. we can acknowledge Yeshua's birthday any day of the year. there's no harm in giving people gifts, and again, any day of the year is a good day to get a gift, really. the problem lies in that it proves these men were not really christians, they were sly politicians who took by force, the good teachings of christ, insisted people not read the teachings for themselves but rather let them be the teachers, and then proceeded to say whatever they wanted. they'd borrow a few buzz words here and there from the teachings, but they'd focus on incidentals that had no real bearing on the salvation message of Yeshua, so that the real issue was completely lost.

the salvation message was not taught. in fact, they insisted on reading mass in latin, no matter what country they were in. often the people had no idea what they were saying and going to church became nothing but a series of deep knee bends.

i said all that, to say this: if the people of that time were falsfying christianity and making it all up as they went along, they sure were doing a shoddy job of it, based on the actual words written in the book they supposedly falsified ( don't let this part trip you up--- they didn't teach it and didn't want anyone to know what it actually said.)

i ask the forgiveness of those who this information has offended, but it is, unfortunately, the truth of the matter.





[edit on 1-12-2006 by undo]




posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 01:31 PM
link   

You have already voted for undo this month.


Rats, I guess I'll have to wait 30 days. Undo, would you say then that the first Anti-Christian Conspiracy is the leadership of the Roman Empire? If not, would you care to name the predecessors? Or explain how it continued through the ages?

Thanks for the B's by the way. Is there a comprehensive listing for the whole alphabet on the topic?

[edit on 1-12-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Undo, great history ofthe Catholic Church, but the question still remains as to whether Jebus (Yeshuah) ever existed. I agree that Catholicism is evil, as is the concept of hell being the destination of anyone who doesn't follow Christ, but it seems that we can also agree that there is no evidence of Jebus existing outside of religious doctrine.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

You have already voted for undo this month.


Rats, I guess I'll have to wait 30 days. Undo, would you say then that the first Anti-Christian Conspiracy is the leadership of the Roman Empire? If not, would you care to name the predecessors? Or explain how it continued through the ages?

Thanks for the B's by the way. Is there a comprehensive listing for the whole alphabet on the topic?

[edit on 1-12-2006 by saint4God]


The first anti-christian? Satan, I do believe. If Yeshua was here from the foundation of the world... well you get the rest of that. I'd elaborate on the entire history of it, but that's a BIG history. I can give a brief listing, based on my research , which may or may not, be entirely accurate (I say this because some spots in the translations and versions of the bible, leave some room to be desired):

1. Satan
2. The Fallen Ones (Nephilim)
3. The Fallen Angels (Progenitors of the Fallen Ones (See #2)
4. The World Empires (Starting with Babylon, and ending some time in our future)
5. The World System, which says, peace peace and yet there is no peace, because it was never about peace, it's about control and domination).

And the list is on my site, based on work collected by archaeologists who were also christians, but many of the items found were not christian-based, but secular archaeology finds. The original site is gone now, but I was thinking ahead and saved their data to a file, then uploaded it to my website when it was no longer available to link to:

www.artapprentice.net...



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Undo, great history ofthe Catholic Church, but the question still remains as to whether Jebus (Yeshuah) ever existed. I agree that Catholicism is evil, as is the concept of hell being the destination of anyone who doesn't follow Christ, but it seems that we can also agree that there is no evidence of Jebus existing outside of religious doctrine.


Raso, the problem is, you're giving them credit for writing stuff they didn't teach nor did they want anyone else to know about them unless they were in the club and agreed to go along with their approach on the topic. They took the writings and hid them from the people. Whereas Yeshua, went out into the streets and taught the people in the languages they could understand, what the good news was. The good news was, you didn't have to do rituals and beat yourself or burn your babies or stone your women. The good news was, forgiveness was available for all in sundry, STRAIGHT FROM THE SOURCE. Now if the same guys who made up the bible and jesus, why would they not teach what jesus taught? Why would they be afraid for you to see what jesus taught? Forget about what paul taught, just look at what jesus said:

"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are they who mourn,
for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the meek,
for they shall inherit the earth.

Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they shall be satisfied.

Blessed are the merciful,
for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure of heart,
for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they shall be called children of God.

Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Gospel of Matthew 5:3-10

Those are some pretty good ideas. Do the meek inherit the earth today? What do you think? What kind of system do we live under?



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
The first anti-christian? Satan, I do believe. If Yeshua was here from the foundation of the world... well you get the rest of that. I'd elaborate on the entire history of it, but that's a BIG history.


Good call. Candidly was curious as to you're answer and think it's spot-on. Hey, some interestingly relevant points I'd found on your link:

Jesus Mt. 1:1 - the Christ, the Son of God

Roman Historians - Tacitus, Josephus, Lucian, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger

About Paul though, he reflects the things Christ taught.



[edit on 1-12-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by undo
The first anti-christian? Satan, I do believe. If Yeshua was here from the foundation of the world... well you get the rest of that. I'd elaborate on the entire history of it, but that's a BIG history.


Good call. Candidly was curious as to you're answer and think it's spot-on. Hey, some interestingly relevant points I'd found on your link:

Jesus Mt. 1:1 - the Christ, the Son of God

Roman Historians - Tacitus, Josephus, Lucian, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger

About Paul though, he reflects the things Christ taught.



[edit on 1-12-2006 by saint4God]


Aye, I deliberately removed that when I copied and pasted it because it doesn't explain the God part of Jesus, it says He was the Son of God, which is true, but He's also more than that, and some people don't get the more than that part. I don't like giving someone who doesn't get it in the first place, only half the answer, if you see what i mean. And since the issue was about the versions of Josephus and not the diety of Christ, I removed it for the sake of the audience.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   
As far as Paul is concerned, that guy is heavy duty and heavy duty doesn't work when you don't get the easy stuff to begin with. Also, Paul, even though frequently inspired, was also just a man, albeit a christian man, he was still capable of making mistakes which may or may not be based on his upbringing (which if you know anything about paul, should speak to the matter of whether or not we should give his words the same weight we give Jesus' words on issues related to things like forgiveness, women and so on. i view his letters the same way i view a good sermon by a pastor. good words, inspirational words, usually true words. good advice, inspirational advice, usually true advice. we take his writings as if they were all prophecy, and of course, they aren't. he doesn't even claim to be a prophet. anyway, that's just my approach to his writings.).



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Undo, that's all well and good, but those ideas cold have come from any one, or group for that matter. There's no evidence that shows it came from the guy who hung from the cross, and was born in a manger, and was born of a virgin.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Raso,

There I would have to point to ancient history as the evidence that such things happened at all. Almost every ancient culture has histories about the gods having hybrid children on earth. These hybrids would become the kings and rulers, with the "gods" working behind them in the background. We assume today, that it is all make believe, but is it really? I don't think so. Just the preponderance of these events suggests something big was going on. But for you to understand it, would require going back threw many thousands of years of historical texts, and you're so pre-conditioned now to think the ancient people were just superstitious idiots, that I'm afraid it would be a waste of our time to even bother. But if you ever get truly interested in knowing the truth of the matter, and haven't already made up your mind that you already know all there is to know about thousands of years of earth history, we can certainly discuss this elsewhere such as via email or on a different thread, to avoid cluttering up this thread or taking it too far off topic.

[edit on 1-12-2006 by undo]



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I should quantify what i've already said about the HRE. Once the people were able to read Yeshua's words for themselves, alot more catholics were able to become christians and not just people standing up, kneeling, standing up, kneeling, put money in the little pot, standing up, kneeling. That's also when the entire paradigm changed, as well. So I wouldn't say that catholics don't know Yeshua today. Today, alot more of them do. Some may practice useless rituals, but if they read the bible, they know the way of salvation, how to go about following Yeshua, and from where their salvation comes and that's what really counts.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
I should quantify what i've already said about the HRE. Once the people were able to read Yeshua's words for themselves, alot more catholics were able to become christians and not just people standing up, kneeling, standing up, kneeling, put money in the little pot, standing up, kneeling. That's also when the entire paradigm changed, as well. So I wouldn't say that catholics don't know Yeshua today. Today, alot more of them do. Some may practice useless rituals, but if they read the bible, they know the way of salvation, how to go about following Yeshua, and from where their salvation comes and that's what really counts.


My but you Christians are a hateful lot, aren't you? Who are you to judge that Catholics practice "useless rituals". Doesn't it say something in the bible about "take this and eat from it for it is my flesh", "take this and drink of it for this is my blood"....isn't THAT ritual behavior??



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   
The Last Supper was a one time event. It would be as though I was a religious figure, we were all eating together, and I asked you to "pass the butter." If I had any followers there would be no reason for them to take that as a commandment to follow through the ritual of "passing the butter" at every spiritual gathering for the next two thousand years.

Martin Luther split from the Catholic Church because many of its practices were unscriptural and had been created to give its leaders more power. Protestants generally abstain from the rituals, except baptism and communion, and then these are only occasional ceremonies, and not regarded as mandatory, but rather as a special thing to do on special occasions. Many Protestant churches hold communion on Christmas Eve or New Year's Eve services. Some factions regard baptism as being mandatory to salvation, but the majority of Protestants see the only "mandatory" ritual to go through to make it to Heaven is to obtain forgiveness from Jesus Christ, and then live the rest of your life for Him.

When people criticize the Christian religion and lump Protestants and Catholics together, it is making a grave error. The two are very different and have fundamentally differing beliefs. Many Protestants believe that Catholics are not even Christians, though I disagree with this view.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 12:45 PM
link   
You christians? lol What is that some genetic impairment, like oh, you men or you women? or what about you humans? I know, let's go for broke, you earthlings! Next it'll be (insert the name of this particular universe) ! And then whatever dimension it happens to be!

Oy. You, you, person you! Did you know persons can be hateful?! It's a social disease, I swear! It's like they believe they actually have the right to think for themselves and it's OH MY GOSH, DID YOU SEE WHAT THAT PERSON DID IN (call up long list of mistakes any person has ever made) 299 BC?! Sheesh and they call themselves people! What were they thinking1



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 01:32 PM
link   
the creator of heaven and earth is the only one I pray to. not man made or man corrupted. people can worship any entity or object they see fit. but human beings don't see killing themselves or others as a part of any religous belief . I think most people are begining to realize that eating meat on fridays and not going to church on sunday/saturdays are NOT going to send them to hell . but what people are realizing is that priests have been raping children and hiding the facts for decades, they been telling us what and how we should be living our lifes for thousands of years, they've been controlling countries and businesses for as long as they have been in power. and who believes that holy wars are at the buttom of all this when we know that their all man made.. who in their right minds CAN believe them when the facts are and repeated history have given us the answers of who and what they are.. It isn't g-- that we question or hate, it's the CORPORATION that we hate. it's a business, money, money, money. and thats their g--.... pray to your g-- but fight the corporation. that's where we're at..



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   
schalib,

Roman culture, from which the Catholic teachings originated, was based on the prior pagan cultures. Are you familar with pederasty? It was a norm in Rome and even moreso during the Grecian Empire. This was incorporated into their religions, their family life and social life. They worshipped the male form, as the most perfect and as a result, killed many of their daughters after they were born. This is the kind of social condition from which Rome and Roman religions evolved.

It was not considered a sin at all, for a male to be interested in and sexually attracted to a male and especially a young male. It was actually the subject of much art and poetry. In polite society, it was the subject of much discussion in which they would compare notes about the beauty of their particular male "apprentice" (young male), who they would train in the ways of life, including sex, religion and social norms (insert altarboy in place of apprentice. same.same). So what you see today has probably been perpetuated down through the millenia, because when it started, it was the norm, not the exception. I'm not promoting it, just explaining why this tradition managed to survive to modern times. You take a bunch of pagan men who were already practicing pederasty, give them a paradigm to follow, stick them in situations where sex with the opposite sex is forbidden and a tradition where the male form is worshipped above all else and wallah. ..



[edit on 9-12-2006 by undo]



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Not to mention all those statues with male genitalia swinging every which way. Queers back then must have gotten positively aroused every time they walked down the street!



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Southern Cross, well if it weren't considered impolite to post naked women everywhere, our society would have nude female statues on every street corner. Hrm, well we are almost there now.


Rome learned somewhat from the mistakes of Greece, as the Grecian empire nearly self-imploded due to the lack of females in their society. Rome started promoting a form of pederasty in which the apprentice was highly encouraged after his apprenticeship to marry a female and have a large family. And that's exactly what we see in the RCC. All the signs are there. This is also why they teach against homosexuality in the community at large, because without a strong family system, empires fall.

[edit on 9-12-2006 by undo]



posted on Dec, 10 2006 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by southern_cross3
The Last Supper was a one time event. It would be as though I was a religious figure, we were all eating together, and I asked you to "pass the butter." If I had any followers there would be no reason for them to take that as a commandment to follow through the ritual of "passing the butter" at every spiritual gathering for the next two thousand years.


Surely you do the whole, drinking wine.. his blood.. and a bit of bread.. his body.. So people do still practice what was preached at the last supper.

I'd say that's very much ritualised.

*EDIT*

*Atleast we're not still sacrificing goats and sheep* (as far as I'm aware)

[edit on 10-12-2006 by shaunybaby]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
Surely you do the whole, drinking wine.. his blood.. and a bit of bread.. his body.. So people do still practice what was preached at the last supper.

I'd say that's very much ritualised.


Christ explains what the bread and wine represent in John 6. Naturally the people "don't get it" so they have to argue among each other whether or not they're supposed to bite him or not until Jesus explains it again.



Originally posted by shaunybaby
*Atleast we're not still sacrificing goats and sheep* (as far as I'm aware)


Have you ever wondered why?

[edit on 11-12-2006 by saint4God]



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 120  121  122    124  125  126 >>

log in

join