It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Excellent Read on Fallen Angels

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2005 @ 01:01 AM

Originally posted by lostinspace
I would like to say that one of the best shows on the SCIFI channel right now is the "New Battlestar Galactica." The religious element of the Cylons is so fascinating. That last episode was real creepy when Sharon got on board the Cylon Base ship and was approached by 20 copies of herself. When the nuke was left some of the Cylon clones of Sharon began caressing the bomb before it exploded.

Did no one notice my comments on the origins of the cross and its connection to the Ancient world to the modern world. I'll have to find a link to show the Susa cross found in the middle east. It has a striking similarity to the one found near Cuba. They both have a plus in the center with a dual outlined plus surrounding it. I found the Susa cross in Zecharia Sitchin's 12th Planet book. The Luwain Hieroglyphic of two crossed ovals represent 'Lu'. The Cretan Hieroglyph of the plus symbol also represents 'Lu'. The word that comes to mind is 'Luminator.' The question is, Are these balls of fire in the night sky friend or foe?

Regarding the bomb adoring cylons, that sounds like a cargo cult type of reaction, which anthropologists noted on pacific islands after wwII.
I would have to double check, but the cross you describe sounds like one at the Lalibela church complex in Africa, which is an amazing site. These churches are completely carved out of solid rock. I will let you know if the double bordered plus sign is in fact on the roof of one of the churches, but I am pretty sure.

posted on Apr, 4 2005 @ 01:05 AM

looks very much like you describe.

posted on Apr, 4 2005 @ 01:11 AM

That is what I was referring to.

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 12:07 AM
Isn't that supposed to be the Ethiopian Church that one of the original copy of the "Book of Enoch?" Other languges have been translated from this copy. The reprint we have today comes from the discovery of three manuscripts in Abyssinia (now Ethiopia) in 1773 by Scottish explorer James Bruce. In 1821 the book was first translated into english by Richard Laurence.

What is really interesting is that the Book of Enoch supports the theory that the 'sons of god' were materialized angels. This specific cross must have some deeper meaning.

I'm trying to hunt down an image of the Sumerian cross of Susa from Iran and display it here. I think I'll have have better luck tracking down the Cuban cross I mentioned and post it here as well.

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 12:25 AM

This is a restored cave painting found somewhere on the Isle of Youth next to Cuba. There's a couple more of these crosses found in caves, but they are not restored, one at Matanzas and the other at Quanacabibe (western tip of Cuba.) It has been suggested by some researchers that it is a mark of the 'Sea People.'

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 12:43 AM

This also forms a cross pattern, with the temple at the intersection. There are three waterways encompassing the city in a circular pattern.

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 04:18 PM

The Celtic Cross seems to have a closer relationship to the layout of Atlantis by Plato because of its circle surrounding the cross.

Wern't the Celts originally from Ireland? This would be another ideal place for the 'Sea People' to have control over because of the Island's location near the Mediterranean.

posted on Apr, 8 2005 @ 06:01 PM
I hunted all over the internet for an image of the ancient Susa Iran disc Cross but could not find it. Originally I find the image from Zecharia Sitchin's book The 12th Planet, page 301. Its not legal for me to scan it straight from the book, so I'll have to describe the disc in 'a thousands words.' You know the saying, "A picture is worth a thousand words."

First draw a circle. Now equally distribute three slightly curved (curved at the same radius as the circle) fine toothed (44 fine teeth and 2 larger outer teeth) combs near the outer edge within the circle. Place three waves, in a stacking fashion and parallel to the length of the comb, in front of the comb stretching from tooth 16 to tooth 31. Put this wave pattern in front of all three combs. The image is being described from the circumference to the center. Now draw a straight line in front of the wave pattern, which is also parallel to the length of the comb, but curve it slightly inwards toward the comb when reaching the outer circle on both sides. The line is somewhat thick. Put this line in front of all three water patterns, which are in front of their each comb. The three lines should now form of triangle. Now draw a circle that would fit nicely in that triangle. Place a black triangle in each corner with one of its sides being the curved portion of the circle. Now place a white inverted triangle within the black triangle. It should look like three black triangles in each corner. The last images are now in the center circle. Draw an outlining plus symbol that fits the entire inner circle (12 lines, not 2 criss-cross lines). Now draw another outlining plus symbol within the one just made. Finally draw a simple plus symbol at the center to match the shape of the two outlining plus patterns.

That's it. This is the ancient Sumerian artifact found at Susa Iran. This is the most elaborate find with the triple plus pattern. I know of only three locations in the world that have this symbol. The first would be from Susa Iran, the second would be from Lalibela Ethiopia, and the third from Cuba. The question is, "Who first invented this particular pattern for their recognition?" My guess it came from Susa originally because the Sumerian culture is the oldest, and that it has the most complex image out of the three.

An interesting thing to note is that the Aztec god Quetzalcoatl is shown wearing a cloak with crosses on it. I'm under the impression that Quetzalcoatl's period was long before the death of Jesus Christ. Some have suggested that crosses on Quetzalcoatl were proof of some sort of influence by the Templar Knights. The Templar Knights were supposed to be a medieval military order employed by the Catholic Church. The same is thought of about Lalibela's rock hewn crosses. They think the rock hewn cross churches were cut in the 13th century A.D., but the age really is unknown.

What's the name of this form of cross and what does it really mean? I doubt it really connects to Christianity. I'm getting the feeling that it was an actual object that radiated a bright light and moved about freely. Kind of like a UFO. An object that acted as a guiding light. Remember the one that led the astrologers to Jesus. Another thing I remembered (I think. I have to watch the program again), they said the objects chasing the war planes in WWI glowed red. Take note of the Cuban image of the cross. There are red circles surrounding the cross.

Can anyone find an image of the Susa cross I explained?

posted on Apr, 9 2005 @ 10:37 PM

Originally posted by dbrandt

Originally posted by OpenSecret2012
2. The person I was responding to, DrBrandt, obviously was tangled up. Just re-read his post:

"God(the real God of the Bible) is certainly giving us plenty of warning through this stuff."

Anyone can see that that makes no sense! Even DrBrandt saw this! That's why he had to add the parenthisis. Compare to saying:

I'm dbrandt not drbrandt.

But.. "Dr" sounds better!

OK, I made a little mistake.

Originally posted by dbrandt
When I say the God of the Bible I mean the one who inspired it to be written. There are entities mentioned in the Bible that people worship as a god but they are either fiction or are associated with satan and deceiving people to think they are on the same level as God.

No matter if the other gods or "other gods" are fake, real beings who are lesser in power than Yahweh, the fact remains whenever any of them are being talked about, they are specifically named by their personal name. Why? So the reader knows which god or gods, is being talked about. Baal or Marduk? The Raphaim or Anakim? The "Prince of Persia" or Gabrial? The Son of Dawn or Jesus (Yehushua or Y'ushuah)?

The Prince of Persia was worshipped as a god. To his followers he was a god. The Prince of Persia beat to a pulp one of Yahweh's angels (more accurate translation of the word 'angel' is : messenger). Yahweh then had to send back up, a 2nd angel, to help out his first angel.

OK, so followers of the Bible know which god is the true god. But what about people who don't follow the bible? When a follower of Yahweh goes to Persia does he say "God demands you worship him!" ?
The Persians would say "Yes he sure does!". The Persians would think it's their god being talked about, not the god of the Bible.
Compare to if a follower of Yahweh goes to Persia and says "Yahweh demands that you worship him!" The Persians would instantly know which god is being talked about. Not the god they worship. Not their god who beat an angel to a pulp. Not their god who took on 2 of Yahweh's angels at the same time.

That's why the god of the Bible told what his specific name is. For his followers, and for non-followers.

Originally posted by dbrandt
So, who did Jesus claim to be? Who does the Bible say He was? First, let's look at Jesus’ words in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.” At first glance, this might not seem to be a claim to be God. However, look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement, “We are not stoning you for any of these, replied the Jews, but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God” (John 10:33).

Yes, Jesus did say "I and my Father are one."
Does this mean they are the exact same person?
OR.... does it, can it, mean something else?
Like... Jesus is saying he and his father are on the same side. Of the same mindset. Working towards the same goals. Need an example? In Genesis when God talks about marriage, and how a husband and a wife leave their parents and will become one. Become the same flesh. Does this mean a husband and wife are the exact same person? That their two bodies morph into 1 body? That their 2 brains morph into 1 brain?
OR... two different people who are on the same side. Of the same mindset. Working towards the same goals?

Look at the scripture that surrounds John 10:33. They are in the same context, on same topic:

John 10:25
Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.

John 10:29-30
My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

30I and my Father are one.

Here, Jesus says his dad gave him his powers. His dad is greater than all, greater than man, and greater than Jesus (since He gave Jesus his powers.) Jesus shows how close he is to his dad by saying they are one. Just like how the Bible (in Genesis) shows how close a husband and wife are suppose to be when it says a husband and wife become one. In the English language, this term the majority of the time refers to two or more seperate people who work as one. The way to tell what it refers to is to look at the surrounding context.

Have you ever heard the English phrase "Of Like Mind"?
One can say "My friend and I are of like mind." "My neighbourhood is of like mind." Does it mean you and your friend share the exact same brain? You and your neighbours share the exact same brain?

The fact that Jesus first repeatedly refers to his dad as a seperate person, shows what context he means when he finally says in this English language translation "My Father and I are one."

John 10:32
Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

John 10:37-38
37If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.

38But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Jesus is again repeating that his powers (the works he does) comes not from him, but from his father. Then he says if he does not do what his father wants, then don't follow Jesus. How to know what his father's will? By comparing what Jesus does and seeing if its in line with the old testement. And what's the intent, and result, of the works, or powers, of Jesus. (He could've been a fallen angel, or a demon, or Satan, or some other being for all everyone back then could've known.)

Jesus then says, forget about him. Look at his works. Look at his results, his intentions. Is Jesus going around killing people? Ruling, conquoring, and lording over people? Pillaging, ravaging, and plundering?
Yes Jesus says Yahweh is in Jesus, and Jesus is in Yahweh. Just like man is made in Yahweh's image, and likeness, the same can be said that Yahweh is in man, and man is in Yahweh. Yahweh is in us, since Yahweh is in us, we are in Yahweh. Same with Jesus, the angels, and other beings Yahweh (the god of the Bible) made. Just like when a husband and wife become one flesh the husband is in the wife, and the wife is in the husband. They're one.

Originally posted by dbrandt
The Jews understood Jesus’ statement to be a claim to be God. In the following verses, Jesus never corrects the Jews by saying, “I did not claim to be God.” That indicates Jesus was truly saying He was God by declaring, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).

Jesus never corrects the Jews, because from Jesus' point of view, there's nothing to correct. Next, the Jews who were confronting Jesus were being influenced by Satan. And/or by demons. (good angels turned bad.) Their intention wasn't to find out for sure if Jesus was a son of Yahweh, or Yahweh Himself. Their intention was to kill Jesus.

If you believe from that one quote "I and the Father are one", Jesus ment Jesus and Yahweh are the exact same person. Even though before it, and after it, Jesus specifically says Jesus and Yahweh are seperate, distinct people..... then you must believe a husband and wife morph into 1 person, 1 body, and are the exact same person after they marry? Since the Bible says a husband and wife become one, become one flesh.

Originally posted by dbrandt
John 8:58 is another example. Jesus proclaimed, “I tell you the truth, Jesus answered, before Abraham was born, I am!” Again, in response, the Jews take up stones in an attempt to stone Jesus (John 8:59). Jesus announcing His identity as “I am” is a direct application of the Old Testament name for God (Exodus 3:14). Why would the Jews again want to stone Jesus if He hadn’t said something they believed to be blasphemous, namely, a claim to be God?

In Exodus 3:14, it is misstranslated on purpose from the original Old Hebrew, and Hebrew! Need more proof? Turn in your Bible to Psalm 83:18. That verse bluntly, explicitly, blatantly, states what God's specific name is. And it is not "I Am". It's not "Lord God", or "God Lord", or "The Lord", or "The God". If you're using the King James Version of the Bible (KJV) then it should have an accurate translation of Psalm 83:18. In the original Old Hebrew and Hebrew it state's God's specific name alllll over the Bible! So even the KJV is roughly 95% accurate translation. But it gets Psalm 83:18 translated right.

Next "I Am" isn't a name. It's a descriptive title. Simular to saying "God is". Or the long version - "God has no beginning nor ending. Time means nothing to God. God simply is."

But let's stick with your example in Exodus 3:14. Let's look at the surrounding verses, which are on the same topic, which means they define the context:

Exodus 3:13-16
13And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?

14And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Pause here a moment. Ummm.... let's see here. God's name is "I Am"... what!? Baal, Marduk, Enki, Jesus, the Son of Dawn, Zeus, Apollo, Anu, and I Am. O..... K. Can you say... a part of the Bible that's been misstranslated on purpose.

15And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, the LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.

Hold it! Hold it! FIRST it reads that God is talking to Moshe. Then God tells Moshe God's name is I Am. But now... God is saying his name is LORD God. What the heck? Oh yeah 'lord' in all capital letters is supppose to be different than 'lord' with the letter 'L' capitalized?!?
Can you say the people who misstranslated the Bible into English can't even do a good job covering their tracks?

16Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt:

Guess what? Muhahahaaaa! Get off your lazy arse, go find a Jewish rabbi who speaks, and read Old Hebrew/Hebrew. And ask to look at his Torah. (Torah is simply the Hebrew word for 'Bible'.) And... guess what's really written in the original Old Hebrew/Hebrew where it says "LORD God"? Here's a hint:

The Hebrew word for 'lord' is adonai. And that word adonai never ever never appears anywhere in the above verses. Nor does it appear in Psalm 83:18.
It's very important YOU see and read this with your own eyes for yourself from a Torah, and/or Jewish Rabbi. IF you really do believe in the Bible, you'll go do this as soon as you can.

You'll be like "What the heck?! 95% of all Bibles are misstranslated on purpose!? And even the best translated Bibles like the KJV are 10% misstranslated on purpose?! I can't believe I'm reading different stuff from the original language that modern Bibles are translated from!"

Originally posted by dbrandt
John 1:1 says that “the Word was God.” John 1:14 says that “the Word became flesh.” This clearly indicates that Jesus is God in the flesh.

In the words of Firemarshal Bill, or whatever was the name of Jim Carey's character on that TV show "In Living Color".....
"Let Me Show Ya Somethin'!!!" :

First, here's the quote you're referring to:

John 1-3
King James Version (KJV)

John 1
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2The same was in the beginning with God.

3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

In the beginning was the Word. OK, let's say this is or was, Jesus back when he was in his non-human form. He's known as "the Word". Since this is an English language translation from the original Old Hebrew/Hebrew let's look at something closely. The letter 'w' is capitalized. This means 'Word' is a noun. A person, place, or thing.

Then it says the Word was with god. Being with someone doesn't mean you and someone are the exact same people. The fact that it even says 'the word was with God' shows that it's likely the Word was one of God's earliest creations. Maybe the first or second creation. (Check out the biography in the Bible on the Son of Dawn, another of the first creations of God.)

Next we get to the part that says 'and the Word was God'. Could this mean the Word and God are the exact same people? If yes, then "In the beginning was God. And God was with God. And God was God". Does that really make sense?
Is is simply saying how close a relationship the Word and God have? The same way in Genesis it says a husband and wife will become one flesh.

Ask yourself, what does "one flesh" mean? Aha!
99% of the time 'one flesh' would mean the exact same person. 'Of the same flesh.' But of course it is not litteral, it is talking about how on a non-litteral level a husband and wife become one person.

On a non-litteral level the Word and God are one person. 2 seperate people, who's goals are soo interwoven, who's relationship is sooo close, that they are one person. If you believe John 1:1 mean the Word and God are the exact same person, then you must believe a husband and wife morph into becoming 1, exact same person - litterally.

Originally posted by dbrandt
Thomas the disciple declared to Jesus, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). Jesus does not correct him. The Apostle Paul describes Him as, “…our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13). The Apostle Peter says the same, “…our God and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1).

Slooow down. No where, in any of those verses, in the original Old Hebrew/Hebrew, does it specifically say Jesus (Yehushua) is the same person as Yahweh.
"God" and "Lord" are titles.

Corinthians 11:3
It states the pecking order.

Now why would the Bible, which you claim you trust and believe, say the head of Jesus is Jesus? Does that really make sense to you?

BTW, let's look at your own examples:
From John chapter 20...

John 20:17-18
17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

18Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the LORD, and that he had spoken these things unto her.

WHOAH! Looooooooooook at that! Jesus exxxxplicitly says he's going to go to his father. Jesus gets even more hardcore! Jesus goes on to say his father is your father. His God, is your God. WHOAH! Looooook at that!
According to you, Jesus is really saying he's going to go to himself? Jesus is the god of Jesus? Does this really, really, make sense?!?

This actually upholds my point that the specific name of a person, has to be used, especially if the person gives what their specific name is. 'Lord' and 'god' are titles, not names.

Thomas rightly called Jesus his lord, his god, since in Corinthians it says the pecking order is Jesus is above man. Jesus is a much, much, higher level being than man. Is man equal to Jesus?
Angels are also higher level beings than man. But the reason why man doesn't call them 'lord' or 'god' is because Yahweh says so.
In the English language, the word lord and the word god are synonyms. (look at how 'lord' and 'god' are used interchangably throughout the Bible. "And God said..." "And the Lord said"...)
Meaning someone who is above you. In Bible times wives called their husbands "My lord'. Sarah called her husband "My lord". Slaves called their masters "My lord".

No where, does Thomas call Jesus by the name Yahweh.

Originally posted by dbrandt
The most important reason that Jesus has to be God is that if He is not God, His death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the whole world (1John 2:2).

Ummm... that verse you give to support your claim that Jesus and Yahweh are the exact same person says they are two different people.

1 John 2:1-2 (King James Version)
1My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

An advocate is someone who represents you. For example, in the English language, a defense lawyer is sometimes called a 'public advocate'. That verse you cite is saying Jesus, is our [us humans] "advocate with the Father". Jesus is our representative to Yahweh.
What does "We have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ" mean to you?

Originally posted by dbrandt
Only God could pay such an infinite penalty (Romans 5:8; 2Corinthians 5:21). Jesus had to be God so that He could pay our debt. Jesus had to be man so He could die.

Let's throughly dissect this, since the claim that Jesus and Yahweh are the exact same person is a very serious claim.

Let's check out the verses you listed that you say back up this claim:

Romans 5:8-19
8But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

No where does that verse say God and Jesus are the exact same person. God (Yahweh) showes his love for us [humans, man] by having Jesus die for us. God made someone named Christ die for the humans.

10For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

WHOAH! Hold it! Hold it! How can someone be their father, and their own son at the same time?
These are 2 seperate people:
1. God
2. His Son

What does the phrase "his son" mean in the English language? "That's his son.", "His son had a car accident.", "His son died during surgery.", "His son attended Harvard for 4 years."

11And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

And here... it says we can get through to God through... God? Or get through to God through another being called Jesus?

12Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

See that? Yahweh is telling what the penalty is, and why it its. It's not an "infinate" penalty. It's because of a human man that sin entered the world. (I have issues with this, but that's for a whole new thread and topic.
God (Yahweh) made a perfect man named Adam. Adam messed up the rest of the human race.
So what's the necessary ransome? The necessary sacrifice? God has to make another man. And this 2nd man God makes has to somehow clear up the mess of the first man God made.

Verses 13-16 repeat this over and over.

17For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

Again, there is no "infinate penalty". No need for God himself to come to Earth and die. It's not that deep of a penalty. It was a perfect human creation of God that messed up. Which means God needs to make another perfect human creation to set things right.

18Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

And... it repeats its point yet again. It wasn't because of God's disobedience humans were made sinners. It was the disobedience of a perfect human that humans were made sinners. Which means the obedience of another perfect human is needed to offset what the first perfect human did. God doesn't need the obedience of God. Satan didn't offer God all the kingdoms of the world.
If Satan had enough power to decide if he could give or keep the Earth from God, ummm.... that'd mean he's just as powerful as God.

Next up, the other verse you give to back up your claim Yahweh and Jesus are the exact same person:

2 Corinthians 5:21
21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

It's very obvious it says he [God (which god? Yahweh)] made him [Jesus] to be a sacrifice for us [humans].
It doesn't say "He made himself to be sin for us."

In the English language
"He made him" - It's talking about 2 different people.
is different than saying
"He made himself" - Is talking about 1 person.

Originally posted by dbrandt
The tit for tat thing on calling Jesus, Jesus or Yeshua is only confusing for people who don't know Him. It is a distraction and is pointless.

No. It's not a "distraction". And no way is it "pointless". It's the truth. Yehushuah is the name of the son of Yahweh. "Jesus" is simply a name whoever translated the Bible from Aramaic into Greek, invented, and came up with.
Even the movie Passion of Christ accuratly, brought this up. It was funny watching people in the audiance turning to each other going "What? How come no one is calling him 'Jesus'?".
Because no one in the Bible ever called him 'Jesus'. Not even his enemies.

Blame Roman Emperor Constantine who 99% watered down the original Bible, the translations, misstranslations, on and on. Do you really want to read the Bible? Take a freeeeee Hebrew course, and read it for yourself in its original Old Hebrew/Hebrew. Many Rabbi's, and Jewish Synagogue's give free courses to anyone. Some charge a fee. But it's not that much.
See how you corrected me for calling you "DrBrandt"? And that's just 1 letter. Jesus and Yehushuah is very, very, very, different. Yehushuah on purpose told everyone to call him Yehushuah.

Now, you, or I, can make our informed choice to go on saying 'Jesus'. But its an informed choice. Since you and I know what his real, true, name is. Many people aren't making an informed choice when they use 'Jesus'. They don't even know that its not the name he used. They don't even know that 'Jesus' is nowhere, nowhere, in the original Bible. They don't even know that 'Jesus' is a name simply invented by whoever was translating the original Bible into Greek. 'Jesus' is a Greek word.

I dare you to look up Psalm 83:18 in your Bible. If your not using the King James Version, then look it up in the KJV.
Next, find a Rabbi, and ask them to help you look it up in the original Hebrew Torah (Bible).

God's specific name appears hundreds of times in the original Old Hebrew/Hebrew Bible. Which is what all other Bibles are supposed to be translated from

Emperor Constantine on purpose had it virtually erased from all Bible versions, all Bible translations. (Psalm 83:18 was toooo blatant to be erased from 5%-10% of Bible versions, and translations, like the KJV.)

There's toooo many Bible verses that leave no room for error, or missinterpetation, when they state that Yahweh and Jesus (Yehushuah) are 2 seperate people. Unless you also believe husbands and wives morph into 1 exact same person cuz hey... the Bible says they become one.

[edit on 10-4-2005 by OpenSecret2012]

posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 02:06 AM

Originally posted by lostinspace

An interesting thing to note is that the Aztec god Quetzalcoatl is shown wearing a cloak with crosses on it. I'm under the impression that Quetzalcoatl's period was long before the death of Jesus Christ.

You're right, there's something very, very, intresting!
You neeeed to check out the book "The Lost Realms" by Zecharia Sitchin. It goes into hardcore detail about Quetzalcoatl, the Olmecs, Toltecs, and all S. American, Cent. American, and N. American ancient history.

Some have suggested that crosses on Quetzalcoatl were proof of some sort of influence by the Templar Knights. The Templar Knights were supposed to be a medieval military order employed by the Catholic Church. The same is thought of about Lalibela's rock hewn crosses. They think the rock hewn cross churches were cut in the 13th century A.D., but the age really is unknown.

The Templars (Knights of the Temple) go back before the Catholic Church. They originated from an occult society. They're an offshoot from an ancient mystery school or secret society. The Babylon Brotherhood, the worship of the Sun, and Sun God. In Egypt, and before that, in Babylon, and Sumar. These ancient mystery schools or secret societies, many, many, times change their names, but keep the same agenda.

(The true history of the KKK for example.)

I strongly recommend you read the book "The Biggest Secret", and after that "And the Truth Shall Set You Free". Both by David Icke. He goes into graphic detail on the origins of the Templars. And of course, at the end of every chapter he lists all his sources.

What's the name of this form of cross and what does it really mean? I doubt it really connects to Christianity. I'm getting the feeling that it was an actual object that radiated a bright light and moved about freely. Kind of like a UFO. An object that acted as a guiding light. Remember the one that led the astrologers to Jesus.

You're onto something!

Modern Christianity has nothing to do with that original sect of Judisim. Jesus and his followers never called theirselves Christians. It was later on that the Romans decided to call them that. During the time Jesus was alive, he and his followers were simply known as "another sect of Judism."

Modern Christianity is 100% paganism. It originated from Roman Emperor Constantine and the big meeting he had at Nicea (or Nice, depending on how one translates the name.) where he formed the foundations *ahem ... invented* the idea of having a Pope, the rest of the church hiearchy, having mass, confession, on and on and... on. Latter on new offshoots came out of this. (Protestants from Catholics. Mormans, Calvanists, Puritans, on and on from Catholics.)

IF you really, really, want to learn the history of the cross, and various types of crosses, you need to read the above two books by David Icke, starting with "The Biggest Secret".

Jesus was never impailed on a cross.
1. It's impossible to put someone on a cross right side up. (with the person in 'standing position'.) The weight of their body would rip the nails through their hands, and the body would fall over.

2. When the Romans did use crosses, they impailed the person upside down. With the feet facing skyward. Both feet nailed together is strong enough to hold up the weight of the body. See the famous movie "Spartacus" and the ending how the Romans hung Spartacus and his men on crosses along the road!

3. Jesus was hung on a stake.
- The Hebrew (and even Greek) word for the object Jesus was hung on, is the same word used to describe the staff Moshe (Moses) used when he challenged the magicians in Egypt. "Stelieos". Jesus was hung on a larger version of the word used to describe the object Moses carried in his hand. What English speakers call a "staff".

The movie "Passion of Christ" touches on this a tiny bit. (One of the reasons the movie is 97% accurate.) Mel Gibson shows Jesus right side up on a stake, but with ropes tied around his arms LOL!

- Famous author Tolkien has a famous quote. "Truth turns to myth. Myth turns to legend." What's the 2 ways to kill a vampire? A cross right? Why?
Because supposivly Jesus died on a cross, which makes a cross 'holy'.

What's the other way to kill a vampire? A.... stake! Right or wrong? Eh? Now why? Hmmmm..... why?

Another thing I remembered (I think. I have to watch the program again), they said the objects chasing the war planes in WWI glowed red. Take note of the Cuban image of the cross. There are red circles surrounding the cross.

They are known as "Foo Fighters". Yeah the rock group took that name to get attention LOL! WW2 pilots stopped talking about them to keep from getting smacked upside the head by their superiors. Some were spaceships piloted by other beings. Either terrestial, or extra-terrestial. (there's a lotta evidence non-human beings live inside our planet, as well as off planet.)

Some of the Foo Fighters were German machines that used 'reverse engineering' from technology other beings shared with the Germans.

Some of the technology the Germans got from raiding varioius Egyptian, and Middle Eastern temples, and libraries to get ancient technology secrets.
(I just loooove asking people "Why do ya think the Germans were in Africa? What were they after?", "Where did the Germans get the idea for the swastika from? What was Hitler, and his crew doing in India when they made many trips there before Germany started WW2?". Everyone, including teachers who want to keep their jobs, always give a blank look, and/or run away LOLOL!)

Can anyone find an image of the Susa cross I explained?

I don't have time right now. Maybe some one else doe?

[edit on 10-4-2005 by OpenSecret2012]

posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 02:37 AM

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII

Originally posted by OpenSecret2012
And... any Christian who sings the most famous Christmas song ever, is... saying God's personal name! Over and over and over! Do you, NoPhobos, celebrate Christmas? (or anyone you know?) I'll bet you've also sung the most famous Christmas song ever! Which means you've been saying God's personal name over and over and over!

Jingle Bells? His name is Jingle Bells?
Or is it Pa rum pa pum pum?
I know it's not Wenceslas.
I give up, just tell me.

Ok, since you say you give up.
The most famous Christmas song sung, which says God's specific, personal name, over and over and over is.........

H a l l e l u j a h

Translate the title and it means:

"Hail to you Jah"
"Praise to you Jah"

More info about God's specific personal name:
Many, many, of the good guys in the Bible had God's name as part of their own names!
Names mean something. Just like Smith, Smithson, Robertson, mean 'son of a smith', 'son of Robert'.

[edit on 10-4-2005 by OpenSecret2012]

posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:25 AM
Pina Chan

I found this image while searching for an image of Quetzalcoatl with his cross covered tunic. I didn't find it, but I found this startling coincidence.
Take note of the four different bulls-eyes withing this bas-relief. It so happens the Cross image found on the Cuban Isle of Youth has four different bulls-eyes as well. As a reminder I posted that image on an earlier post in this thread.
Another thing that caught my attention in this image was the three so-called clouds at the top. They have a very similar shape to the comb pattern found in the Susa Cross I described earlier. To me it looks as though foot prints are walking toward the cloud patterns. The heel implies the direction of movement. The spegetti pattern reminds me of the volcanic burst pattern shown on a stone-frieze of a Tulan warrior escaping the sinking Aztlan.

If you look really close in this image you'll notice a little cross within a circle along with fire surrounding it. It's sitting outside the container with which the main god figure is seen.

This has to be a connection!!!! A Maya/Olmec and Cuban connection to a similar legend of four lesser star beings (foo fighters) and one bright star being.

posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:44 AM
The account of the Foo Fighters seem very interesting. Notice this web site says the Foo Fighter UFO's emitted a bright red to orange glow with a halo effect. The halo effect reminds me of the bulls-eye image on the bas-reliefs.

If I remeber right, Hitler was searching for Atlantis until he prevolked the surrounding nations wich resulted in World War II. Every time you search for clues to the credibility of the Atlantis legend, you find numerous German research papers back from Hitler's day. Did Hitler awake the ancient Foo Fighters of the Olmec-Maya World?

[edit on 14-4-2005 by lostinspace]

[edit on 14-4-2005 by lostinspace]

posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 10:20 PM
The construction of these sites are amazing. I just can't believe the devout Christians would build such structures to worship in. I would say the monuments are a lot older than most think.

That Cross pattern on the top of the building is very unique. What civilization started that pattern?

Lalibela's legend claims that the rock hewn churches were built with the assistance of angels and St. Gabriel. The angel Gabriel of Daniel's day?
Once again mystical beings are responcible for the incredible ancient constructions. Whose side are these powerful beings on? Good or Evil?

Even the other monuments around the area are incredible constructions.

One of the tallest Axumite obelisks, now toppled because of a mad queen.

The priests there even claim they have the ark of the covenant at one of the newer constructed temples.

[edit on 15-4-2005 by lostinspace]

[edit on 15-4-2005 by lostinspace]

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 06:46 PM
looking at the Ethiopian lalibella sructures it occured to me the perhaps a craft descended and then fitted into the structures allowing the occupants entrancre to their particular shrine, which they would enter and converse with preists while having their own chambers, only a thought it could be why we have shrines or possibly an answer to the holy of holies in the solomon temple.

posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 12:34 AM
In reference to the last post, about the stone hewn churches being made to fit landing alien ships is quite an interesting observation. The pyramids of Egypt were recently imagined to be landing platforms for pyramid shaped space ships. I'm talking about the movie Stargate.
It seems that the stone carved building structure at Lalibela is more complex than one of the three egyptian pyramids. Just imagine your task is to chisle out solid rock and as you go down you must keep in mind that it can't be carved with one straight shot down. You include frames that stick out around the wall. Also take note that if a piece of rock was not solid with the other mass it would have broken off from the building. They appear to not have had that problem at Lalibela because it's perfect. You can also tell it's a solid carving from the local geology because of the imperfection natural to the surrounding rock. Just amazing!

posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 01:01 AM

Once again the Cross again appears in a Mayan structure. The cross many may think of is the large post like object above Pacal's body. I have read that some interpret that to be a representation of the Milkyway Galaxy. The star that I am refering to is the one near Pacal's left knee. You'll notice the star image has an 'X' in the center of a circle with rays emitting out from it. This has to be the same star pattern shown in the Pina Chan and the Cuban Isle of Youth image.
Some may say that that star represents Venus and they could be right. If it is Venus the planet then why is it sitting on the container of Quetzalcoatl in the Pina Chan Bas-Relief? This makes me believe that the star actually moves about as an independant body. It's neither a Sun or a planet. Possibly a free roaming being.

Isn't Venus refered to as the 'Morning Star' which would translate Lucifer in Latin.
When Venus is visible right before the Sun washes out the night sky it is called the 'Morning Star' or Lucifer.
When Venus appears in the early evening it would be called the 'Evening Star' which would also translate to Hesperus in Latin.

posted on May, 11 2005 @ 05:29 AM
This is one of my most favorite threads everrrrr!!!

posted on May, 11 2005 @ 09:51 AM

Originally posted by dbrandt
When I say the God of the I mean Jesus Christ.

I just wanted to pop in and point out that no where in the bible does it state that Christ is god. The doctrine of the God being the son, the father, and the spirit is not scripturally supported in the bible. There are actually a list of versus to the contrary.

"Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord" (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29).

"I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside me" (Isa. 45:5).

"To us there is but ONE GOD, the Father, of whom are all things" (1 Cor. 8:6).

Christ himself differentiates himself from the Father in the below passages of scripture.

"I can of mine own self do nothing" (John 5:30).

"My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me" (John 7:16).

"My Father is greater than I" (John 14:28).

posted on May, 11 2005 @ 10:15 AM
for some fascinating interviews about the nephlium go to and listen to Michael Mott, then listen to Dr. Brooks Agnew in the past guest

They are both wonderful. It's free and you don't even need to sing up.


new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in