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.

 

Jesus & Sons - A family business since AD36

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2005 @ 07:45 AM
link   
With all the revelations about the stripe of jesus christ & the Magdala being written & released to the public, some of them well researched & well written with very plausable arguemnets, i ask, how long can the Catholic & christian churches survive.

Faith is not based on rational proofs, but on human necessidad.
I believe that the church will survive scandal after scandal, but with every problem loose more & more credibilidad.

Has the truth about the "REAL" jesus, the desendant of the house of David & heir to the throne of Jerusalem & not the son of god(of which jesus was elected in the consillio of Nicea in 325AD by the first archbishops of the christian church & the emperor Constantine) been a well maintained secret within the church & select groups for milleniums.

Has a well maintained balance been kept between groups like the "Priors Of Sion" & the "Cathars"who have knowledge of the secret, & the church, a balance which is now impossible to maintain, maybe on personal or political grounds.

I find it an extremly possible if not a certainty, that Jesus, as a Rabbi, would have one or more desendants..as within jewish law its compulsary.
If its the case, then Mary wasnt the "prostitue", forgiven and pardoned by him, but his wife.

In the Evangelicos one of the disciples asks "why does he love her more than us" & further quotes "and he only kissed her on the mouth".

But the fact that Jesus was a father destroys his "divinidad", & denys him the stautus of the son of god & thus the cornerstone of the Catholic & christian faiths ceases to exist.

And so the historical truths are & will continue to be denied & swept under the carpet by the church from fear of the loss of its followers & its powers.

The facts about the life of a man, a man of which historically very little evidence exists, who tired to reclaim his throne for himself & his people from Roman occupation and was executed for his efforts has been
chopped & changed by every generation since the begining to suit its own religious and political needs.
Its sad that we will never know the truth while there is a catholic or christian church or faith, willing to distort, hide, change & deny the true facts of its heritage.

If the blood line of jesus does exist, where and who are they ?
Do they have an political agenda ?
Can they claim to be the "true" church.

Personally as a non-believer,i feel that god has no place in politics, but sadly the church, politics and the masses walk hand in hand.
The time has come to tell the truth, for as quoted Jesus himself "THE TRUTH WILL MAKE YOU FREE".



Mod edit-all caps in title,

[edit on 22-5-2005 by asala]




posted on May, 21 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   
The church definetly is losing followers. Here in Ireland something like 250 priests joined in 2003 but only 20 in 2004!



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   
The propagation of lies is not well researched fact. It is clear that Christ did not marry, nor did He fornicate, elsewise He would not have come back from the grave and walked mong people to let them see that He had arisen. Without dying with no sin, His scarifice would not have cleansed us of our sins.

God may not belong in your country, Spain, but the Christian faith is what my nation is built on, and it belongs here.

Interesting that people who do not believe try and understand Christianity, even though the Bible clearly states that the Bible will be a mystery to those who do not believe.


The conspiracy of this thread is clear, although at first I figured this was another thread created by someone who doesn't understand the definition of conspiray and cannot read the directions at ther beginning of each forum. The conspiracy is simply this: "well researched & well written with very plausable arguemnets" pieces of fiction, created to veer people away from God and His plan for salvation. Things are going just as they were prophesied, and this is nothing more than more proof of that.



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   


"Priors Of Sion"


The Priory of Sion was a proven fake. People came forward to confess it was a hoax.



I find it an extremly possible if not a certainty, that Jesus, as a Rabbi, would have one or more desendants..as within jewish law its compulsary.
If its the case, then Mary wasnt the "prostitue", forgiven and pardoned by him, but his wife.


There is no evidence to suggest Jesus was married.



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite


"Priors Of Sion"


The Priory of Sion was a proven fake. People came forward to confess it was a hoax.




Disinformation perhaps? Actually there is lots of evidence to prove Jesus was married. Remember the bible story of how he turned the water into wine? In those days it was customary for the groom to pour the wine also Jesus' mother came to the wedding, only the groom or brides parents came, or something like that....



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Im lost...do you or do you not believe that a man named Jesus did exist during the times of the "Christian" Jesus? The desendant of the house of David right?


Has the truth about the "REAL" jesus, the desendant of the house of David & heir to the throne of Jerusalem & not the son of god


Wether you recognize him as the son of God or not.....you do admit that Jesus did exist...and you also provide "evidence"
the he did exist.

But here you say


The facts about the life of a man, a man of which historically very little evidence exists


Religion aside....was he or was he not a real man?



Its sad that we will never know the truth


But here you are saying the "we" (including yourself) do not know the truth....but you write stuff as if your version is the "truth"



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 12:54 PM
link   


Disinformation perhaps?


Not really, everyone believes it and its a confessed hoax, just like the John titor hoax. Jesus did not marry nore have children, period.



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Research and you will find historical accounts of Jesus in Britain and India following his supposed ascendance to heaven. The truth is out there. You do not need somebody to shovel it down your throat like some evangelist preacher.



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
When I read that the wedding at Canaa was suggested to be Jesus and Mary Magdalene's union, I very meticulously reread the account.
It is hard to refute that the most sensible and literal conclusion, requiring the least mental gymnastics, is that the wedding is His.
Of course many will point to John 2:3, which states Jesus and his disciples had also been invited.
So, if that is all you need to hear to discount the notion of it being His wedding, there is no use reading further........note that it is John who shares this.
To summarize my reasons for thinking Jesus and Mary Magdalene were betrothed:

1. Mother Mary takes charge of supplying the wine when it ran out, an odd thing for a guest to do, when tradition is that the groom's family does so.
2. The couple who are married at Canaa, are curiously anonymous. Why?
3. Jesus supplies the wine, and the mc praises the groom, thereby supporting the traditional responsibility is the groom's family.
John 2:11 states that this is the 1st miracle, reveals Jesus' glory, and the disciples believed in Him.
4. Nowhere in the NT does it mention Jesus' marital status, one way or the other..........why? A valid question, I feel.
5. Three, not one or two, three times He is called Rabbi, a title which has as a firm prerequisite that the man be wedded.
6. So.....if He is not wedded, why does no one notice the obvious and comment on the contradiction?
7. Jesus preached that marriage is good, and divorce is bad. In this case, we are asked to believe that He did not take His own advice,
on top of the half dozen previous suggestive points. I look at Him as a do as I do, not do as I say kind of teacher, how do you see Him?

8. At the empty tomb, who would you predict would arrive at the tomb first that morning? Those who were closest to Him would.
Luke 24:10 "It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James........."
John 1:29 "Behold the lamb of God" This is John the Baptist being quoted, and the lamb of God he is referring to is Jesus.
Revelations 21:9, (note the similar verse numbers, considering both chapters are by John). "Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the lamb's wife."

As to who are his living descendants, perhaps it is the titular Jewish Royal Family, who are also the Austrian Royal Family, The Hapsburgs.

www.nexusmagazine.com...



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Jesus was a rabbi and according to Jewish law MUST have been married to be a rabbi. Though the bible never says that Jesus was married, the bible doesnt say that he WASNT married either. If Jesus was married, he could still be sinless in having a child and even having sex. As long as you are married to a woman and not having sex outside of the marriage, no sin is being committed. The bible is clear on that. But we just dont know.

I've been facinated by this for years. And I personally would LIKE to believe that Jesus and Mary had children and that the bloodline continues. But at the same time, I am a joint heir with Christ, therefore EVERY Christian has the blood of Jesus in them.

For anyone to claim for certain that Jesus did or did not have children is just ignorance. They were not there and there is no known facts to point one way or another (although there may be in the secret chambers of the Vatican Library).



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Jewish virtual library
The Talmud tells of a rabbi who was introduced to a young unmarried rabbi. The older rabbi told the younger one not to come into his presence again until he was married.

I read that to mean there are/were unmarried Rabbis.

As TC pointed out, this 'Jesus was not the son of God' doesn't fly to far with many people. I view threads like that as deliberate attacks and disinformation at its worst.

I know the claims about his secretly having children that went to Europe and therby the Merovingian line came about and other stories. I don't believe any of them. They are nothing more than propaganda as far as I'm concerned. Someone someplace trying for a tie to something that is not there.

*edit to add:

The Cathars were heretics- they weren't Christian and certainly knew no secrets worth enough to save them. The Catholic Church destroyed them.

Priors of Sion a hoax? Hmmm, I'll think on that.


[edit on 22-5-2005 by JoeDoaks]



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas CrowneThe propagation of lies is not well researched fact. It is clear that Christ did not marry, nor did He fornicate, elsewise He would not have come back from the grave and walked mong people to let them see that He had arisen. Without dying with no sin, His scarifice would not have cleansed us of our sins.
As per below, there is nothing clear about his not having a wife. You might as well presume that every one of his followers save for Peter, also was not married, simply because there is nothing within those 4 books that clearly states so. There is also no evidence, in fact, even less evidence than a marriage, that he died anywhere between the age of 30 and 33, yet, that is what is commonly touted.


God may not belong in your country, Spain, but the Christian faith is what my nation is built on, and it belongs here.
Purely a bombastic tactic meant to minimize and insult the poster, especially when Spain was a country immersed in Christianity long before your forefathers ever considered crossing the Atlantic.


Interesting that people who do not believe try and understand Christianity, even though the Bible clearly states that the Bible will be a mystery to those who do not believe.
Yet another attempt at minimization and insult. Perhaps you are of the belief that there are those who were once believers, and who not by by studious due diligence, but ignorance have come to see the farce in the teachings, or perhaps you simply choose the easy route which is to console yourself that they never were believers to begin with, since rationalizing such rejection and dismissing same is far more comforting to your own belief. The Bible also clearly states to beware of false prophets, I can see no better way for the supposed devil you deal with to manipulate you into believing his word simply by including that disclaimer in words he caused to be written. You have no proof either that he did not, nor that anyone truly believing in the real God wrote those words.


The conspiracy of this thread is clear, although at first I figured this was another thread created by someone who doesn't understand the definition of conspiray and cannot read the directions at ther beginning of each forum. The conspiracy is simply this: "well researched & well written with very plausable arguemnets" pieces of fiction, created to veer people away from God and His plan for salvation. Things are going just as they were prophesied, and this is nothing more than more proof of that.
Correction! The Bible is by implication considered a conspiracy.


Infinite-There is no evidence to suggest Jesus was married.
Not really, everyone believes it and its a confessed hoax, just like the John titor hoax. Jesus did not marry nore have children, period.
There is even less information that he was married, yet you believe he was not. Everyone believes it? What exactly does everyone believe, and where is the world wide poll of all the billions living today and those past to prove this?



posted on May, 22 2005 @ 11:49 PM
link   
JoeDoaks wrote "The Cathars were heretics- they weren't Christian and certainly knew no secrets worth enough to save them. The Catholic Church destroyed them."

I don't believe that there is any evidence to support that the Cathars were not Christians. Their "crime" was that they were not only not part of the Roman Church but they openly criticized the Roman Church for being so preoccupied with accumulating wealth and power. The Cathars had a firm belief in their vows of poverty and chastity and, well, they were pretty extreme. They were also, in many instances, dualists and believed that John the Baptist was probably the real messiah but that Jesus was a great prophet. It's hard to know because virtually all their documents were destroyed and what we know of them comes largely from what their RCC critics wrote about them.

To write that the Catholic church "destroyed them" is truthful but not entirely accurate - the armies of those Popes tortured and slaughtered them wholesale! Men, women, and children (unarmed and putting up virtually no resistance) were hacked to death and burned at the stake! I'm not sure that there can ever be any atonement for such heinous crimes committed in the name of Christianity.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Al Davison
I don't believe that there is any evidence to support that the Cathars were not Christians. . . .
They were also, in many instances, dualists and believed that John the Baptist was probably the real messiah but that Jesus was a great prophet. It's hard to know because virtually all their documents were destroyed and what we know of them comes largely from what their RCC critics wrote about them.

While much if not all about the Cathars is obscured by legend and bare surviving records some beliefs about them exist. By your own statement they weren't Christians.


Gnostic traditions
Through a life dedicated to ever increasing purity, the composite nature of man can undergo a double death and transfiguration, so that the formed spirit, born of the spark and nourished in the soul, will eventually separate, returning to the Light. The rigorously ascetic discipline necessary to achieve this state was available to the "Parfaits" (or "perfects"), master adepts, and a lower grade of adepts. The masses, or "believers" as they were called, were allowed to live fully in the ways of the householder, and understood that they were enmeshed in cycles of reincarnation to be reborn on Earth.
-and-
They held to the tenet that Christ was cosmic, (and so could not have been crucified), suicide was sacred . . .

Here's an Amazon page listing some of the books about them. I've read three books relating to some aspect of them, one was supposed to be 'definitive.' I didn't get any 100% understanding from it.

- the books fell far short of their mark, but what is on the above web page fairly describes what the authors of the books stated as well.

I am no Cathar expert nor do I claim to be. It is my understanding that they were not Christian. By reading just the above snippets they clearly fall outside Christianity.



To write that the Catholic church "destroyed them" is truthful but not entirely accurate - the armies of those Popes tortured and slaughtered them wholesale! Men, women, and children (unarmed and putting up virtually no resistance) were hacked to death and burned at the stake! I'm not sure that there can ever be any atonement for such heinous crimes committed in the name of Christianity.

If a people cease to exist they are destroyed even if remnants survive.

We can beat up the Catholic Church in another thread.

The Cathars are also rumored to have had the grail (Templars claim the same). Exactly what the grail was is open to speculation, some claim the skull of John the Baptist.

The Cathars are also rumored to have had a subterranean 'city.' Some of the 'crusaders' spent much time searching for the opening hoping to find the wealth of the Cathars.

One of the better Cathar sites I have found is a military related site. The site delves a little deeper into the Cathar phenomenon than most sites.

As to the Priory of Sion, probably a hoax taken from the Order of Sion:


fiu edu/posseur
According to the "prieure documents," a conclave of Calabrian monks who left from the Belgian Abbey of Orval in 1090 helped secure the election of Godfroi de Bouillion as de facto king of Jerusalem during the First Crusade (but as is well known, he refused the title, accepting only Defender of the Holy Sepulchre), based on their belief that he was a descendant of the Merovingians, and by that fact, according to these documents, also a descendant of King David through Jesus and Merovech. In return, Godfroi secured their installation into an Abbey on Mount Sion. These documents also claim that the Ordre of Sion and the Order of the Temple (officially, the Poor Knights of the Temple of Solomon, later known as the Knights Templar, and officially recognized as such in 1118) were, until 1188, one unified organization with the same leadership.

True or not? Dates seem fluid in this era as well as claims. It is difficult to state something happened on a certain date.

Add the Templars and the Cathars- sprinkle Merovingian lore with pagan crusades and fairly continuous timeline exists for groups claiming Jesus' bloodline or is it John the Baptist?

The Templars suffered the same fate as the Cathars for many of the same reasons. Heresy and money.




posted on May, 23 2005 @ 09:29 AM
link   
JoeDoaks - I could not see your Amazon list but that is a good site for someone who wants to get a "quick read" on the Albigensian Crusade.

I looked at the bibliography of the site and found a book I have just finished reading:
The Albigensian Crusades
Joseph R. Strayer. Dial, New York, 1971; re published with an added Epilogue by Carol Lansing that explores aspects of the Cathar 'heresy' (U. of Michigan, 1992).

Strayer uses many of the same source materials as were listed in the bibliography of this site. The Epilogue material contains what are believed to be some of the Cathar ritual texts.

Recommended readings, for certain! This seems to be the most "swept under the rug" of all the Crusade histories - the only Crusade against other Christian sects and the only one fought solely in Europe. I guess since it was mostly just a slaughter, without any glorious battles, it doesn't rate it's own movie.


OK, I'll stop hijacking, now.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Browser bug!

Well, wow.

Anyway, amazon and Cathar. Probably get the same page.

I read the book you refer to. Good history, paints a sordid tale indeed. However, I found it lacking regarding 'the Cathars.'

What were they really?

What exactly did they believe?

What other groups were they tied to (if any)?

If they lived such simplistic lives then where did their rumored wealth come from and what did they do with it?

Were they tied to the Merovingians?

Was there a Templar connection?

Lots of unanswered questions.

We still disagree on the Cathars being Christians.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Yes, if you understand why Jesus was here and what He had to do in order to be successful, you know what He did or did not do. As He was God in the flesh and the disciples were disciples, I need not know the marital status of the disciples in order to know Christ's.

As far as the accusation that I am trying to insult or minimalize by stating what the Bible states, that is an attempt to duck. You are attempting to pick apart my belief and render it impotent by claiming that Christ was a sinner and a liar. I respond by stating what the Bible states.

Again, you claim I am being Bomabstic and attempting to insult by clearly stating that my country's nation is based on Christianity whereas your country, Spain, might not be. I have no idea about your country, nor am I knowledgeable of your country's founding documentation, nor do I care. I was stating that this belief is the foundation of my nation.

You seem to be a bit sensitive, looking to be insulted. Or, you are merely trying to divert redress.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 01:48 PM
link   
I had no idea that Alabama was a nation.

The claim that the USA was founded as a "Christian nation" has been debunked to death - no need to repeat all of that.

------- while I'm typing ------
JoeDoaks: I'm not claiming that the Cathars were Christian. The Cathars claimed to be Christian but I make no claims about them, myself. [I did say in an earlier post that they were Christian - I was repeating the historical records that I have read.] I'm hardly an authority as to who is and is not a Christian (only Jake1997 can do that).

The term "heretic" sends shivers up my spine, though! It's a word that was historically followed almost immediately by torture, rape, pillage, burning, execution, seizure of properties, slaughter of women and children, witch hunts, pograms, and well you get the idea...

[edit on 23-5-2005 by Al Davison]

[edit on 23-5-2005 by Al Davison]



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Al Davison
I had no idea that Alabama was a nation.

Well it is! NASA, Supercomputer and Mercedes!

I'll probably regret this in another thread or a later post in this thread- Al you are


You're O.K.

On the Cathars- did you ever to come some kind of conclusion as to what the grail was?


Did you ever wonder about a Merovinginian tie-in?



posted on May, 24 2005 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Yes, if you understand why Jesus was here and what He had to do in order to be successful, you know what He did or did not do.
I understand full well why he was here, because his mother and father copulated. Now as to what he did while alive is far better discerned from the comprehensive writings of Flavius Josephus than the silly stories called parables and the disjointed tales of his adult life as told by those we know absolutely nothing about. He did what he had to do indeed! He like Simon the magican fancied himself the warrior saviour and brought about nothing but death and destruction against his own kind by his own sword and lust for power. Were you at all interested in facts, you would acquaint yourself objectively with that history.


As He was God in the flesh and the disciples were disciples, I need not know the marital status of the disciples in order to know Christ's.
God being omnipotent has absolutely no reason to create a subsect of himself in human flesh, and one at that who kept telling everyone that they are not to repeat his words, or say he was the saviour. And one who most importantly fled like a scared rat from his hunters. Your God according to Revelation has the ability to notify the entire world of his power by a mere representation in the sky, but he must hate his creation so and be so sneaky and vengeful that he would rather play insipid little games of trickery, I suppose.


As far as the accusation that I am trying to insult or minimalize by stating what the Bible states, that is an attempt to duck. You are attempting to pick apart my belief and render it impotent by claiming that Christ was a sinner and a liar. I respond by stating what the Bible states.
Now who is ducking? I expect nothing less than your refutation to same because you have not the humility to admit to your guilt. And if you think I pick apart your belief, then you must also be contemptuously single minded since you cannot see that you are employing deflection to bolster an obviously bruised ego. And I really do not care what your Bible states, it is laden with holes, contradictions anomalies and outright fantasy.


Again, you claim I am being Bomabstic and attempting to insult by clearly stating that my country's nation is based on Christianity whereas your country, Spain, might not be.
Refer above the same response applies.


I have no idea about your country, nor am I knowledgeable of your country's founding documentation, nor do I care. I was stating that this belief is the foundation of my nation.
Nor I might add, do you have any knowledge of Spain either, you just spit out your darts and aim for the stated country. Further, you have nothing to support your claim that your country thinks this way, that is just a motherhood statement.


You seem to be a bit sensitive, looking to be insulted. Or, you are merely trying to divert redress.
Please, find a better defensive posture.

[edit on 5/24/05 by SomewhereinBetween]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join