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.

 

Hidden Agenda behind Inquisition; Censoring Scriptures via Murder

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Definition of Heretic Scripture:

Anything that would empower the masses and set their spirit free and become totaly aligned with the creator of all things.


The few keep the knowledge hidden for their own use and evil purposes=the few control the masses.


I always wondered why the Bible and even many other mainstream Books,, Torah, Quran, etc never solved mans dilema no matter how much they adhered to the so called truthful holy teachings. Not even (New Ageism, Freemasonry, Paganism, Witchcraft,Atheism,Gnosticism, Agnosticism, Pure Science,Budhism,Hinduism, Satanism, Luciferianism), and all their offshoots and variations


Hopefully in time we will all surrender and know the truth.




posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 06:31 PM
link   
#1: What do you find unconvincing about the historical info gathered at www.truthquestonline.info ? History can be spun, but not invented.

#2: Knowing a Rosicrucian is how I know about the Rosicrucian version of the Book of Jasher, and that it differs greatly from the released version, and what's missing.

#3: Dominicans or Jesuits may not have been involved directly with Salem witch trials, but they instigated it with their practice of persecution as a religious practice. It was inquisitional activity. And inquisitional activity continued until 1917 in Russia, though not officially. Vladimir and son Yaroslav are Googlers for that.

#4: It started Dominican, but Jesuits surfaced in control before it was over. Protestant Reformation era. www.reformation.org...

#5: www.cl.bas.bg...
has this list of books used by Bogomils, who had alot in common with Cathars; Oration on the Cross & Two Outlaws by Saint Gregory, Legend of the Cross by Father Jeremiah, Secret Book of Bogomils, On Adam and Eve and the End of the World, Vision of Isaiah, & others that are available widely.

#5: You keep implying that I believe with certainty that these books and all others not in the Bible are authentic. I've not read those books to discern that. That's the point. I'd like to be able to read ALL the unpublished works before I judge. I've not read the ENTIRE Dialogue of the Saviour to judge if it's Christ either, only little pieces of it. That's why I'd like the Vatican to release the contents IN FULL. What little of it is in Nag Hammadi library, I see no heresy in. Christ could read and write & he knew who he was, so why wouldn't he write books, as is the tradition of prophets?

#6: One can only read the Heliand in the lost Saxon language, which keeps it obscured from widespread reading. According to my library notes, The New Testament part of Heliand and the unpublished Junius II (at least before internet), are titled Christ and Satan, which the Cathars also had. It's a pattern that that particular scripture is not widely read, though most of the formerly secret scriptures are.

#7: The Napoleanic hat logo of yours makes you look a fan of masonic depopulation games, & because I expose them somewhat, and you question instead of post contrary info, as if I surely lied, is what makes me think U could be a mason defender on the job as moderator. Again you called Saxon Christians barbarians, which is an insult to Christianity and Germans, being a moderator, which shows you're secure as moderator/character assassin/propaganda expert here. Psalm 37:22 KJV or 36:22 other versions, 1 Timothy 1:20, 1 Corinthians 5:5.

#8: Illuminati style masonry took over about the time of the US revolution, led by Weishaupt, but the ruling Illuminati clans were already around. "Bloodlines of the Illuminati" by Fritz Springmeier. Skull & Bones was Illumnati founded, so post a link to prove me wrong.
wwwinfowars.com... or read "Fleshing Out Skull & Bones" via wwwGoogle.com...

Ralph Epperson is a historian who was assisted by 33rds in gathering his info. If you don't believe him, you don't believe what the masons said themselves. www.ralphepperson.com... has the New World Order video in which he explains the meaning of the Fez hats. Yes, Fez was emptied and reoccupied around 800AD, according to historian Epperson; founded around 800AD after emptied. Of course the international group will not publicize it, and can suppress info as the secret scriptures were until exposed by the Qumran & Nag Hammadi finds.

I'm 51 years old. I was a career outlaw, dealing with mafia, NSA, and Hells Angels, besides warring with robber gangs. The worst of criminals ARE freemasons. The mafia was founded by freemason Mazzini as a secret masonic order. (Epperson fact researchable). I learned that by almost becoming a "made man" (33). I was told I'd have to ritually kill anyone of any sex or age they chose, even if friend or family, as initiation, & I refused. Father Malachi Martin in an interview with artbell.com exposed a similar initiation within the Jesuit Order (masonic). He was pushed down stairs they say, for it.

#10: To you it's unimportant to see what's in the hidden writings, being apparently faithless. I've witnessed supernatural events, and cannot be faithless now. My quest is as a student of prophecy from ANY source, including the obscured writings. Whether those writings are spurious or not, I cannot compare without being allowed to read for myself. Only recently have I been able to read the Gospel of Peace, in my decades old research of prophecies. I found a Catholic branch mystic nun giving expensive classes about it, but was told I cannot even read it for myself if paying $450, then.

It is supposedly another book by Christ, one of 5 alleged books of his. I see no reason to say it is impossible. It lacks the prophecy I'm after however, like the others that I CAN read ENTIRELY.

You'd have us believe that the Bogomils and Cathars were exterminated without the Vatican keeping any of their scriptures their "heresy" was based upon before torture killed by Catholics. If so, ALL the books of all the heresies must have been burned instead of in the Vatican archives, from whence the once secret writings of the Apocrypha came.

Can't exterminate religions without exterminating their religious books also, or storing them away.

*Mod Edit: Once again removed "Big Quote," please review your Inbox at the mCenter, and read your U2U's*




[edit on 19/9/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 07:23 PM
link   
At least you admit you're defending freemasons as a relative of some. Unless you're 33rd, you don't know it all. 33rds don't argue with me because they're sworn to secrecy, regarding masonry.

#1: I have the Dialogue here, & every publication I've found is very INCOMPLETE. Let me know when I can read the rest somewhere. You say Dialogue spoke of Jeshua as someone else; in what verse? You say it was written after the crucifixion, so please post evidence, because the masons I've known are liars.

#2: What translation do you say is most accurate and why, (in English)? Latin Vulgate is in my opinion and the Hebrew translations expert on with Noory.

#3: You imply that there never were any murder rituals of Baal/Moloch, other than in the Bible. www.infowars.com... has film of a murder ritual of Moloch performed by VIPs in robes at Bohemian Grove, as is TRADITION there. Do you claim they made up those rituals based on nothing? Did you investigate the altar of Moloch at Carthage Tunisia & its' history of ritual murders? Moloch is of Baalism, which went from Baalbek Lebanon to Babylon to Tunisia, and is even involved by name with the Scottish May Day BELtaine traditions of whoredom & infidelity, and fire gatherings.

Did Elijah slay 450 prophets of Baal for no reason? Jehu used his initiation as a trap for all the Baalists in Israel to be killed & was blessed 4 generations by the Lord in 2 Kings 10:19-30 KJV, or 4 Kings other versions. Psalm 137:8-9 KJV or 136:8-9 other versions refers to avenging the Babylonian child murder rituals of Baalism.

#5: You say report to the cops? What a joke to me, who has witnessed 2 very serious evidence coverups when I previously did just that. NSA deputy police chiefs can call national security and remove any evidence about anything, and I don't trust gov enough to let them in my place for anything. I long ago sold coc aine I'm told was supplied by NSA. March 15, 2000, Seattle Times: "Weapons cache stuns veteran agents" about when my NSA connection Doug McAlpin died. Paper said he had a clean record, but he held the record for most coc aine ever seized in Snohomish county in late 1980, but only because his wife died & EMTs saw evidence. He got a slap on the wrist for 2 & half pounds coc aine, 5 auto M-16s, & a bale & half of Columbian herb, when gov was handing out 30 year sentences to small timers. Not only was his record wiped clean, he got licensed to sell arms. He had 300 Chinese tripod machine guns when he died.

If Shriners aren't freemasons, why do masonic gifts & accessory sites also have Fez hats? And what DOES the Fez hat represent, IF www.ralphepperson is wrong about it? Why the ritual knives and swords in freemasonry?



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
At least you admit you're defending freemasons as a relative of some. Unless you're 33rd, you don't know it all. 33rds don't argue with me because they're sworn to secrecy, regarding masonry.

Nope. I'm not a Mason and haven't ever been one.


#1: I have the Dialogue here, & every publication I've found is very INCOMPLETE. Let me know when I can read the rest somewhere. You say Dialogue spoke of Jeshua as someone else; in what verse? You say it was written after the crucifixion, so please post evidence, because the masons I've known are liars.

Yes, it's incomplete and will ALWAYS be incomplete because the only manuscripts we have are damaged by time. The Dialogue speaks of Jesus in the third person. You know that from reading the dialogues.

I agree with other scholars that it appears to be composed from at least four different souces, so it's not exactly an original The dates seem to be without dispute, based on other sources that talk about these writings plus the literary style and use of language and (I believe) radiocarbon dating and other archaeological dating.:
www.earlychristianwritings.com...

I haven't dated these myself. I'm going off opinions of sources that I have confidence in.


#2: What translation do you say is most accurate and why, (in English)? Latin Vulgate is in my opinion and the Hebrew translations expert on with Noory.


I'm not sure why you feel Noory would be an expert or would know an expert. He has people on who contact him. His program is not a forum where someone like Martin van Creveld would appear. In fact, the only self-proclaimed "hebrew scholar" on his show that I've heard about is Zechaira Sitchin, whose scholarship is beyond abysmal.

If it was Sitchin, I think you should not accept his decision of what is accurate and do some more research on your own.

Which is most accurate depends on which source documents they have. There were three collections of documnts... and the sources for the Vulgate Bible is not the most ancient collection:
cgg.org...

Most *literal* appears to be "The Christian Bible":
www.theexaminer.org...

NIV is supposed to be the "closest to the original meaning."
www.theexaminer.org...

There are quite a number of differences in the Hebrew version of the Septuagent and the Christian, including at least one book (Jeremiah) that is considerably shortened:
students.cua.edu...

Different books, in many cases (the "Old Testament" was supposed to be the Hebrew texts that Jesus would have read. Although the Torah *had* been compied by the time of the birth of Jesus, the Christian OT doesn't accurately reflect the list:
gbgm-umc.org...



#3: You imply that there never were any murder rituals of Baal/Moloch, other than in the Bible. www.infowars.com... has film of a murder ritual of Moloch performed by VIPs in robes at Bohemian Grove, as is TRADITION there.

* How is a modern videotape a proof of any ancient deity? I can do a videotape of people worshipping the invisible fairies that hold my underwear up. You've got to have a better chain of evidence than a blurry video with poor quality audio.
* Nobody in the tape shouts Moloch, now do they?
* They do say it's the death of "Dull Care" and it's an effigy. So what proof do you have that the figure is NOT an effigy?


Do you claim they made up those rituals based on nothing?

No, they're a leftover from the secret fraternity rituals of the 1900's. What proof do you have that they are NOT fraternity rituals?


Did you investigate the altar of Moloch at Carthage Tunisia & its' history of ritual murders?

If you had checked my link, you'd see that I had. The "tophet" is found near a cemetary dedicated to the goddess Tanis (not the god Moloch) and it's there where the burned bodies were found.

My links included information from archaeologists indicating that the "sacarifice to Moloch" didn't exist ...and here's another link showing that the information you're giving us is based on the fictional novel by Flaubert:
archaeology.stanford.edu...

Do you have any scholarly sources that show that Moloch was a real god?


Moloch is of Baalism, which went from Baalbek Lebanon to Babylon to Tunisia, and is even involved by name with the Scottish May Day BELtaine traditions of whoredom & infidelity, and fire gatherings.

Do you have any proof (scholarly) of these links? Or are you simply relying on Coast to Coast to feed you information?


Did Elijah slay 450 prophets of Baal for no reason? Jehu used his initiation as a trap for all the Baalists in Israel to be killed & as blessed 4 generations by the Lord in 2 Kings 10:19-30 KJV, or 4 Kings other versions. Psalm 137:8-9 KJV or 136:8-9 other versions refers to avenging the Babylonian child murder rituals of Baalism.

I've just shown you that the books of the Bible are not complete and there's problems with translations. How do you intend to prove this from sources other than the Bible.


If Shriners aren't freemasons, why do masonic gifts & accessory sites also have Fez hats? And what DOES the Fez hat represent, IF www.ralphepperson is wrong about it? Why the ritual knives and swords in freemasonry?

You misunderstood... Shriners are a group within the Masons. Not all Masons are Shriners, but all Shriners are Masons. Masons don't wear the fez.

And the Fez does come from the town of Fez, Morocco, but it's based in the romanticized Orientalism of that time period, The idea of making it a "mystic order of Arabian nobles" came from its founder, who was an actor:
www.ben-ali-shriners.org...

www.lgfo.org...


[edit on 18-9-2005 by Byrd]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
#1: You imply that there's no way the Vatican could possibly have the Dialogue of the Saviour, to be able to complete it. That's not based on any Vatican statement. It was included in Nag Hammadi because it WAS accepted as valid. You expect me to believe that's the only copy there ever was, in Egypt? Be realistic, the Vatican excluded it from the Canon and hid it because of what's in the missing parts.

#2: The Hebrew scholar was NOT sitchin, though I forgot the name, I know who Sitchin is. Noory's credibility is irrelevant; some guests are kooks about kooky things, but Biblical scholarship is another matter. Typical of naysayers to attack any source, even if not identified.

#3: I never said Latin Vulgate is the most ancient version! misrepresenting me backfires. NIV & CB is a joke, as the most accurate versions. Maybe to whatever sect uses those versions it is. But See if the name Lucifer is censored from Isaiah 14:12; see if the ORIGINAL word herb is replaced by the nonsensical word vegetables in NIV in Romans 14:2-4. Note all the different wordings of 2 Thessalonians 2:8, and tell me which is truest. I only accept Latin Vulgate as most accurate still.

You think you can fairly discard the historic Bible as evidence of Moloch rituals & Baal murder rituals? Tents of Moloch were brought along in the Exodus & condemned. You pretend Moloch has nothing to do with the Bohemian Grove rituals, but why does Alex Jones say it is Moloch rituals then? Either he's making it up or you are, and he's got the history of the Grove there also to back him up, at www.infowars.com . I believe Alex over a mason defender anyday. I believe the Bible over a mason defender any day also. Historic facts CAN be hid, as the Church proved by keeping the Apocrypha secret for centuries, ETCETERA!

#4: I've never even heard of Flaubert before you, & I base nothing on him. You forgot to explain why Fez hats are worn so widely, to commemorate what, if not the depopulation of Fez before the repopulation, as told by historian www.ralphepperson.com ?

Church of Satan, the mafia, KKK were all freemason founded. Are you proud of being on their side to deny and dispute anything against them? You have no credibility with me.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
It was included in Nag Hammadi because it WAS accepted as valid. You expect me to believe that's the only copy there ever was, in Egypt?


Actually, that's another point where I differ with you.

Although a lot of pro-anything-but-the-status-quo types have jumped on the Nag Hammadi scrolls as a major theological find, their real value is more literary and archaeological than important from the standpoint of the history of religion.

One of the MOST disputed questions regarding the Nag Hammadi scrolls concerns WHY they were buried in the first place, and whehter they represent any community's (or even any individual's) core set of beliefs.

Just because a bunch of books are together doesn't mean they were considered important books. It also doesn't mean they were grouped for a reason.

Part of the problem presented by the Nag Hammadi texts is that they don't represent a coherent viewpoint; they contain a smattering of what might be called "proto-Christian" texts, right along texts that deny the historicity of Jesus' incarnation. They contain some works that have a definite semitic flavor, while others seem more like a pastiche of pagan gnostic belief-systems.

Just because these books are all buried together doesn't tell us what they burier(s) believed.

See, here are some alternatives, NONE of which can definitely be disproved:

1. These books were the property of a monastery, and were hidden to avoid having them destroyed by the mainstream church. This is the Elaine Pagells school of interpretation.

2. The books were voted to be heretical by the body of monks in an early monastery, but were not burned because the contain the names of God the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. So they were buried as a means of removing them from the library, without denigrating the holy names. There are historical precedents for monks voting on the legitimacy of manuscripts, as well as communities refusing to burn texts that contain the holy names, even when the manuscripts are blasphemous.

3. They were the property of a used book dealer, who stored them in a cave because no one was interested in buying them.

4. They belonged to an authority within the mainstream church, who exhibited them as examples of the horrid things that blasphemers said about Jesus. Does this sound improbable? Well, a number of the Nag Hammadi texts are mentioned and even described in Irenaeus' "against heresies." That's how we knew what some of the documents were.


Now. Some of the above may seem improbable. But the fact is, you cannot disprove ANY of them. We simply don't know who buried these books, or why they buried these specific books together. We don't know if the burier(s) loved or hated, or even cared much about, these texts. We don't know how widely read these books were, except for the ones we already had copies of. Which kind of hurts the idea that these books were all "owned by the vatican," but supressed.

Not only are you reading a lot into what you think the Vatican must have known, you're reading even more into the place of these books within the theological life of the early church.

There's nothing wrong with doing so. But when you are speculating, and you get real defensive when people question the grounds of your speculation, it's hardly surprising that people present what they think are weak points in your arguments.

Your speculations are, for good or ill, based on a lot of assumptions you've made about the history of religions. Not surprisingly, people who don't share your assumptions won't agree with your conclusions either.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Those are the first excuses otherwise I've heard, for hiding them. But I offer as further evidence now the 1991 book "The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception" by Michael Baigent & Richard Leigh/Summit Books.

It identifies in 1991 Ratzinger as the head of the "Inquisition", keeping scrolls secret from the public, with the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The struggle against Ratzinger was carried on by the book. Summit is a major Book publisher & it's the authors 4th publication. Sources are identified and interviewed.

Vatican is STILL trying to hide certain scriptures. There's more unavailable writings on a list I'm trying to figure out where I put it. I had an ad in a sunday Washington Post in mid 1992, urging a vigil at the Vatican embassy for release of a list of then unavailable books. Memorabilia like that I don't throw away, but where is it in many boxes of papers?

If anyone can find the Book of Zerubabel online, please link it. This webtv rig doesn't access everything right. Alot of references to it, but the only link to read it I found was no access to me.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 04:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck


Before the internet, only priests could read books like the Gospel of Thomas & the long list of NOW known excluded scriptures.

You say the Gospel of Thomas wasn't published until 1950. EXACTLY what I'm talking about! WHY was it hidden until then, like most of the apocryphal works? Because the Vatican hid it until then, NOT because it wasn't written until then.


You stated that before the internet only priests could read the GoT. The world-wide web only became widely available in 1995. So as stated, you were wrong.

You now state that the GoT was 'hidden by the Vatican' -- you offer no evidence for this claim. But the Vatican possesses no manuscript of this work.



Please post a link to Christ and Satan from the MS Junius at Oxford Bodellian library, I'd STILL like to read it at least once in my studies!


I'm not sure why this is my problem. But you should know that your source has the shelfmark wrong. Junius is a collection of mss, not a single ms. There should be a numeral to specify which one.



How can you pretend that nothing was ever hid when much STILL IS?


You have offered no evidence for this claim.



The 325AD Nicean Creed set the standard for official Church persecution of "gnostic" Christians, at the time of Eusebius, when heretics were already being killed anyhow.


The first council did not refer to gnostics at all -- they were an unimportant group by that time.

You assert that the creed set the standard for persecution of gnostics.

Finally you assert that heretics were being killed at that time by the church.

For all of these, frankly hateful, allegations, you offer no evidence. Questions must now be raised about your integrity, if you persist in asserting smears in this way.



OK, I was mistaken about the exact year of church influenced killings of heretics, which was 385AD, Bishop Pricillian & followers, convicted of HERESY in Spain, dictated by policy set in 325AD Council at Nicea.


Please explain the connection between Nicaea and the condemnation of the Priscillianists. None is known to me, or, I think, to you either.



We can be sure there were many unknown victims of the policy who never made history because the whole congregation wasn't put to death, as with Pricillian. Sure, gov did it, but as enforcers of church policy set in 325AD.


I think you need to document which of the canons of Nicaea endorse persecution. None do, of course.

I have removed various other assertions, all devoid of context, to which I can therefore not reply.

You complain, I think, that I am "nit-picking" at your statements. Friend, they are *your* statements. It is your duty to get them right. If you can't get the fine detail right, which you cite to back up your general assertions, naturally most people will suppose that your generalisations are likewise flawed.

All the best,

Roger Pearse



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
#1: You imply that there's no way the Vatican could possibly have the Dialogue of the Saviour, to be able to complete it. That's not based on any Vatican statement.


And if it was...?

The Vatican has no such ms, and if it did, it would be available to scholars.



It was included in Nag Hammadi because it WAS accepted as valid.


There are portions of Plato's Republic in the Nag Hammadi jar. Is that evidence that these too were accepted as scripture?



You expect me to believe that's the only copy there ever was, in Egypt?


No-one suggests that. It's the only copy there is now.



Be realistic, the Vatican excluded it from the Canon and hid it because of what's in the missing parts.


You know this... how?

All the best,

Roger Pearse



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by magnito_student
Definition of Heretic Scripture:

Anything that would empower the masses and set their spirit free and become totaly aligned with the creator of all things.


The word 'haeresis' is Greek and comes from the philosophical schools, in which a student was free to pick and choose whatever appealed to him, regardless of whether it was true or not. Heretic has the similar meaning of someone who makes up what he professes.

All the best,

Roger Pearse



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
Those are the first excuses otherwise I've heard, for hiding them. But I offer as further evidence now the 1991 book "The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception" by Michael Baigent & Richard Leigh/Summit Books.


Ah, so this is the source is it?

There are people who will buy any old tosh, and people who cater for them. Baigent and Leigh do this.



Vatican is STILL trying to hide certain scriptures.


'Fraid not.

All the best,

Roger Pearse



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   
#1: I was raised Catholic; baptized, altar boy, confirmed, & even last rites. Hatred is the wrong word for you to accuse me of. My mother was an employee of the Church into old age, and her best friend was a priest I knew since I was a child. I discussed Gospel of Thomas with him back in 1982, which he said is definitely spurious. I'd never been able to read it myself yet then.

It wasn't published until 1950 or so, and not widely circulated before 1982. Who do you suppose kept it unpublished until 1950? Who but the Vatican could keep it a secret for only priests to know at one time?

I DID state the Junius II is the one my study led to. I once sent word to Sinead O'Connor to investigate it for me, via legal handler, at Oxford Bodellian. Her report was with held from me, because of masonic policy, and the lawyer was a mason. But Sinnead soon was a certified minister after that, and she quit the biz now. (1992).

#2: Proof is the list of unavailable books of the former Bogomil and Cathar religions that were exterminated. Proof is the available only in the dead language Saxon Heliand, that also contains "Christ and Satan", as does Junius II, though I've never read it for myself yet. It's all held back by the same church that held back the books of Thomas until the 1950s. The books of the "heretics" are the reason the Bogomils & Cathars were exterminated. I still don't see the atrocious scriptures self proclaimed Christians were exterminated about.

The Vatican cannot be ignorant of the contents of the "heresy" books. "The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception"-Baigent & Leigh/Summit books is accusing Ratzinger in 1991 of hiding scrolls from the public in the name of Vatican Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. I'm not inventing this. It's from people involved rebelling against Ratzinger for it.

#3: Nitpicking away over semantics; OK, the Nicean Creed defined "heresy" which gnosticism was categorized as because of their belief differences. Though the term gnosticism wasn't used, the definition of heresy included them. My old library notes say bishop Priscillian and congregation were executed in 385AD in Spain on the charge of heresy, by the rulers, yet heresy was defined by Nicean Creed and the church influence was at play even charging heresy, and putting the whole congregation to death.

Not officially the Inquisition yet, but the Inquisitional evil went before and after the official dates of Inquisition. Jews were inquisitors before Catholics, paying 30 pieces of silver for Christ and torturing the Minims.

One pope expelled the Jesuits from the Church. The same enemy is subverting the church, be they Dominican or Jesuit. Now what Dead Sea Scrolls Deception said was the Ratzinger "Inquisition" has the same Ratzinger (ex-Nazi) as pope.

It's not hatred, it's "against rulers of the darkness of this world, and against spiritual wickedness in high places"-Ephesians 6:12.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by roger_pearse

Originally posted by magnito_student
Definition of Heretic Scripture:

Anything that would empower the masses and set their spirit free and become totaly aligned with the creator of all things.


The word 'haeresis' is Greek and comes from the philosophical schools, in which a student was free to pick and choose whatever appealed to him, regardless of whether it was true or not. Heretic has the similar meaning of someone who makes up what he professes.

All the best,

Roger Pearse


I know Roger,,,I was being funny out of frustration at the leaders


No sense in choosing the things that upset ya ....example: If ya dont repent and accept Jesus, you die and go to hell.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
#1: I was raised Catholic; baptized, altar boy, confirmed, & even last rites. Hatred is the wrong word for you to accuse me of.


I am merely looking at what you're writing, you know.



It wasn't published until 1950 or so, and not widely circulated before 1982. Who do you suppose kept it unpublished until 1950? Who but the Vatican could keep it a secret for only priests to know at one time?


The text was not discovered until 1945, in a jar at Nag Hammadi. You say that it was not 'widely circulated', but since anyone could buy them, I am unclear what you mean.



I DID state the Junius II is the one my study led to.


If you email the Bodleian, they will be glad to sell you a microfilm of it.



#3: Nitpicking away over semantics; OK, the Nicean Creed defined "heresy" which gnosticism was categorized as because of their belief differences. Though the term gnosticism wasn't used, the definition of heresy included them.


Which clause of the Nicene creed condemns heresy?

Gnosticism was certainly heretical, since it was manufactured from pagan sources (so Tertullian, De praescriptione haereticorum) a century after the time of Christ.

(I've snipped more repetitions which don't address my comments).

All the best,

Roger Pearse



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
Those are the first excuses otherwise I've heard, for hiding them. But I offer as further evidence now the 1991 book "The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception" by Michael Baigent & Richard Leigh/Summit Books.


Michael Baigent stated explicitly in a book signing appearance a few months ago that no one should accept his books as evidence or take them as a fact, but go to the sources. That is the reason why the source materials are included in the bibliography and the notes on pages. He also said that one should always go to the source and draw conclusions from them, in a proper academic fashion.

So please, don't use his books as evidence because he doesn't want them to be used and cited as such.

You might also like to review this topic and answer the questions which you have skipped over. And if you can't, say so, and do more research!
I find this topic very interesting since I've read (and have got) a lot of books about this kind of stuff.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 01:48 PM
link   
None will let me get away with unsubstantiated claims here. I want some evidence, as this is important. The guilty will lie to cover it, so, WHERE's the evidence he said don't believe him or buy his book about it?

The Church forced either Newton, I think it was, to recant although he was wrong. Ruthlessness can do that. My own daughter has been used to force me to silence before, so, I don't even trust Baigent to recant his own book, IF he really did.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 01:58 PM
link   
I shouldn't need to be able to process microfilm to read the Junius II. It should be in bookstores, along with the Heliand, that also contains part of it. It purposely difficult to read these & other writings. If I could read them, I could find the justification for the extinct religions, or at least the reason.

I can't afford to mess with microfilm.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
I shouldn't need to be able to process microfilm to read the Junius II. It should be in bookstores, along with the Heliand, that also contains part of it. It purposely difficult to read these & other writings. If I could read them, I could find the justification for the extinct religions, or at least the reason.

I can't afford to mess with microfilm.

(emphasis added by dr_strangecraft)


First, any large library has microfilm readers. You don't even have to be a member to use them! just walk in and plug in your film.

You do know that bookstores in the west are largely for-profit enterprises, right? That means they choose books according to what they can find a market for, and not according to Komrad Komissar Dierback's list of books that "should be in bookstores."



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   
If it's so easy to access, why not just post a link to it instead? I'm too lazy to check IF Junius II is NOW accessable, but it wasn't in 1992, when I passed word to O'Connor about it. Not via the library here.

You mean to tell me the Vatican never read or had the Gospel of Thomas before the Nag Hammadi find? I don't buy that.
The Vatican archives have been empty all these centuries? Give me a break.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Strictly speaking its an english hat, worn in this case by an englishman, the first lieutenant of the Indefatigable, Horatio Hornblower.



Originally posted by James J Dierbeck
History can be spun, but not invented.

? History can clearly be invented, but I am saying what do you find from that page that supports what you are citing it for??


Knowing a Rosicrucian is how I know about the Rosicrucian version of the Book of Jasher,

Why should this matter? The rosicrucians were around long, long after the events of the gospels.


Dominicans or Jesuits may not have been involved directly with Salem witch trials,

This is just silly. You are using the word Inquisition where what you actually mean is merely religious oppression, perhaps specifically christians oppressing other christians. Its especially senseless to talk about this as "The Inquisition" while at the same time talking about the jesuit Inquisition.


[quote has this list of books used by Bogomils
And according to the site you note these books were spread across all of europe, and their contents are relatively known. Perhaps there aren't modern editions of them, but its hardly the responsibility of the vatican to publish books that it may or may not have that it has deemed heretical. And what does it matter that some heretical sect had their own set of books? Almost all of them do.


You keep implying that I believe with certainty that these books and all others not in the Bible are authentic. I've not read those books to discern that. That's the point. I'd like to be able to read ALL the unpublished works before I judge.

The go ahead and read them, half of the books you've been talking about are publically and easily available, and others are still publically available but are a little harder to get to.


so why wouldn't he write books, as is the tradition of prophets?

Why would the early christians throw away such a book, and for that matter why would the Orthodox and later catholic church destroy and hide those documents too? They wouldn't. If there was a widely recognized "Autobiograhy of Christ" in the 1, 2, 3rd, etc centuries, then the vatican wouldn't be able to get rid of it.


One can only read the Heliand in the lost Saxon language,

Its not a lost language, people can read it, it can be learned.


which keeps it obscured from widespread reading.

I'd suggest that its not widely read because no one wants to read the obscure late issue gospel of a bunch of barbarians.


The Napoleanic hat logo of yours makes you look a fan of masonic depopulation games

I prefer parchesee.


, & because I expose them somewhat, and you question instead of post contrary info

I know its annoying isn't it, having people question rather than blindly argue.


me think U could be a mason defender on the job as moderator.

Do I get a cape as Mason Defender, or just a neat apron??


Again you called Saxon Christians barbarians, which is an insult to Christianity and Germans

Why don't you cry about it?


being a moderator, which shows you're secure as moderator/character assassin/propaganda expert here.


#8: Illuminati style masonry took over about the time of the US revolution, led by Weishaupt
And where is the evidence for this weishauptian takeover of anglo freemasonry???

Skull & Bones was Illumnati founded, so post a link to prove me wrong.

Er, no, how about you demonstrate that it was founded by the illuminati, rather than assuming it was so.


Of course the international group will not publicize it,

Oh ok, so basically anyone who's ideas you like, they've touched at the truth, even if they can't demonstrate it, and everyone else, they're either part of the conspiracy or dupes of it, even when they can support their positions. Check.


I'm 51 years old. I was a career outlaw, dealing with mafia, NSA, and Hells Angels, besides warring with robber gangs.

Why are you telling me this??


The mafia was founded by freemason Mazzini as a secret masonic order. (Epperson fact researchable).

I really don't care if the masons founded the mafia or the other way around or any of that. Lets stick to the topic.


I learned that by almost becoming a "made man" (33).

I'm going to go out on a limb here and conclude that you've never
  1. Been close to having any actual position within the mafia
  2. made it to the high levels of the Scottish, and what the hell, even the York, Rites



I was told I'd have to ritually kill anyone of any sex or age they chose, even if friend or family, as initiation, & I refused.

I flatly do not beleive that the mason's requested this of you, and I flatly don't beleive that the mafia was going to iniate you. Maybe you were tied up with some goons for something and they requested this, thats allways possible.



To you it's unimportant to see what's in the hidden writings, being apparently faithless.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.


It is supposedly another book by Christ, one of 5 alleged books of his

I have a supposed gospel of christ that I can sell to you for a mere 100$, in english

Can't exterminate religions without exterminating their religious books also, or storing them away.

And you can destroy the books without keeping them by sending a bunch of goonish crusaders to break into their holy places and smash everything up. The Church might have cathar gospels for all I know, but you are the one saying that you know they have it. This is not true, you do not know, you strongly suspect that they have it.


*Mod Edit: Once again removed "Big Quote," please review your Inbox at the mCenter, and read your U2U's*

This really shouldn't be so difficult. Don't quote the whole post, especially since you aren't responding in text anyway

[edit on 19-9-2005 by Nygdan]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join