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.


My theory on the secret behind Rennes-le-Chateau

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in


posted on May, 12 2006 @ 11:00 AM

Originally posted by yeahright
Go here-

Translate a block of text at a time. Or input the url to translate a page of web text.

[edit on 5/12/2006 by yeahright]


The use of All-Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 13-5-2006 by sanctum]

posted on May, 12 2006 @ 11:07 AM
Dude, I'm not the one. I don't have a flippin' clue. Just wanted to point you to the translation site.

Good luck.

posted on May, 12 2006 @ 11:11 AM
Many thanks kin i tried it and it worked brilliant,I am new to this site what is your main area of interest,ant

posted on May, 12 2006 @ 11:30 AM
I just sent you a u2u. Answers to questions about U2U and much else can be found here-

That's a great place to start. Welcome, and enjoy your stay.

posted on May, 12 2006 @ 11:35 AM

[edit on 12-5-2006 by adept initiate]

posted on May, 12 2006 @ 11:59 AM

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
My fascination with this topic lies in theorising as to what "the secret" and the apostacy could be, specifically in relation to the events as allegorically portrayed in Revelation, so forgive me if I ramble and brainstorm a bit or go in a slightly different direction to where most of you are going. There's been some great posts by some very knowledgable people regarding the history of Knights Templar, Rennes-le-Chateau, et al.

Mayet and bigprobe mentioned bloodlines, DNA and cloning. The concept of DNA being an image is interesting. If you think about it, DNA is like an image or a blueprint for our physical make-up. Could it be that the image of the Beast is a jump in our evolutionary DNA, something that will be presented as our "stepping stone to divinity", simultaneously seeming to erase the need for God and disproving his divine elevation above us? (What was that line in The Incredibles: "Saying everyone's special is another way of saying no one is.") Maybe the bloodlines of the Merovingian is in fact this advanced DNA, or the missing piece of a DNA puzzle to soon be completed. Maybe the image of the Beast is the DNA of that bloodline and worship of those who possess it? The Beast of Revelation rises out of the sea, 'sea' being a Biblical metaphor for the many races and nations of men. Could it be that the image of God, the likeness of God, is the ascension by spiritual means and through the salvation of Jesus, whereas the image of the Beast is pursuit of divinity through physical means, a counterfeit, a copy, or a deception presented as a shortcut or path to divinity. Jesus stressed that man can only reach the kingdom of heaven through Him.

But if DNA is the secret, then how could Newton be so readily converted if indeed he was made privy to it? There was no way to see, identify, or even conceive of DNA in his day. His fascination with geometry and mysticism would point to the possibility that the secret is metaphysical in nature; the same pursuits that Crowley dabbled in. Does it have to do with the geometry of the Temple of Solomon, or the Pyramids. The freemasonic fascination with geometry and numerology, and the description of it as "the craft" all seems to tie together...but how? Freemasonry also alludes to "seeking the light". What is it that they are searching for exactly?

I have just started this thread, (to this point) and have been waiting for some to ask, "If their are bones, what do we compare the DNA to?"

posted on May, 12 2006 @ 12:27 PM
I stated this before...but here's some possibilities on the "DNA matching":

Shroud of Turin has NOT been eliminated as a possible "authentic" relic (by the way, it just has be declared authentic, not necessarily be authentic. Remember, we're dealing in falsehoods in this theory.)

The alleged Veil of Veronica.

The alleged skull of John the Baptist.

The alleged child of Christ.

The alleged bones of Mary Magdalene.

posted on May, 12 2006 @ 03:58 PM
Wow Valhall if you ever write a book I'll buy it,I have ADD and I spent 5 hrs reading your post,very intriqing,and excellent material

posted on May, 13 2006 @ 09:44 AM

o.p. by Valhall
My question for most of my life was: What could cause such a sudden abandonment of long held religious beliefs? It seems it would have to be something that appeared almost irrefutable. It would have to be evidence. And it would have to be evidence presented in a manner that would make it acceptable to an audience it was at the same time "proving wrong".

Ah, the coming apostasy. So many possibilities, so little time. I'm with you Val, I believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, that no one comes to His Father, the Creator, but through Him. Jesus is Almighty God. He said of His Father, "I am in Him and He is in Me." A nesting, so to speak. He could have been married and had children if He wanted to.

So what will cause the apostasy? I think you are on to it. There will be a revelation about Christ after the cross that directly contradicts Christian doctrine, as known by the masses, of the last 2000 years. Rennes le-Chateau holds, or held, part of the secret, imo.

I feel it is coming soon.

Take the "seven kings" from Revelation 17:

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton (and one is), Bush II (S&B nickname Temporary; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space)

And the beast that is to follow

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

Will be known by his mark and the number 666

John 6:66
From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

The beast will be known because he will cause the apostasy?

I don't know about you, but I will be keeping a close eye on our next president.

John 7:10, or 6:81, depending on how you slice it.
But when his brethren were gone up, then went he (Jesus) also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

Go ahead, call me crazy, I just connect the dots, I don't create them. Ok, so I make strange connections.

posted on May, 14 2006 @ 12:28 PM
If I remember correctly, wasnt in the Arthurian legends, King Arthur supposedly descended from Jospeh of Aramatheia, who was supposedly jesus' uncle?

Not that i believe that. In fact, I honestly do not believe there is any link between the Celts, Greeks and Hebrew tribes. No descendancy from from the holy land in any Royal family. In fact, it is most likely that in the early days of Christianity in Northern Europe, those kings whose populations were converted to Christianity were claiming descent from the Holy Land to legitimize their rule, since it was custom in the southern lands that rulers were decended from divinity. But all genetic, cultural, linguistic, and archaeological evidence clearly shows that the Celts, Germanic Tribes, greek and Roman peoples were indo-European invaders who came from Southern Russia, Ukrain, and Eastern Europe, not some long lost tribes of israel. Like i said, I believe these claims of descendancy were more than likely made when adopting the new religon to legitimize their absolute rule aas well as to Christianize their old folk tales and religous beliefs. For example, King Arthur and Camelot were more than likely tales of an ancient Welsh King that eventually adapted to the new religous beliefs.

I myself have no real opinion on Jesus' personal life. i do appreciate Val's opinion that it does not matter if Jesus got married and had kids, that her belief in Jesus does not change. I do find the speculation about such a thing and the implications of Christian endtime beliefs quite fascinating and perceptive. Such scientific debunking of Christianity would certainly send alot of followers away.

posted on May, 15 2006 @ 02:49 PM
The adept shall demonstrate the stations found in rennes-ste marie madeleine/Lady of Marceille, the answer lies with the last-station 14

"look at the man on the left and the colour of his robes,contrast with station 1 and another individual,need I say anymore"

The even number stations are in red border
the odd numbers in green

Everything is about reversal,switching ,replacing ,dualism

The man switched in the tomb!!

Watch as i r3veal more secrets-in time!!!

Mod Edit: The use of All-Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 15-5-2006 by sanctum]

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 01:38 PM
For true believers there is another possibility regarding the DNA and I believe it was mentioned early on in this post. That it will be different from normal humans. Wouldnt that be something

[edit on 19-5-2006 by lifo]

posted on May, 20 2006 @ 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Valhall
How about this one?

What's at the dead-center of that painting?

Munkacsy (1881) Christ Before Pilate

Please see the painting previously posted above. nerdling and I have been discussing this painting this morning. I personally feel that the discovery of this painting is one of the more important things that have come out of this thread. Let's review the oddity of it:

1. We have only one woman depicted in the scene. She cannot be Mary the mother of Christ since she has a child.
2. Christ is not the center of the painting, but instead the woman and child are at the dead center to the painting.
3. The child in the woman's arms is not looking at Christ but is staring dead on to the viewer of the painting.
4. The woman is holding a shield against the boy in her arms.

and now what we'd like to get some feedback on is that it appears the woman is making a hand gesture with her right hand against the shield. It appears to us that the thumb is curled under, the pointer finger points straight up, the third finger is definitely curled under, not sure on the ring finger, pinky is splade straight out.

Does this hand gesture mean anything?

posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:03 PM
Hasn't that hand gesture been associated with a reference to John the Baptist? I'm sure the forefinger extended gesture has. I'm not so sure about the shield bit, but the woman holding the child appears to be looking directly at the lance held by the centurion with his back to us in the front-center-left of the painting. The lance passes in front of Christ and the point is dead center-low. Could it be a depiction of Longinus' Lance?

The woman and child pictured could very well be meant to portray MM and her son. Is this meant to portray Jesus as the father of the boy, as well?

Here's an interesting comparison from the Baptism of Christ, with Christ's right hand in relatively the same position on his own chest, and his left hand making the benedictory gesture.


posted on May, 20 2006 @ 06:46 PM

Originally posted by Valhall
Let's review the oddity of it:

1. We have only one woman depicted in the scene. She cannot be Mary the mother of Christ since she has a child.
2. Christ is not the center of the painting, but instead the woman and child are at the dead center to the painting.
3. The child in the woman's arms is not looking at Christ but is staring dead on to the viewer of the painting.
4. The woman is holding a shield against the boy in her arms.

As it is actually totally inapropriate for this woman and child to be in the picture in the first place, I see it as a symbol of something. But in my view it is one of two things (as even the DaVinci code does not have a child born at this time).

So it is either a symbolic reference to the the mother and child as in Mary and her son Christ.

The second thing that struck me is from the Passion of the Christ Movie, though this was based on writings that I think came after this painting was done - actually maybe I should check into that. During Christ's passion he was being tormented by the devil appearing as a woman holding a child (in imitation of Mary his mother and Him) to mock him. This comes from the writings of Catherine Emmerich. It would be interesting if she predated the date of this painting, but I doubt it.

There is nothing I am aware of that would explain historically or bibically this woman and child in that scene beyond that, but I will try to look further into it as time allows.

Edit: I stand corrected. Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich - born 8 September, 1774, died at Dulmen, 9 February, 1824.

The painting - Munkacsy (1881) Christ Before Pilate.

So why are we even connecting this painting in anyway with Rennes Le Chateau? Refresh my memory - it's along thread.

[edit on 5/20/2006 by Relentless]

[edit on 5/20/2006 by Relentless]

posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:10 PM
OK! Its so nice to see so many references to so many parts of the puzzle of rennes-le-chateau!

Personally I see a massive parallel between the sumbology of the Isis myth in the geometrically encoded figures of the landscape and local architecture and the Sumerian creational myths. The story of Isis and Ra and company seems like a very interesting continuation or alternate version of the Sumerian idea.

If you follow the links from Hermes Trimesgistus in ancient Egypt (with the isis myth of course) and the egyptian priesthood's initiation of the ancient greeks (Plato's ideas are very Gnostic indeed) into the Mystery Cults and the continuation of these beliefs right up to the Gnostic teachings through people like the Templars or Cathars all the way to the alchemists the thread is never broken. Secret societies and the likes all say different versions of the same thing and carry on the same traditions even if it often becomes perverted. The interesting thing here is that the basis of this line of belief is that we are potential Gods. Through the experiential understanding or Gnosis of our true nature we become Gods. This is the Isis theme and the idea behind the 'outside is the inside' belief. In essence, we are meant to be ultimate masters of all things material. To explain all this in detail would take me days bit if anyone at all is interested I will be more than happy to explain and/or provide links and sources.

As all roads seem to lead to Rome, all my research comes back to this eventually!

Amethyst, knowledge or poof, demonstrable proof, of the Sumerian Myths being true would definitely make people 'fall OUT of faith' as you say. The Church has been a diabolical instrument of perversion with material gain in mind and has corrupted and often intentionally hidden all this. The Nag Hammadi findings are perfect proof of this!


posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 10:14 AM

This page is for you to view valhall, and as you will see there is a common thread in all of the areas of the church there - almost every image and Fresco that shows christ also shows a baby being held by a women in blue robes.

this image of people at christs feet being a good example of this, and heres another very strange image.

Look very carefuly at this picture. Notice that they all hold a child? even Jesus Christ ??!!

here is my two pennies worth after alot of thinking about this over the years.

The Priest who actually found the 'secret' knew that it was false / a falsehood / decievment, and so in plastering the church with symbols of satan and a baby that may / may have not been christs is actually throwing it in our face - Think about it. The man knew the deception and understood it well, so in creating an almost blasphemous church gave us the starkest warning he possibly could.

Oh and this introduction on the site really gets the mind ticking over!

[edit on 18/7/06 by GSA]

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 01:19 AM
sooo this is my first post on ATS...and i wanna say that this thread is one of my main reasons for joining. Valhall you have done an amazing job of presenting information and giving your thoughts on this subject matter.

also im getting ready to head off to a jesuit school....and after ready some of the threads on ATS im
getting kinda worried!...with the black pope and all! _javascript:icon('

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 06:24 AM
hey hmmm,

Welcome to ATS! Thanks for your comments and good luck in your education. I look forward to reading your posts here on ATS, and anything you might be able to add on this particular subject.

See ya!

posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 02:01 AM
thanks vahall...this subject continues to intrigue me....i have read over the entire thread but i cannot exactly remember what has been posted and what hasnt.....i stumbled upon this article doing some more research and found it quite interesting...

some more stuff

top topics

<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in