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.

 

I have found an inconsistency in the gospel according to Mark

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thinker
"He supposedly had a dream and he saw a cross engulfed in light and a voice said to him “Under this you will rule”

When jesus was alive, they said they wanted to start a rebelion, he said no and died on the cross.

I though jesus was againist WARS? fighting in the name of god?


To become a "soldier" for God is to take up arms in the form of the only sword offered to the believer - the Word of God...not manmade weapons.




posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by Thinker
"He supposedly had a dream and he saw a cross engulfed in light and a voice said to him “Under this you will rule”

When jesus was alive, they said they wanted to start a rebelion, he said no and died on the cross.

I though jesus was againist WARS? fighting in the name of god?


To become a "soldier" for God is to take up arms in the form of the only sword offered to the believer - the Word of God...not manmade weapons.


Not to argue your above point, because it is very true, however, in Revelations, there is a lot of strange stuff that could only be seen as weapons.


"9Then a third angel followed them, shouting, "Anyone who worships the beast and his statue or who accepts his mark on the forehead or the hand 10must drink the wine of God's wrath. It is poured out undiluted into God's cup of wrath. And they will be tormented with fire and burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb"

or

"Use your sickle now to gather the clusters of grapes from the vines of the earth, for they are fully ripe for judgment." 19So the angel swung his sickle on the earth and loaded the grapes into the great winepress of God's wrath. 20And the grapes were trodden in the winepress outside the city, and blood flowed from the winepress in a stream about 180 miles long and as high as a horse's bridle.

advice7.com...

I also have another question for you. In Revelations, it says "And no one could learn this song except those 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth."
Could it be possible to have 144,000 decendents of certain bloodlines within "known history" in other words, since we began to keep records?



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Perhaps the narrative style is not entirely an exact history, but an best guess of what Jesus said. He probably used words like "do your own thing daily (your cross or whatever your destiny) but follow me." It is the meaning of the words that matters. It is simply hindsight in the narrative style, when you know the entire story in advance. The metaphor is foreknowledge.
For that matter he could have said those exact words since he spoke in parables.

What does it mean to say "take up your cross and follow me?" It means whatever your own challenges are do them well with all your might, and become a better person in your followings. It means whatever your life story, make the most of it.

Also the words "take up your cross," would work after the resurrection, maybe even a retrospective on former journeys converging in Mark's gospel as he heard it.

I hope it adds to the discussion.



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by NetStorm

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by Thinker
"He supposedly had a dream and he saw a cross engulfed in light and a voice said to him “Under this you will rule”

When jesus was alive, they said they wanted to start a rebelion, he said no and died on the cross.

I though jesus was againist WARS? fighting in the name of god?


To become a "soldier" for God is to take up arms in the form of the only sword offered to the believer - the Word of God...not manmade weapons.


Not to argue your above point, because it is very true, however, in Revelations, there is a lot of strange stuff that could only be seen as weapons.


"9Then a third angel followed them, shouting, "Anyone who worships the beast and his statue or who accepts his mark on the forehead or the hand 10must drink the wine of God's wrath. It is poured out undiluted into God's cup of wrath. And they will be tormented with fire and burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb"

or

"Use your sickle now to gather the clusters of grapes from the vines of the earth, for they are fully ripe for judgment." 19So the angel swung his sickle on the earth and loaded the grapes into the great winepress of God's wrath. 20And the grapes were trodden in the winepress outside the city, and blood flowed from the winepress in a stream about 180 miles long and as high as a horse's bridle.

advice7.com...

I also have another question for you. In Revelations, it says "And no one could learn this song except those 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth."
Could it be possible to have 144,000 decendents of certain bloodlines within "known history" in other words, since we began to keep records?


You are comparing the mission of the angels in Revelation, to the commission of human believers by Christ. These are two entirely different sets of entities with different responsibilities.

The 144,000 is believed to be descendants of the 12 tribes of Israel. These will be Jewish converts to Christianity. The conversions appear to take place at or after the Rapture and will leave behind these 144,000 preachers.

These 144,000 play an important role that many people may miss. In Genesis, God makes the "Everlasting Covenant" with Abraham and his descendants. This everlasting covenant is dependent on NOTHING - it is unmerited. It says that they will be His people and He will be their God and they will always be saved (now that is not to be taken that ALL Jews are saved, but that the Jewish people (the lineage) will be saved, by some remnant which is some percent of the total people.) That this covenant is the ONLY covenant in the Old Testament in which God makes the following unique siutations, is very important:

1. EVERLASTING is applied to the covenant God makes with the Israelites.
2. No physical act required on the Israelites part (only belief in God as their God - love me as your God)

What many Christian believers seem to miss is that God has never broken a covenant and therefore, the sacrifice of Christ does NOT break this covenant. Therefore, this covenant must be reconciled with the message "there is only one way to the Father and that is through the Son".

In order for both of these promises to be fulfilled, there must be something that happens in the end times that provides to the "non-believing" Jewish population (i.e. not yet accepting of Christ as the Meshiach) a second chance to accept Him. This second chance will then fulfill BOTH the everlasting covenant and "salvation through Christ". I believe these 144,000 play the necessary role in this second chance.

[Edited on 30-1-2004 by Valhall]



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

In order for both of these promises to be fulfilled, there must be something that happens in the end times that provides to the "non-believing" Jewish population (i.e. not yet accepting of Christ as the Meshiach) a second chance to accept Him. This second chance will then fulfill BOTH the everlasting covenant and "salvation through Christ". I believe these 144,000 play the necessary role in this second chance.

[Edited on 30-1-2004 by Valhall]


Well my point was that God does use force.
As for the 144,000, that would be 72000 males and 72000 females? A second "Eden"?



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Some think I am looking to deep into this. I might have been but my whole point is that The bible isn't the absolute Truth!!!! Jesus didn't write the bible nor is he the son of God there is a lot of versus in the bible where he seperateds himself from God the Father. But back to my orginal statement. The bbile wasn't written by Jesus or GOD the most high. I beleive that is was influnced by aliens. Think for yourselves people



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by NetStorm

Originally posted by Valhall

In order for both of these promises to be fulfilled, there must be something that happens in the end times that provides to the "non-believing" Jewish population (i.e. not yet accepting of Christ as the Meshiach) a second chance to accept Him. This second chance will then fulfill BOTH the everlasting covenant and "salvation through Christ". I believe these 144,000 play the necessary role in this second chance.

[Edited on 30-1-2004 by Valhall]


Well my point was that God does use force.
As for the 144,000, that would be 72000 males and 72000 females? A second "Eden"?


Men wrote the bible not GOD. Well mabey with the help of aliens



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaTruth
The bbile wasn't written by Jesus or GOD the most high. I beleive that is was influnced by aliens. Think for yourselves people


So then we agree


"posted on 29-1-2004 at 07:59 AM Post Number: 351935 edit quote

quote:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Truth
I dont mean to be rude, but i jut want you to think really hard for a minute.

Why would aliens creat a concept of jesus? when they are tying to rule us?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by NetStorm

Why wouldn't they? How better to control than to give something to follow? And then say "I'll be back" right before his death.

Why would not the logical solution to having control of a people (planet what ever) give them something to pray to, believe in, then come back as that something."
-----------------------------------------------------

Kinda synchronistic, that DaTruth and Truth have different opposing views.


[Edited on 30-1-2004 by NetStorm]

[Edited on 30-1-2004 by NetStorm]



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   
That is because Truth is a devout Christian. I know the difference between religion and spirituality. Religion is man made and the universe strecths way beyond this Planet called earth. We are only a small part of a bigger picture and I refuse to limit my thinking to just the religions on this planet.



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Then Jesus, looking at him , loved him, and said to him, “One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross and follow Me.”

Why would “Jesus” ask someone to take up the cross? The cross became a symbol of Christianity during the reign of the emperor Constantine. He supposedly had a dream and he saw a cross engulfed in light and a voice said to him “Under this you will rule” Ok even if I’m wrong and the cross was a symbol during the early part of Christianity it still wasn’t a symbol until after “Jesus” died.

Why would “Jesus” use the cross as a symbol of his teaching if he didn’t even die on it yet? I know most of you will say cause he’s God but that won’t fly with me. I think that this statement was deliberate who ever put it there. It is yet another proof of the deception that has been brought upon us.

------------------------------------------------------
I Study the bible quite often & in one sense most of the comments here about the translations changeing the meaning are true... I will say one thing though.. I have come of the belief that they were not intentionally changed or reworded, they just were put into the words used at the time of the translation. just like if an american did a translation starting today it would be totally different than if a german did it...

but back to the taking up of the cross... this is a statement that could very well have been used by JESUS. One thing you have to remember is that during these timesthe cross was a symbol of great torture & punishment... to take up ones cross would be like sanding a soldier into battle... they take on an inportant task knowing full well what the circumstances are, but what they will accomplish is much more worthy than the price that has to be paid. It really had nothing to do with the christian maning of taking up the cross that we have today. It was a way of saying follow me no matter what the cost!





posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 09:53 AM
link   
the worst in consistany i know of is the sacred SHroud, the one that was supose to have held christs body, on the shroud the is a blood stain closely resemblimg a cross where the chest would of been, since the cross wasnt a symbol of christianity till centuries later why was jesus wearing one ?? i know it wasnt a buriual right beacause the cross was a punishment till jesus died.



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by NetStorm

Originally posted by Valhall

In order for both of these promises to be fulfilled, there must be something that happens in the end times that provides to the "non-believing" Jewish population (i.e. not yet accepting of Christ as the Meshiach) a second chance to accept Him. This second chance will then fulfill BOTH the everlasting covenant and "salvation through Christ". I believe these 144,000 play the necessary role in this second chance.

[Edited on 30-1-2004 by Valhall]


Well my point was that God does use force.
As for the 144,000, that would be 72000 males and 72000 females? A second "Eden"?



uuuhhhh. No, it wouldn't be. And I haven't got a clue where you got that.



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaTruth

Originally posted by NetStorm

Originally posted by Valhall

In order for both of these promises to be fulfilled, there must be something that happens in the end times that provides to the "non-believing" Jewish population (i.e. not yet accepting of Christ as the Meshiach) a second chance to accept Him. This second chance will then fulfill BOTH the everlasting covenant and "salvation through Christ". I believe these 144,000 play the necessary role in this second chance.

[Edited on 30-1-2004 by Valhall]


Well my point was that God does use force.
As for the 144,000, that would be 72000 males and 72000 females? A second "Eden"?


Men wrote the bible not GOD. Well mabey with the help of aliens


DaTruth...

statements like these need to be prefaced with it is my opinion, or I believe....not as fact.

think for yourself...but don't even attempt to think for me.



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 10:35 AM
link   
the shroud of turin is a proven fake dated by several independent sources to around 1300ad the most probable theory ive heard on it is that it was the wrapping cloth of jacque molay after his brutal torture during the persecution of the knights templar

and anyone who does not think that jesus used force riddle me this.......the jerusalem temple back in the day was a gigantic complex with almost a city unto itself with shops and moneychangers and such also with its own military garrison of around 600 soldiers.....how did jesus and co take control of this and expel the money changers and shopkeepers using no force?



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 10:36 AM
link   
also keep in mind that this occured shortly before his crucifiction



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by NetStorm
Well my point was that God does use force.
As for the 144,000, that would be 72000 males and 72000 females? A second "Eden"?


The 144,000 is the bride of Christ. I think they are either 144,000 warriors (i.e. the army of Israel) or that they are 144,000 women who will carry forth the offspring of Jesjuah. There is nothing which indicates they will be preachers. What we do know however, is that they are all gifted singers, and the only ones who can learn the Song of Mosche suggesting they have a special spiritual messenger or vessel leading them.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by woulfgar
I Study the bible quite often & in one sense most of the comments here about the translations changeing the meaning are true... I will say one thing though.. I have come of the belief that they were not intentionally changed or reworded, they just were put into the words used at the time of the translation. just like if an american did a translation starting today it would be totally different than if a german did it...


Yes, think about how different MacBeth would read if it was translated into 50's NewYork American English.


but back to the taking up of the cross... this is a statement that could very well have been used by JESUS. One thing you have to remember is that during these timesthe cross was a symbol of great torture & punishment... to take up ones cross would be like sanding a soldier into battle... they take on an inportant task knowing full well what the circumstances are, but what they will accomplish is much more worthy than the price that has to be paid. It really had nothing to do with the christian maning of taking up the cross that we have today. It was a way of saying follow me no matter what the cost!




Infact the exact phrase "to take up one's cross" is a phrase which is directly linked to the time of the crucades. They viewed the sword as the cross, and to take up the cross had a clear meaning: "To dress up in arms for the Papal Empire and free Jerusalem from the heathen Muslims". It simply meant to join a crucade. KJV is written is such romantic language as that of the Knights Templar and the Church of England which is an institution I would rather be without.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Mark 10 has a good deal of interesting pieces for those who look... 10:15 Jesus says that one must have a childish faith in order to be saved. But Paul in 1 Cor. says that he "put away childish things". 10:18 Jesus says that "there is none good but one, that is, God." He also seems to be implying he is neither good nor God. 10:19 When Jesus lists the "commandments," he only mentions five -- the humanistic ones. He also gives one that is not included in the "original ten" commandments: "defraud not." 10:29-30 Jesus will reward men who abandon their wives and families. 10:34 Jesus explains to his disciples about his death and resurrection. Yet John (20:9) claims that the disciples had no advance knowledge. 10:42 Seems to imply God approves of slavery.



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by thoth
the shroud of turin is a proven fake dated by several independent sources to around 1300ad the most probable theory ive heard on it is that it was the wrapping cloth of jacque molay after his brutal torture during the persecution of the knights templar

and anyone who does not think that jesus used force riddle me this.......the jerusalem temple back in the day was a gigantic complex with almost a city unto itself with shops and moneychangers and such also with its own military garrison of around 600 soldiers.....how did jesus and co take control of this and expel the money changers and shopkeepers using no force?


So he told the shopkeeps to leave, and basically caused a reuckus. I'm not to hip on Jewish law, but I can't imagine that the guards would just take him down (esp. considering some of them may have agreed with what he was doing). What they did do was call the Pharisees (Jesus is criticizing the law, the Pharisees study the law, it fits).



posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Mark 10 has a good deal of interesting pieces for those who look...


10:15 Jesus says that one must have a childish faith in order to be saved. But Paul in 1 Cor. says that he "put away childish things".


As I have stressed before, I honestly believe Saulus Paulus is the first CointelPRO agant in modern history. He was a brave adversary though. Jesjuah probably loves him more than most others. For atleast he was brave, cintrasting many other adversaries Jesjuah had at the time. I believe he'll survive and join the faithful. But he will have to fall down first.


10:18 Jesus says that "there is none good but one, that is, God." He also seems to be implying he is neither good nor God.


Exactly. Most of the mission of Jesjuah was infact used to proove that he was not God. He teaches that God is Love. That no man or physical entity can replace God. The two masters parable explains how Jesjuah explains God. How the reason behind there being discribed two entities in God has to do with God living between them, not being eirther


10:19 When Jesus lists the "commandments," he only mentions five -- the humanistic ones. He also gives one that is not included in the "original ten" commandments: "defraud not."


Jesjuah was the dude who minimised the Law, who compressed it and defined it. Who explained the "foundation" of the Law. The law is 613 commandments, laws and regulations. Remember that. Not just the ten commandments.


10:29-30 Jesus will reward men who abandon their wives and families.


As does any king say to his elite forces.

10:34 Jesus explains to his disciples about his death and resurrection. Yet John (20:9) claims that the disciples had no advance knowledge.

Hehe. Well if you study the Gospel, you would realise that every time Jesjuah is prophecying his death and ressurrection, he does so in a quite shady language or in parables using the language of allegory and symbolics. His disciples believed he was probably talking about something else than dying physically.


10:42 Seems to imply God approves of slavery.


Matthew is written in Hebrew tradition aimed at a Hebrew audience. Keeping slaves has always been part of the Hebrew culture, and the whole Middle-Eastern culture foir that matter. The Law has many reflections over how to treat slaves etc. A jew could only keep a slave for six years unless the slave wanted to stay for another seven year period. Being a slave back then would be like being a poor industrial worker today. Iyt was a quite common way of making ends meet. Slavery is an important part of Jewish history and tradition.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Edit: William: Have you read the latest u2u I sent you? Why is my Mikromarius account unreachable? Someone has obviously hacked into it and changed my e-mail info. Please look into it. *Marius*

[Edited on 30-1-2004 by Hamilton]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join