It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
could someone explain?
Preface to the Gospel of the Holy Twelve
In the original Sanscrit and Aramaic gospel, the duty of abstaining from meat and wine were emphasized, while in the later versions, it was omitted. Since those who founded the Christian Church, like their emperor, Constantine, were meat eaters and drinkers of wine, naturally they were opposed to these doctrines, whose acceptance would involve a revolutionary transformation of their living habits, they interpreted the first promise to mean, "Thou shalt not kill". implying that the commandment applied only to humans and that the slaughter of animals was not killing. The Original Gospel, representing the teachings of Christ, the Lord of Love, taught harmlessness and compassion to all living beings, including both animals and humans. For reasons above stated, the Roman Churchmen at Nicea opposed these doctrines and eliminated them from the Gospels, which they radically changed so as to be acceptable to Constantine, who loved the red meats and flowing wine of his midnight feasts too much to accept a religion that prohibited these pleasures, which was a main reason why he so bitterly persecuted the early Christians who advocated these doctrines. For this reason the Church Fathers changed the Gospel in such a way that Love and Compassion were limited only to human beings but the animal expressions of life were excluded from receiving these benefits. But the savior of the Original Gospel, as Christ were represented to be, was a redeemer of the animal world, as he was of men, seeking to alleviate the sufferings of all living beings.
Originally posted by ChiKeyMonKey
It's a hebrew translation error.
The bible actually states JC turned water in to Ribena and told everyone it was wine (white lie - no harm no foul).
Originally posted by Jovi1
It would be refreshing to hear something other than the it was just grape juice defense. Get over it we know they had, made, and drank wine. Really think about it for just a second about what would happen if you were at a wedding and the spirits ran out, people would leave. Why do you think Mary even brought it up, sorry friend they werent staying for some really great non-alcoholic grape juice. The refrences you provide aren't describing two different beverages they are describing the double edged nature of one, again the condemnation is not on the use of various spiritous beverages but on the misuse of them. Alcohol doesn't cause you to sin, you choose to do that all on your own and if you are not strong enough to stand on your convictions and drink them then I would have to question those convictions to begin with.