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.

 

Is The Da Vinci Code part of a Plot in Holywood & the Media against Catholicism & the Latin Culture?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix1111
 

Hi Matrix1111,
I know that you are a nice contradictor, also that you have studied the scriptures, and tried to analize them even going directly to the original sources.

However, there is no way to continue claiming that the Virginity of St Mary is an invention of the Catholic church after we read carefully the chapter 2 of St Matthew Gospel, that thesis dies immediatly with the so solid evidence I have shown here.

It is quite clear that the birth of Christ from a virgin is a dogma of faith that comes from about 8 centuries before Jesus born, since it is mentioned by St. Isaiah that is quoted in that sense my St Mathew.

To insist in this point is to try to create a storm in glass of water, there is no way at all to continue insisting in blame the modern Christian Theology of misintepretation, of course if the itention is not precisely to discredit the that specific church you are trying to weak.

The solidity of the argument that I am defending is such that it is well acepted by Greek and other Orthodoxes, Egyptian and Etiopian Coptics, Armenians, other Eastern rite minorities, American Episcopalians and Anglicans. So this is not a caprice of the Catholic theologians, is a solid biblical truth.

It does not matter that you are not alone in that line of thinking, to continue insisting in the false thesis of the conspiracy in the Catholic church to make St Mary an ethernal virgin is to show clearly an obssesion to creat a schism at any cost, even through antiethical ways.

It is incredible but in this time there are non Christians, like the Muslims, the Sufies are a nice example, that respect more the Santity of Mary than even some supposed "Christians".

Thanks for your atention,

The Angel of Lightness




[edit on 7/17/2008 by The angel of light]




posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by The angel of light
reply to post by Matrix1111
 



The solidity of the argument that I am defending is such that it is well acepted by Greek and other Orthodoxes, Egyptian and Etiopian Coptics, Armenians, other Eastern rite minorities, American Episcopalians and Anglicans. So this is not a caprice of the Catholic theologians, is a solid biblical truth.


Of course the majority of Christians believe in the virgin birth. Matthew's interpretation of the Greek version of the Old Testament (Septuagint*) is the cause of this misunderstanding. The original Hebrew version clearly is indicating a young woman, not a virgin. You can insist on being right based on the weight of the chruches that have believed in the virgin birth, but it doesn't wash away the fact that Matthew perpetuated a biblical mistranslation into a doctrine of belief. That's what's I'm simply trying to point out.

For 200 years Early Christianity did not have a virgin birth doctrine. This is a historical fact. Paul never mentioned a virgin birth. The early church fathers such as Justin Martyr, Jerome, Ireneaus and Origen never mentioned a virgin birth. The Hebrew Old Testament never prophesied a virgin birth.


It does not matter that you are not alone in that line of thinking, to continue insisting in the false thesis of the conspiracy in the Catholic church to make St Mary an ethernal virgin is to show clearly an obssesion to creat a schism at any cost, even through antiethical ways.


The schism already took place at the Council of Nicea. I'm simply trying to correct the mistake using facts. You're arguing your side of the issue from the standpoint of tradition. The Council of Nicea may have been able to silence the "heretics" of the past, but that ain't gonna happen in this day and age.


*footnote:
The Jews of the diaspora, who fled Judah after the fall of Jerusalem 586BC, were widely distributed throughout the Mediterranean and the middle east. A significant segment of these had chosen Alexandria in Egypt as their home. By the fourth century BC the Jews there had largely lost much of their capability to communicate in or understand their original tongue, Hebrew. They adopted the language of the area, which was Greek. The need to understand their religious roots was strong and so the Hebrew Bible (then consisting only of the Torah) was translated into Greek. This translation was called the Septuagint.



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix1111
 





The Jews of the Diaspora, who fled Judah after the fall of Jerusalem 586BC, were widely distributed throughout the Mediterranean and the Middle East. A significant segment of these had chosen Alexandria in Egypt as their home. By the fourth century BC the Jews there had largely lost much of their capability to communicate in or understand their original tongue, Hebrew. They adopted the language of the area, which was Greek. The need to understand their religious roots was strong and so the Hebrew Bible (then consisting only of the Torah) was translated into Greek. This translation was called the Septuagint


Well I want to finish this discussion since it is quite obvious that we are talking using a so different language. While I am using two so known and for centuries very clear biblical writers St Isaiah and St Matthew, Matrix1111 is insisting with incredible stubbornness to continue using non orthodox and so dubious sources.

For instance now he wants to give a precise interpretation of one of the fundamentals of the Christian faith, by using translations or I can say better biased interpretations of a group of Jews that arrived to Egypt after the entrance of Titus in Jerusalem in the 70 AC and he expect that we are going to accept their words in a matter of this????

It is a lie that is so big to be enough to construct with it an interoceanic bridge from here to the beaches of Normandy, that the Jews of the Diaspora exited Jerusalem in the 586 AC, as your sources said, they were massively expulsed as slaves and dispersed along all the provinces of the Roman Empire by the General Titus in 70 AC and by orders of the Emperor Claudius, that is in any serious book of History.

Your words clearly shows that you are part of the false rhetoric used by the extremist zionists to justify their current conflict in the middle east, they are lying just only to blame the Palestinians of all their problems in their exile.

en.wikipedia.org...

In 586 AC when Palestine was annexed by the Islam there were no Jews at all living there, possible some other type of Semites, like the Edomits or Amonits, Canaanits, Jebusean or Philistean but non jews by sure.

It is clear that the People that he is talking about were not Christians of any denomination, moreover, they were the people that Jesus in person told were going to be expulsed of the Holy land, and many killed inside the Walls of Jerusalem, as a consequence of their terrible sin committed when they rejected him and decided to execute him with false charged of conspiracy against Rome.

In the 70 A.C the Principals among the Jews decided to support a genuine subversion against Rome, leaded by Herod Antipas, and the consequences for the Jew nation were terrible, and along the next 20 centuries. So the same people that requested to Pilate to crucify Christ saying that he was a danger to the empire since he claimed to be the King of the Jews, were the same that decided to go ahead in conspiracy against Rome 40 years later.

The only conclusion that I can take of all this arguments and primarily about so nice sources used by Matrix1111 is that of course they most disagreed with me and the traditional Chritian ideas since his sources comes for one of the most hypocrite and perverse people that ever have lived in the History of our planet.


Luke 13:22-30 by the way is a so useful evidence to prove that Jesus never said that in some time in the future the Holy land will return to be a Jew State. Christ never promised a modern Israel, as now some fanatic & irresponsible "Christian" leaders, like John Hagee are every day repeating in their TV programs, as a supposed reason to continue sponsoring the expansion of the Zionist plans in the Middle east and also to promote the sending of more and more of millions of Jews to a country in which the only sure thing they are going to find is one of the most impressive and cruel tragedies of the History.

To the contrary Christ clearly stated that the possession of the Holy land by the Jews was going to finish and that country will be given to another people that use it better, since they showed to don’t deserve it.

The modern Israel was never predicted by any Prophet of the antiquity, the supposed verses of Isaiah that this fanatics likes to use to support their crazy ideas were written 8 centuries before Christ and refer exclusively to the return of the Hebrews from the exile in Babylonia happened in the V century before our era.

America must understand that there is so grave conspiracy between the Zionist fundamentalism and the Evangelic one to wash the brains of our society with the idea that we are doing the best to support an state that visible during the last 50 years has been created terrible issues in the middle east and for America too, since they are manipulating us to support them in their wars against Palestinians, Syrians and Arabs.

Thanks for your attention,

Your friend,

The Angel of Lightness




Luke 13:22-30

The Narrow Door
22Then Jesus went through the towns and villages, teaching as he made his way to Jerusalem. 23Someone asked him, "Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?"
He said to them, 24"Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to. 25Once the owner of the house gets up and closes the door, you will stand outside knocking and pleading, 'Sir, open the door for us.'
"But he will answer, 'I don't know you or where you come from.'

26"Then you will say, 'We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.'

27"But he will reply, 'I don't know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!'

28"There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. 30Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, will be first, and first who will be last."





[edit on 7/19/2008 by The angel of light]



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by The angel of light
 


English isn't your first language?



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix1111
 





Well I want to finish this discussion since it is quite obvious that we are talking using a so different language.


My first language is the Truth, I always write thinking twice before I am saying something if that is really a fact or not, if I have the reason, if I am using a correct & precise source or argument, or if it is based on a solid claim. I feel responsible to inform clearly and correctly my readers.

The Angel of lightness







[edit on 7/19/2008 by The angel of light]



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join