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.

 

Mary.

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousPoster4
I saw something on one of those stations saying Jesus' body was missing the very next day, and that he wasn't dead, and he lived to be an old man, with kids of his own.

Funny stuff.

Then again, thats more believable too.


It's more believable that a man was crucified to death but actually didn't die and somehow survived being shut behind a rock and went on to live a normal life? Hmm... I'd much rather believe that he rose from death to be with God.




posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousPoster4
Genisus 1:26

and god said, "let us make man in our imag after our likeness."

Wait, isn't there 1 God?

Yes, theres one god...maybe he's like me and talks to himself like that. I know I do that a lot...just like Gollum



posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 05:21 PM
link   


Who was he talking to, and who is "us" and "our"?

You have to keep in mind that the Bible was not written in English. It is being translated into English from Hebrew, Greek and Latin. Even when the Bible is being written in Hebrew there are problems because Hebrew borrows words from Aramaic, Canaanite, Akkadian, etc.

There are numerous Bible errors where translators mixed up plural and singular forms of the word "god/Elohim" and singular/plural grammar. Tons of other small errors include lines like this from Genesis: "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Many readers see that and believe that the Bible says Gods because there are many Gods but this is a Hebrew mistranlation into English. There is not a plural for the word God / Elohim in Hebrew. It would be like the word Moose in English. Most of the time these errors get fixed over time - in some Bibles you will see the word GODS has been replaced by THE LORD GOD. You might have a Bible that says Rabbits chew their cud and have hoofs. Does this mean that back in the Bible times that Rabbits were different animals? Nope, just a mistranslation. Rabbit should have been camel and has been fixed in many Bibles. There are hundreds of these small word mistranlations.

Just try to keep in mind that mistranslations appeared because of the different languages, influences of individual authors, and because translators placed their own stamp on them. This is the main reason it is very difficult for people using Bible Codes or looking for secret message to be considered legitimate if they are using English texts. The English Bible is a translation - of a translation - of a translation. Just like making a copy - of a copy - of a copy - words get lost and lose some meaning being shifted into different languages.



posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Faisca

Originally posted by AnonymousPoster4

Why did you skirt around replying to my post? Just wondering...


What was there to reply to?

I find this all very amusing.


I responded to the question you asked and you didn't acknowledge my answer. Which is not only rude, but shows that you probably couldn't come up with some witty anti-religious comment for me.


You didn't give an answer, you gave an excuse. An excuse to believe in what you do.

All you people do is make excuses. Or answer what you think was ment.



posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Excuses just as in zerotimes last post.

[Edited on 28-3-2004 by AnonymousPoster4]



posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 06:04 PM
link   
There are 4 possible Marys, choose the one that works the best for you:
1) Historical Mary who gave birth to Jesus; the father might have been a Roman centurion, there's debate on this. But whoever the biological father was, spiritually the true father was God. This Kid was only half-human.
2) The Alien Mary: What Jacques Vallee refers to as the "BVM" (Blessed Virgin Mary); a tool used by aliens to impart information to humans in a form that they will be entranced with & listen to. For example--Fatima Apparition.
3) The Mother Goddess Mary: that primordial Goddess that has been worshipped in countless forms all over the thousands of years (Isis, Ishtar, etc.)--of which the Mary we know is but one form. "She Of Many Names".
4) The Roman Catholic Mary: A thoughtform become real through the intense devotion of Christians & Roman Catholics in particular. Such is the power of this massive concentrated belief that miracles do happen in conection with Her and Her relics, though more often than not it is the believers themselves who make the magic happen (weeping statues etc.). Thoughtform, yes...really powerful--YES!!!!

I'm a pagan but have turned instinctually to Mary #4 during certain periods of duress and with good results. I'd not be disrespectful of Marys #3 & #4. Mary #2 is somewhat untrustworthy & a bit manipulative. Mary #1 was a simple, devout woman who was chosen by God for A Necessary Task Of Great Import--she probably loved her child very much, realized early on that He wasn't completely from "around here," and had a lot to deal with.



posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 08:23 PM
link   


Excuses just as in zerotimes last post.

Why is my answer an excuse? Even people who do not believe in the Bible can understand the complexities of translating two thousand-year-old dead languages into present day English. Do you believe that the translations are easy?

The facts are simple. There is no plural for the word God in Hebrew. The word is Elohim. There is no plural so when you see the word GODS in english text it is a mistake. When the Bible says a Rabbit has hoofs this is a translation error. All of these errors have been addressed for over a thousand years and get fixed over time. Is this really that difficult to understand?


[Edited on 28-3-2004 by zerotime]



posted on Mar, 28 2004 @ 08:47 PM
link   
There's a movie called "Joseph of Nazereth" that deals with this. Mary being an adulterer instead of a virgin mother. I lean toward this theory. Also, another good movie about this is; "The Life Of Brian".



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassie Clay
There are 4 possible Marys, choose the one that works the best for you:
1) Historical Mary who gave birth to Jesus; the father might have been a Roman centurion, there's debate on this. But whoever the biological father was, spiritually the true father was God. This Kid was only half-human.
2) The Alien Mary: What Jacques Vallee refers to as the "BVM" (Blessed Virgin Mary); a tool used by aliens to impart information to humans in a form that they will be entranced with & listen to. For example--Fatima Apparition.
3) The Mother Goddess Mary: that primordial Goddess that has been worshipped in countless forms all over the thousands of years (Isis, Ishtar, etc.)--of which the Mary we know is but one form. "She Of Many Names".
4) The Roman Catholic Mary: A thoughtform become real through the intense devotion of Christians & Roman Catholics in particular. Such is the power of this massive concentrated belief that miracles do happen in conection with Her and Her relics, though more often than not it is the believers themselves who make the magic happen (weeping statues etc.). Thoughtform, yes...really powerful--YES!!!!

I'm a pagan but have turned instinctually to Mary #4 during certain periods of duress and with good results. I'd not be disrespectful of Marys #3 & #4. Mary #2 is somewhat untrustworthy & a bit manipulative. Mary #1 was a simple, devout woman who was chosen by God for A Necessary Task Of Great Import--she probably loved her child very much, realized early on that He wasn't completely from "around here," and had a lot to deal with.



I agree. I love Mary 4, There are just too many odd things around Mary, Fatima etc. I know when I pray I envision Mary as a loving mother and it makes me feel good. (and that's what counts) Also
Remember, Mary's Mom, she couldn't have a baby, and she was visited by an angel first. ( I think)

Now the science side of me says hmmmm, Virgin Birth..

I'm sure the first thing Joe said was... It better be Gods baby or your gonna meet him in person. But. look at what has taken place here, is that not truly a miracle.

2000 years later, we are arguing about it? and is the focus of billions of people. I think that's what's amazing.


Anyways to argue your point first given.

People we NOT believing in everything back then. How would you know? A movie? If anything you did not want to affiliate yourself with God let alone the SON of GOD.

Look what happened to Jesus! They stoned people daily (this is written docs) for even saying the word of God.
So for a young women, to say that, not only take huge balls (oops) but could have been a death sentence. This was no ordinary woman. I hopefully you will realize just how tough that must have been and for it to stick for 2000 years.

My 2 cents

But bottom line is if you think GOD can do these things, then truly anything is possible



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 11:10 AM
link   
the difference.

marys sons church has spread to all corners of earth, and has his sacrafice while being
the largest religion on earth, and having seen 2000 years of miracles in his name which i can
testify to.



how large is the fable mithraism spread?



proof is in the fruits and miracles.



peace



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth


marys sons church has spread to all corners of earth, and has his sacrafice while being
the largest religion on earth, and having seen 2000 years of miracles in his name which i can
testify to.
how large is the fable mithraism spread?
proof is in the fruits and miracles.



Well, Mithraism probably would have spread all over and to a degree it has, in the shape of modern Christianity - allbeit in a slightly different form. But the RCC wiped it's main face out, along with anything else it didn't agree with. Hundreds of pagan cults and competing Christian sects were literally obliterated. Mithraism itself, was a later development of the Dionysus cult whch itself came out of the Osiris cult.
See where we're going with this?

Each religion was a development of an earlier one. Each took the doctrines, beliefs and symbols of their predecessors and then adapted them for their own uses.

Even your "proofs" of miracles is not an original idea. Each of the earlier religions had it's fair share of miracle workers.

[Edited on 29-3-2004 by Leveller]



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 11:29 AM
link   
jesus was predicted by many prophets, and actually lived and worked miracles, while mithra is a thought up fable who never existed.


these [miracles] i speak about you do not know the circumstances of, and me and god know, so ill leave it at that.





peace



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth


jesus was predicted by many prophets, and actually lived and worked miracles, while mithra is a thought up fable who never existed.
these [miracles] i speak about you do not know the circumstances of, and me and god know, so ill leave it at that.




Cool dude. I'll just forget everything I've seen and learnt and climb aboard the Brainwash Bus to Oblivion.

Of course Mithras was made up. I already stated that he came from another idea. Unfortunately for you though, old JC did pretty bloody much absolutely the same. All the other dudes had their prophets who foretold their coming too.

I find it even cooler that you're in on a secret that only you and your God know about. I'm pretty much in the same boat with my God.
In fact it was him that told me all about the Christianity/Mithras stuff and told me to tell you that basically, all religion is a crock and a development of other ideas that came before. He also told me that He's rather pissed about how all you religious dudes are doing all your # around the world in His name, without even bothering to ask Him first. Let me tell you - if I were Him, I'd be pretty pissed.

God. If you're reading this. I told 'em. Sorry for letting your secret out.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerotime


Excuses just as in zerotimes last post.

Why is my answer an excuse? Even people who do not believe in the Bible can understand the complexities of translating two thousand-year-old dead languages into present day English. Do you believe that the translations are easy?

The facts are simple. There is no plural for the word God in Hebrew. The word is Elohim. There is no plural so when you see the word GODS in english text it is a mistake. When the Bible says a Rabbit has hoofs this is a translation error. All of these errors have been addressed for over a thousand years and get fixed over time. Is this really that difficult to understand?


[Edited on 28-3-2004 by zerotime]


Just thought you might like to know that Elohim is plural.



posted on Mar, 29 2004 @ 03:14 PM
link   


Just thought you might like to know that Elohim is plural.


Not a plural as in many. True, Hebrew words ending in IM usually mean plural but this is not a case where Gods equals multiple Gods. Elohim is a word that indicates a proper name (the God of Isreal) and plural personality. Part of the big problem with people who pick at the Bible is that they pull out one-liners without the ability and education needed to thoroughly examine at the entire book as a whole. We know Elohim is not plural gods because it can be examined all the way through the Old Testament of the Bible.

Here are a few examples:

And God (Elohim) said unto Jacob, Arise, go up to Bethel, and dwell there: and make there an altar unto God (El) that appeared unto thee when thou fledest from the face of Esau thy brother. Genesis 35:1

No one contends that the God who instructed Jacob to build an altar was authorizing Jacob to build it to an entirely different God. And yet, without hesitancy, both El and Elohiym are employed in the verse. Elohim is used it represents the proper name and plural personality.

The writer of the Old Testaments did not believe in multiple gods. We know this because he tells us time after time.

Unto thee it was showed, that thou mightest know that Jehovah he is God; there is none else besides him. DT. 4:35

The Old Testament writer was also fully aware of the multiple personalities of God. We know this because he tells us through TWO LINES (the second is usually left out).

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:26-27

Some people might suppose that these plural pronouns indicate more than one god or that God is somehow more than one, but the grammar of the passages indicates otherwise.

In Genesis 1:26, ELOHIM (plural) said (third masculine singular), "Let us make (first person common plural) man (noun masculine singular) in our image ("image" is a masculine singular noun with a first person common plural suffix), after our likeness ("likeness" is a feminine singular noun with a first person common plural suffix)."

When ELOHIM refers to the one true God, singular verbs and pronouns are used. When the one true God reaches out to include others in His activities, plural verbs and pronouns are used. These do not indicate any plurality of gods or that the true God is more than one. "When [ELOHIM] refers to the God of Israel it is always singular in concept, even though it has a masculine plural ending.

As Jewish people will tell you it would not be uncommon for God to say WE when referring to the creation because throughout the Bible we are told that the angels were present at creation, rejoicing in the works of God. When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy Job. 38:7




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join