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.

 

Possible Ancient Conspiracy that is still in play today?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:08 PM
link   
First, a couple of disclaimers. First, this thread in no way is intended to debunk the claim of Jesus' divinity. Second, this thread in no way implies that any living person is 'in' on the conspiracy.

With that said, let me get to the meat of what I mean in the title of this thread. One of the basic tenents of Christianity is that the only way into the 'Kingdom of God', i.e. Heaven, is through Jesus. In other words, that one must accept and believe that Jesus was the Son of God, and that only Christians will not go to Hell for eternity to suffer in pain. This has proven to be an excellent recruiting tool, as one third of the world's population is Christian. So where's the conspiracy, you might ask? Let me tell you...

While some of the Gospels and other books of the New Testament have been attributed to those who actually knew Jesus, there is no conclusive proof of such, thus authorship is debatable. But for the sake of this debate, let's assume that they were. Let us also assume that the original versions were accurate.

Now for the first few centuries of Christianity, the tradition was passed down vocally, as most did not know how to read, and as the various books would have been written in various languages, no one would really be able to read all of them anyway. It wasn't until the fourth century that the Church heirarchy decided what books to include in the official 'Bible' and which books to not include, and to translate them into one language.

What if instead of deciding based on facts contained, they made these decisions based on what would give the Church more power and influence, and what would cause more to follow and accept this new religion. In addition, what if the original text was changed to accomodate these goals. In other words, instead of basing decisions on spreading the true teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, they instead based decisions on what would give this already powerful hierarchy even more power over the 'sheeple' (yes, it's not a new concept).

One of the strongest ways to accomplish this would be to include or change passages in the texts to reflect that Christianity was the only path to 'salvation'. Is it not possible that instead of saying that the only path to salvation was through him, Jesus instead said that it was through God. This would allow for other paths to be followed outside of the official Church. One would only be required to accept a loving Higher Power, and not be under the control of the Church.

What makes me doubt the official view of Christianity? It just doesn't strike me as very 'Christ-like'. More people have not had the opportunity to 'salvation' than those who have. Before the modern era, most of the world was not exposed to 'The Word', thus never had the chance to accept or deny Jesus. Now, if one is to accept the qualities that Jesus espoused to God, then this would seem counter to this requirement to enter the 'Kingdom of God'.

Heaven, by this standard, would be a rather empty place, while Hell would be way overbooked! By this standard, babies and small children who die before they can comprehend or understand such complex ideas will go to Hell. By this standard, anyone in the Orient or the Americas before their discovery by Europeans would go to Hell. By this standard, all who were born and died before the birth of Jesus would go to Hell. By this standard, 4 billion souls currently here are going to Hell. Ghandi, Hell. Buddha, Hell. Confusious, Hell. His chosen people, the Jews, Hell. Anyone who led a good life and did good deeds but did not know Christ, Hell. I think you get the picture. Does this sound like what a Loving Father would do?

According to Christian beliefs, in the battle for souls, Satan has already won. Are we saying God is a loser? Or is this a conspiracy of power hungry early Church leaders to gain more power and prestige? A conspiracy that is unwittingly being continued to this day? Is this just another case of 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely!'??? Since history is replete with corrupt Church leaders, is it really a stretch to think this is possible?




posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


You're out of your vulcan mind, Spock!

I've always wanted to say that. Ahem. This will open a can of worms, but I have a few comments.

1) The Gospel of Mary last dating showed it to be approx 40ish CE. So it was contemporary to Jesus and dictated by someone claiming to be near and dear to him.

2) The dating of the Gospels is all screwy based on a comment in Mark and the supposition that he was not divine. The supposition leaves out the possibility of a) a good guess, or b) just politically astute.

3) There is another "find" that will be published in the next few years, also contemporary.

4) As to your argument on the divinity and the reference...It depends upon who interprets the text what the theology is, so...as to the divinity, the sentence reads about coming to the Father by Jesus almost in a proximity manner as if we will walk through or by him.

5) My take is that the 25th chapter of Matthew sums it up. Jesus ("the Godhead") lives in all of us, when we help and nurture our neighbor it is a form of worship, in fact the form of worship.

So, to sum it all up...6) IMO, not a conspiracy, just man injecting his desires to find some other way than public service to worship God because the poor and the sick are just so icky and not as much fun as dressing up and throwing around incense.

Odd to be coming from a Catholic, eh? I wish the priest would put down the incense. *sigh*



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I don't know where but I remember reading long ago that the word Jesus used could be interputed as the self instead of "me". In other words, the only way to heaven is through yourself, or maybe knowing yourself. It made sense to me at the time. I'll do a little searching and see if I can find anything on this.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by A Fortiori
 


I assure you Doctor, my logic is quite sound.

Love Star Trek quotes! Anyway, it's been a long day, so I'm a little confused about your position. Do you believe it is possible for non-Christians to return to the Creator? And is it not possible that the translations could intentionally contain errors to give the Church sole domain over the path to the afterlife?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


No, its not you. It's my martini.


I believe it is possible for everyone to return to Source. In fact we all will eventually. We have to choose it though. We have to understand the nature of G-D so that we know how to seek it and want to see it in the post physical body realm.

Basically, I think we die and return to "Heaven" (use it in quotes for a reason) OR we are so enamored with "Hell" (Earth) that we choose to return.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by A Fortiori
 


WOW, you might be surprised how close our beliefs are!



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Have you read any ancient Gnostic works? I fall somewhere between there and Augustinian Catholicism and Pure Land (Vietnamese) Buddhism in how I view the afterlife.

Still, as you know, I am one hundred percent loyal to my main guy, Jesus.


I'm a faithful gal.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by A Fortiori
 


It's been awhile, but I did read them once. Very enlightening! In fact, it's the Gnostic Gospels, and the discrepancies that made me not only doubt the official Christian Doctrine, but the intentions of the Church leadership in the selection of which books were to be included in the 'official' Bible.



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Julius Caesar = Jesus Christ
Brutus = Judas
Caesar had his 12 lictors who carried the fasces and represented the law.
Christ had his 12 diciples who carried and spread the gospel that represented the law.

The whole story of Jesus is a completely manufactured myth build around an obscure cult that no decent Pagan Roman found anything the least bit attractive about.

Temples to Bacchus and Venus and Jupiter were attractive, so were Co-ed baths.

Bread and Circuses was bankrupting the empire though and it's army and citizenry bled white by endless wars of expansion conquering the world.

In warfare one must adapt and improvise so they simply came up with another plan.

Instead of giving you bread and circuses they offered you eternal life and salvation.

Instead of throwing you to the lions or having a lictor lob off your head for Caesar's pleasure, they kept you in line with the fear of hell.

It took a while to get it going, the Dark Ages, but once they had it all in place they lifted it.

You can still see the Roman Fasces on the wall behind the speakers chair of the U.S. Senate and on the back of old mercury dimes.

Rome is on your money in a dead language called Latin, the money that extolls you to trust in G-d in a nation founded on seperation of church and state, a nation founded on that same magical zodiac number of 13.

The sun in the middle, surrounded by the 12 signs.

A sun that represents the All Seeing Eye of Horus on top of the Egyptian Pyramid surrounded by the Latin inscription on that back of your 1.00 bill.

The same Horus who was also the son of G-d, only a G-d named ahem...Amen, as in Amen Ra as every Christian dedicates their prayers to Amen who is the light the Sun.

Christianity is nothing but a control cult for Rome's governance and conquering of the planet.

A Rome that is very much still alive. A Rome that has very nearly conquereed the entire world now.

Look at the architecture in the edifices of your public buildings, look at your laws, look at your money, look at the treaties that end wars and establish nations.

Rome is alive and well and doing swell in no small part thanks to Julius Caesar aka Jesus Christ.

It's right in everyone's face, they just as always refuse to believe the obvious.

Hail Caesar, live long and prosper, and I for one can not wait for them to finish up so we can get back to coed baths!

Kirk out!

[edit on 5/9/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Abraham...was the Egyptian Pharaoh Amenemhet I
Jacob...was the Israeli/Hyksos conqueror who sat on Egypts throne, ruling as Yakubher.
Moses...the Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III (note: Isis, mother of Moses)
King David...Pharaoh Psusennes I (David's son Solomon....sol means son and Omon means Ra.....was the same person as Siamun (son of Pharaoh Psusennes), meaning Son of Amun)
King Solomon...ruled as Pharaoh Siamun. (note: King Solomons Temple means "Temple of the Sun God Amen)
Jesus...rightful heir to the throne of Egypt....son of Cleopatra and Julius Caesar...named Caesarion.

The previous poster is close, but not exactly correct.

Ever wonder why the Queen sits on a Throne built around the Stone of Scone?



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Very thought provoking!

I must say I am more spiritual than religious. I believe in GOD and Jesus (I was raised Southern Baptist) but after having some issues within the churches of my past and some blatant hypocrisy I turned to GOD on my own and believe he/she/it does not care either way.

I believe, I pray, but I do not go to church. Some of my friends and family look down on me for that.

I was told once that the great journey is within ourselves and what we decide to do with it is up to us. I never thought of Earth as being Hell and we simply return until we are ready to move on, that really made me think.

I was told by a friend a couple years ago that Jesus mentioned to someone sitting in a tree something to the effect of "you fool death is not the end you are born again into this life" or something to that effect. If someone could find the actual scripture that would be great, but my friend said Jesus was talking about reincarnation and that his teachings were to help us understand that we can get closer to GOD by living and learning in multiple lives.

Anyway - awesome thread, made me think more!



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Tesla401
 


Gremlin caused duplicate post!

Gremlins are the real dark conspiracy!

[edit on 4/9/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tesla401
Abraham...was the Egyptian Pharaoh Amenemhet I
Jacob...was the Israeli/Hyksos conqueror who sat on Egypts throne, ruling as Yakubher.
Moses...the Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III (note: Isis, mother of Moses)
King David...Pharaoh Psusennes I (David's son Solomon....sol means son and Omon means Ra.....was the same person as Siamun (son of Pharaoh Psusennes), meaning Son of Amun)
King Solomon...ruled as Pharaoh Siamun. (note: King Solomons Temple means "Temple of the Sun God Amen)
Jesus...rightful heir to the throne of Egypt....son of Cleopatra and Julius Caesar...named Caesarion.

The previous poster is close, but not exactly correct.

Ever wonder why the Queen sits on a Throne built around the Stone of Scone?


Oh please don’t get me wrong, the Hebrew Elders and the Zionist leaders are up to their eyebrows in all of this.

They basically bankrolled the whole plan.

The Hyksos, aka Habiru/Hapiri/Hebrews were kicking around the Mediterranean and the Middle East from Egypt to Babylon for six thousand years before Caesar. Just like today they remained separate but equal peoples within communities they wandered in and out of, often working as mercenaries, slave traders, money lenders, artisans and political advisors and usually trying to completely take over the nations they wandered in and out of.

Jerusalem was just their settling point when they got kicked out of Egypt, and Egypt wasn’t the first kingdom they got kicked out of. Why do you think the first thing that fell inside Baghdad was the museum and why the archeological sights were all prime targets of U.S. Forcers, why Syria is a closed society, and why Egypt is paid billions a year to keep it’s mouth shut.

Most of Christianity is based on Sassanind Persian Gnosticism the Roman who wrote most of it was a pagan turned Gnostic which the Catholics know as St. George.

It’s why the Muslims reject the Jews they were there in the region too and they know it’s all a huge lie.

The whole sacking of Jerusalem was nothing but a false flag to help pull off the plan and give the whole thing credence. Since the pagans who were having the religion rammed down their throats couldn’t actually see or communicate with G-d or Jesus the next best thing was letting them see the Jews who came from the same region.

The Christian armies would conquer and cower the pagans and set up governance and the Jews would move in behind them and set up the banking and gold based commerce system, lend money, create economic slaves, and give credence to the whole notion that Jesus was a Jew and the Son of the Jewish G-d.

Rome would occasionally scapegoat and hide behind the Jews and still does.

The Hebrew elders bankrolled it, and it’s why Rothschild banks the church’s money and the Queens and the rest of the princes, and princesses still openly around from the Empire.

It’s a brilliant plan. Roman arms and cunning divide and conquer warfare, getting people to essentially eliminate each other by using their own differences against them, and Jewish gold financing it all.

The plan is working marvelously.

Hail Caesar!



posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


So I have a question. Do you think that maybe the prophecies of St. Malachy could be fortelling the exposure of this cover up? The Papal line is supposed to end with Pope Benedict (or the next Pope, depending on which of the two prophecies is legit), and I cannot think of anything else that could possibly bring down the Catholic Church. Hmm, perhaps on 12/21/12???



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


So I have a question. Do you think that maybe the prophecies of St. Malachy could be fortelling the exposure of this cover up? The Papal line is supposed to end with Pope Benedict (or the next Pope, depending on which of the two prophecies is legit), and I cannot think of anything else that could possibly bring down the Catholic Church. Hmm, perhaps on 12/21/12???


You have to understand that there are in fact two popes. The Jesuit General who is known as the Black Pope and the Pontiff in Rome known as the White Pope.

The real religions are sun cults, based on worship of the sun and the basic elements, hence the Holy See, the all Seeing Eye, but also the oceans, the two elements to life as we know it, sun and water, and without them we all die.

At the priestly level they actually practice a form of occult mysticism that uses mushrooms to alter their state of mind much like American Indians do.

Their costumes actually represent the various mushrooms the use, in they colors and cuts.

They actually tap into the spiritual power of their congregations while chanting arcane rituals in Latin the laity don't understand to use the power of positive visualization to their own end, some call this magic, but it really is just the power of positive visualization.

It's all based on the Zodiac and the progression of the Equinoxes; right now we are in Pisces the Christian Fish, the previous age that B.C. before Caesar was the age of the Ram which was ruled by the Hebrews as the dominant power.

The Hebrews the Masters of the last age hooked up with the Romans the Masters of this Age to run things, and further human collective consciousness along.

However the age ends in 2012.

The Age of Aquarius begins then, and it will mark a major shift in how the world runs and functions as that is how the progression of the Equinoxes works.

Actual scripture quotes Jesus as saying I will be with you to the end of the age. Actual scripture says behold a man at the door bearing a pitcher of water.

This is Aquarius the next age which starts in 2012. Rome has until then to solidify its gains, and set the stage for the next age. Basically metaphorically speaking the fish Pisces has been a fish out of water. It flops and flips and gasps and struggles. The age of Aquarius adds the water to the equation, it will be a period of growing collective consciousness were people will increase their inherent powers of their own mind, wiser for the lessons of the last age, and in a better position to use them.

Part of the rancor in the world today is the shift has already occurred, Most people are unhappy because they know they are being bombarded with lies, not just because the lies are obvious but because they are becoming wise enough and intuitive enough and in touch enough with their own intuition to know instinctively when they are bring lied too.

The Christian, Muslim and Hebrew religion will actually be stamped out in the end of this age, and that is what the prophecy is about. It’s about preparing people for an end of the spiritual governance system based on deities and a one world government by deceiving them into believing that their side wins and everyone will be just like they will.

In reality the Powers that Be will introduce a new more pragmatic spiritual belief system in the start of the new age to keep helping people along that don’t trust in their own inherent powers as human beings and aren’t mature or wise enough yet to wield them safely and effectively.

Much of the strife right now is the Powers that Be literally teaching people how counterproductive their own vanities, jealousies and desire for vengeance and wealth are.

That’s why G-d was marketed as a vengeful, jealous, angry and vain G-d, because those are the exact character flaws that plague humans. It’s why his son/sun was marketed as being gentler, pious, understanding and forgiving as those are the qualities that lead to a more harmonious growth and understanding and wisdom.

It’s a process of evolution with intelligent design for not the smartest of creatures, with the very slow and meticulous aim of teaching them to be more intelligent, compassionate, wiser, empathetic creatures, in part by brutally showing them how miserable life is when you don’t have those qualities.

There are some sinister aspects to the conspiracy there are some evolutionary aspects to the conspiracy too.

It’s all about getting humans to grow up and learn.

It’s all about putting them on the same page and wave length.

It’s all about teaching them to finally stop fighting each other and to start fighting with one another to take their place amongst the stars and the universe.






[edit on 5/9/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Well, honestly.. wow. Hahaha.. sick post(s). You have organised many stray facts in my head for me, and I thank you for that.


I think the OP's question has been answered, and at length. You have tied together many, many pieces of the puzzle in a concise and effective manner.

I can only give you a star, but it's a special star. ..there's no saviour beneath it, however. .. it's not that special. Still, pretty special if you consider how much attention it's getting. ..way more than three wisemen.



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

What if instead of deciding based on facts contained, they made these decisions based on what would give the Church more power and influence, and what would cause more to follow and accept this new religion. In addition, what if the original text was changed to accomodate these goals. In other words, instead of basing decisions on spreading the true teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, they instead based decisions on what would give this already powerful hierarchy even more power over the 'sheeple' (yes, it's not a new concept).



Well since you're so forgiving with the "Let's assume the Bible is true" (by the way the Bible cannot be "true" *IF* it was altered later by men as you suggest. It would then not be true) can you please show us where these evil power hungry men injected into the scripture how the "sheeple" were to make them rich and wealthy??

I do not see where we have any statements in Scripture that large amounts of money or land is to be given to these evil, power corrupt church leaders? In fact Jesus Himself rebukes organized religion based on mans empty attempts to please God with their empty religion and repetitious prayers. Jesus rebuked the wealthy and prideful. Kinda stupid to keep those things in there if these guys wanted to influence people to their "religion".



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by TangoVooDoo

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

What if instead of deciding based on facts contained, they made these decisions based on what would give the Church more power and influence, and what would cause more to follow and accept this new religion. In addition, what if the original text was changed to accomodate these goals. In other words, instead of basing decisions on spreading the true teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, they instead based decisions on what would give this already powerful hierarchy even more power over the 'sheeple' (yes, it's not a new concept).



Well since you're so forgiving with the "Let's assume the Bible is true" (by the way the Bible cannot be "true" *IF* it was altered later by men as you suggest. It would then not be true) can you please show us where these evil power hungry men injected into the scripture how the "sheeple" were to make them rich and wealthy??

I do not see where we have any statements in Scripture that large amounts of money or land is to be given to these evil, power corrupt church leaders? In fact Jesus Himself rebukes organized religion based on mans empty attempts to please God with their empty religion and repetitious prayers. Jesus rebuked the wealthy and prideful. Kinda stupid to keep those things in there if these guys wanted to influence people to their "religion".


Sorry for intervening here but I just wanted to bring a thought.

When we look back into all religions...all the time we see the new one taking something form the old....mostly this reason is for comfort...making it easy to conform. Look how hard of a time people have taking on a new thought. Imagine how hard it would be to take on a thought totally opposite of the one they already foster. It happens this way for a deeper reason. While this happens though...you can see how certain things are refused by the Elite to be let go of.

Rome saw control of the uncontrollable masses through the church. They needed to bring structure to a people that fostered different belief systems. Imagine what people would of said to someone that came at that time and said....your sacrifices are wrong. The people would go stark mad. They would kill him eventually because he is taking their comfort.

Imagine there being a knowledge that would give each human the capability of only needing a direct relation to God without any middle man. How would the Elite control or make money without the middle man and the middle Earthly Temple. Look at the riches the Pope wears. Look at the money spent on Earthly temples. Just because they send some of their money to help others doesnt cover their wrongs.

Imagine a man that came and said...you need no priest, you need no Earthly church....now go and be with your God all on your own. He would surely be killed.

Look at what the world is getting ready to shed blood over again....Israel.

This is Earthly. This is separation. This is a conspiracy to cling to Earthly things. How hard is it to prophesy of horrid wars when you have a people saying there is a God chosen land and a God chosen people. There are conspiracies within that even the people that made some of these Earthly thoughts didnt realize it would be a conspiracy.

We are slowly moving away from these things.

If you need a priest to forgive you and listen to your wrongs...there must be a church. For a church there must be money. The NT is full of stuff about needing Earthly churches. The Vatican is very wealthy. I bet they could feed the starving ones without any help.

But yet it also says the body is the true temple....

So the light is in the darkness. So its all good if you can see through it. I dont think all churches let loose to this idea...and I think some really try to walk in the right way.

I believe Rome added to and took away important things.



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TangoVooDoo
 


OK, I stated the assumptions to keep this thread on topic. I should have worded it better. But that said, I wasn't refering to material items such as land and riches, but instead I was refering to POWER to control the masses. A way to keep them under the thumb of the Church. We know for a fact that the Church wielded massive amounts of power through the centuries. They had their hands in every pie.

I am not trying to debate the validity of the religion, but instead the motives of those who shaped it following the death of it's founder. They had total control, absolute power to dictate what was and what was not to become Church Dogma.

"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton



posted on Sep, 8 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by LeoVirgo
 


Well, I am ember-ed towards the fact that we are individual and somehow an arbitrary evolution of deep thinkers. But, if I was going to try and digest the topic of discussion for all its worth, I am going take every possibility into consideration, for instance:

If you need a priest to forgive you and listen to your wrongs...there must be a church. For a church there must be money. The NT is full of stuff about needing Earthly churches. The Vatican is very wealthy. I bet they could feed the starving ones without any help.

It has been a variance of political issues that I personally think towards of the advent of Christianity being immersed upon the planet.
Though it leads to issues of Merovingian descent's, I for one cannot close my eye's to the feasibility of this being possible. And it would explain a lot by way of canonizing and denying some of the scriptures being permeated with such individuals such as ourselves, we would tear it up, so too speak. LOL
It is personal choice none the less, and from where I am at right now G_O_D stands for good orderly direction, with all the turmoil and discrimination around the world, it seems it has gotten lost in translation somehow.
I am atheist, but it wasn't always this way. baptized a Lutheran. I can give these suggested principal the credits they are due, but it doesn't require a multimillion dollar facility to postulate my good side to my fellow living being's, "YES" animals as well......
Very nice OP with the thread post, starred and flagged.
These topics usually get convoluted with argument and self absorbed ideologies.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join