Originally posted by squirelnutz
reply to post by xuenchen
I think Jesus was real but he was part of the early "Hippie" Christians as I call them.. He defied Roman Law and the crucified him; but to add salt to
the wound; they made him the mascot/figure head of the New Christianity..
Or maybe they asked him to be the representative for the New Christianity and knew it; said "No" and they did it anyways..
This is all speculation, but the dates match up perfectly
Bear in mind here that I am not attempting to convert you to Christianity but feel the need to explain and throw some lines of thinking out here for
those with some analytical ability to digest. And I think most of the posters out here can comprehend what I am explaining from a purely logical and
secular point of view.
Jesus Christ could not have been part of any "Hippie" movement. For the Hippies are recognized as a type of "revolutionary." Not fitting the mold of
most peoples of their day.
What is known by those who understand the doctrine is that Jesus was no revolutionary..Nor Hippie. It is the Hebrews and their leadership who were
revolutionaries in attempting to overlay a dogma and doctrine on the Law of Moses and pass it off as this Law when it was in fact no such thing. The
Hebrew leadership were the Revolutionary Hippies secretly and privily substituting something else for the Law of Moses...thus overthrowing the order
and going after another god/gods. This is called in the Bible...by the word "Whoredom."
Jesus was not going against Roman Law..he was going against Talmudic Law being infiltrated and overlaid on the Law of Moses as if the Talmudic Law was
the Law of Moses..it was no such thing.
They did not ask Him to be representative of the new Christianity...for He is the Rightful King. What they were hoping is that He would turn and go
against Rome..and He did not. When He got to Jerusalem He went to His Fathers house..not to Rome. When the Hebrew leaders realized He was scorning
them with His teaching and preaching ..they turned on Him.
We know this because in like manner in later years ..they did turn on Paul for the same thing. So too with the other Apostles. Killing most of
Don't worry here ..I am not trying to convert you or anyone else here. And furthermore many many Christians are not knowledgeable sufficient to
comprehend this and many yet of their own preachers want to keep them this way.
IF one follows what is detailed in the Word...they killed Jesus to cover up what they were really doing...they were the revolutionaries/Hippies.
Once you know and understand this...which Pharisee/Sadducee leaders do you want to follow...Hellenic/Catholic Pharisees...or Hebrew Judaic
Pharisees..pick one?? Understand now??
Furthermore...the Significance of Jesus according to the Bible is His death and for whom He died. It is not His birth. In this many ministers are very
deceiving to their flocks by not getting them to comprehend this concept. Instead..like many merchants and philosophers...tending towards all the
Beautiful stuff...prettys...The Holidays are pretties...beautiful.
There is no new testament instruction for a Believer to celebrate a birthday....ever. Nor is there an instruction for a Hebrew in the Olde Testament
to celebrate a birthday. You will find this pattern in Paganism.
Birthdays are self glorification. This is not an instruction to self glorify in either the Olde or New Testament. So from whence does it
See how easy it is once you learn to think outside the box. Is this not to what you are alluding so often in your posts Proto??? Outside the box of
public education/television/movie standards...or all the peoples whom are on the bandwagon??
I think you want to ask certain questions but you have to filter and go through a thousand other questions to get to the ones which might be very
telling to those who can think outside the box.
Kaiser is a variation of Caesar. So too with the word Tsar or Czar.
Pontiff...the one who gets you across the river Styx..the boatman??
Why do so many Feudal systems use the word Lord in their hierarchy. My Lord..by your leave My Lord. Liege...etc etc?? These are extensions of olde
Feudal Priest/Kings systems of government which was and still is the dominant form of government among men today and going back into antiquity.
Theses peoples by and large believed that their leaders or Kings had their crowns put upon them by the Priesthood and their authority was then and
therefore from god or their gods. Their power then was absolute. This is the dominant form of government among men for most of recorded history.
Divine Right of Kings...absolute power.
The very power someone is attempting to return to by way of Commercial maritime law...which is also very ancient in its forms and origins. Absolute
power over everyone and everything. Or as some would declare...the absolute mastery of everything.
This is the very best form of Government that intelligent reasonable logical men can on their own merits and demerits devise. Tyranny. History is
replete with this example..both yesteryear's and today.
Well for most this is a tangent and would not make sense..but to those who do..bon appetit.
The term used by Rome..."Universal" is a dead giveaway. I say this because the doctrine in Christianity is anti social. Christianity is itself anti
social. Come out from amongst them and be ye separate. This is anti Social.
Universal means it must be more social to be universal. You hear this about Rome very often...it is Universal. This should be a dead giveaway.
In craft Masonry one often hears ...all religions are the same religion. All gods are the same god. This too is universal. Once you understand
this..some of the dots become connected. It is a social dogma..or social doctrine...universal.
I will tell you something that even many Christians do not follow well or easily because their preachers and ministers seldom will make the connection
for them. If you understood it you will know sufficient to put light on their churches and doctrine.
IN Galatians chapter 4 concerning the two brothers by their father Abraham...there is a statement in allegory form.
It says that the Children of the bondwoman...Hagar...her child Ishmael...shall not be heir with the children of the freewoman...Sarah...her child
Issac. In Issac shall thy seed be called.
The Universal Doctrine is to make the children of the bondwoman heir with the children of the free woman in contradiction to what the Word
If all gods are the same god and all religions are the same religion than the children of the bondwoman shall be heir with the children of the free
Now perhaps some of you can understand the goal of many of these movements. To bring about Universality through the bondwoman and her child
Hagar/Ishmael being heir with the child of the free woman Sarah/Issac.
And they intend to do this by bankrupting every nation/people ..through maritime merchant law. Equality will be found at the poverty level. You can
see the groundwork of much of it taking place in front of you.
I hope that these disconnected bits of information's help some of you to connect the dots at some levels.
I do not intend to convert any of you out here but just offer another view with different information's and from a different angle than I believe many
of you have ever heard.
I have read this thread up to about page 27 and am continuing to read through but wanted to post in reply to the last couple of days of posts.
Gotta get some shut eye now.
Thanks to all for their posts.
edit on 1-12-2010 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)