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.

 

Are Royal Families really chosen by GOD?

page: 7
5
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Absolutely Not!
God wouldn't do that
The devil would tho




posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmericanDaughter
Absolutely Not!
God wouldn't do that
The devil would tho


Others have brought this viewpoint forward as well. If we are to analyze the actions of most royal families, it sure would be well supported.

That being said, the premise of this thread leans more toward the perception of the royal families themselves. Do they believe it, and use it as a way to justify their extreme wealth and power, or do they know it to be false but play along to keep a hold of what they have?

Thanks for posting,

the Billmeister



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Billmeister
 


Well, to be honest I had never considered that God had chosen the royal family Or that the 'royals' thought they were!
I know they act like it but I just figured that came from generations of entitledment; I can't imagine that they actually believe their family was chosen by God and for ?what? especially since thay are so screwed up!
If an American who doesn't pay attention knows they are screwed up can you imagine how bad it really is.
Of course most everyone is screwed up soo I don't believe The Lord made some or any family above others and it seems more like the devil's personality.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmericanDaughter
reply to post by Billmeister
 


Well, to be honest I had never considered that God had chosen the royal family Or that the 'royals' thought they were!
I know they act like it but I just figured that came from generations of entitledment; I can't imagine that they actually believe their family was chosen by God and for ?what? especially since thay are so screwed up!
If an American who doesn't pay attention knows they are screwed up can you imagine how bad it really is.
Of course most everyone is screwed up soo I don't believe The Lord made some or any family above others and it seems more like the devil's personality.



Ah, yes indeed.

My original questioning came from the understanding that the royals are taught this from birth, and anything (especially something positive like being a special "chosen one" by God) would be believed, if nothing else to justify their awesome privilege.
But, as I have stated before, we will really never know unless one of them is a member of ATS, and kindly decides to participate to this thread.

the Billmeister



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by Logarock
 


barabbis is not greek or latin...
it is hebrew, or arabic...
bar...like in bar mitzvah, is hebrew, bar mitzvah means the son of the covenant....mitzvah means the covenent...
so the bar in barabbis is son of....
okay, the last part could be abbis, which is either hebrew or arabic,,,,and hebrew was never that good about vowels...the were usually left ouf of writing. so, it could be abbas..
which means... "lion" in Arabic. (Austere: (1) severely simple in appearance. (2) strict, stern).
abba, is father...
so, we have Jesus....the Son of God.....and then we have Barabbis..which could concievable be translated as the Son of The Father...God.....to add to this that there are a few old documents that have Jesus Barabbis....

so, well, considering that Christ stormed into the temple, overthrew the moneychangers and drove them out of the temple area, well......that barabbis was really more than just a thief, that he was arrested for rioting, well.....
the two could be one, the rabbis could mean rabbi, which they called jesus rabbi, it could have been christ's son....or, barabbis and christ could be one in the same.....
regardless, I can't see how you can say that jesus wasn't prone to disrespecting the ptb of the time!



Ok I didnt say it was greek or latin. And I didnt say Jesus wasnt prone to disrespecting the ptb. I have always like the Jesus vs the PTB thing.

Anyway the reasoning behind this argument about Jesus and Barabbis is very poor. Mark is very clear in that whatever confusion has been created, he was talking about two seperate individuals here. The choice was between a Maccabean traditional type of deliverer and the other very extraordinary person. We certainly cant expect that a man that said render unto ceasar is going to be taken in by the nationalists. He never displayed a beef with roman occupation. He tossed out the money changers becouse He was on His own ground. The romans knew that Christs beef was with the Jewish order and not with rome.

This was the same case Jeremiah found himself in and as you need to apply here Jesus was likened to Jeremiah by some becouse of His openess to Gods will of foreign occupation and His war with the corrupt national establishment. We have to know that the Romans had a complete dossier on Jesus and considered His mission of no threat to them and was part of a internal Jewish issue. Barrabbis would have never went into the temple and tossed over tables ect. Barrabbis was a political and nationalistic zelot that needed the support of the temple.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by AmericanDaughter
Absolutely Not!
God wouldn't do that
The devil would tho


I am not saying that you should go out here and shine the Kings shoes or anything, but the truth is God did do some of "that". House of David....do the research.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by AmericanDaughter
Absolutely Not!
God wouldn't do that
The devil would tho


I am not saying that you should go out here and shine the Kings shoes or anything, but the truth is God did do some of "that". House of David....do the research.


Interesting you should bring that up, as the thought had occurred to me.

If someone could prove to be a descendent of the House of David, for example, they might have a valid argument in claiming their "divine right" to rule.

Any thoughts?

the Billmeister



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Billmeister
 



Would you settle for the divine right to exist? They would have that at the very least. Many of the royal lines in europe over the years have used many of the old judaic royal emblems.

edit on 28-1-2011 by Logarock because: ex



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
God didn't intend for their to be kings and queens....
He appointed judges to rule over Isreal first.


Actually, the way I read Genesis, God gave man dominion over the creatures of the earth sea and sky. I do not recall where it says that God gave mankind dominion over each other. And besides, once Adam and Eve transferred their authority over to the evil one, god pretty much stepped out of the picture. With man giving his sovereign authority over to the rulership of the bearer of the poison apple, this shadow government has been wreaking havoc ever since.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by Billmeister
 



Would you settle for the divine right to exist? They would have that at the very least. Many of the royal lines in europe over the years have used many of the old judaic royal emblems.

edit on 28-1-2011 by Logarock because: ex


I would hope that we all have a divine right to exist.

Are you suggesting, or more precisely, do you think that the royal families who use these symbols, are implying to be descendants of these biblical royal lines?

the Billmeister



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea

Originally posted by dawnstar
God didn't intend for their to be kings and queens....
He appointed judges to rule over Isreal first.


Actually, the way I read Genesis, God gave man dominion over the creatures of the earth sea and sky. I do not recall where it says that God gave mankind dominion over each other. And besides, once Adam and Eve transferred their authority over to the evil one, god pretty much stepped out of the picture. With man giving his sovereign authority over to the rulership of the bearer of the poison apple, this shadow government has been wreaking havoc ever since.


Does this suggest that all "earthly" kings are doing the devil's work?

Or perhaps those who allow themselves to be ruled are to blame?

In either case, I extrapolate that you suggest the only true "king" is not of this world.

the Billmeister



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Billmeister

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by Billmeister
 



Would you settle for the divine right to exist? They would have that at the very least. Many of the royal lines in europe over the years have used many of the old judaic royal emblems.

edit on 28-1-2011 by Logarock because: ex


I would hope that we all have a divine right to exist.

Are you suggesting, or more precisely, do you think that the royal families who use these symbols, are implying to be descendants of these biblical royal lines?

the Billmeister



OOHHHH. I get just so tired. Yes Bill...101...we all have the right to exist. No question.

Yes I am. But its not something they broadcast. Its like hiding in plan sight.

Goggle serch up some pictures of your Queen when she was young and tell me what you see.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
The answer in my opinion is NO!

Royal families can trace their ancestry to people that had political plans, money to carry them out and were not afraid to use violence to accomplish their desires.

God didn't come down and say that a certain person and all his/her ancestors would be the chosen people to lead for all eternity.

People clawed their way to power and did everything they could to insure their children would inherit that power.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
The Divine Right of Kings was an addition made into scripture by King James.
Look it up.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


Yes they fight among themselves like a pride of lions.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea
The Divine Right of Kings was an addition made into scripture by King James.
Look it up.


There is nothing in scripture that says anything about a "divine right" per se. It simply points out that the House of David would not fail from being a house.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by Billmeister

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by Billmeister
 


Many of the royal lines in europe over the years have used many of the old judaic royal emblems.

edit on 28-1-2011 by Logarock because: ex


I would hope that we all have a divine right to exist.

Are you suggesting, or more precisely, do you think that the royal families who use these symbols, are implying to be descendants of these biblical royal lines?

the Billmeister


Yes I am. But its not something they broadcast. Its like hiding in plan sight.

Goggle serch up some pictures of your Queen when she was young and tell me what you see.


OK, now we are getting somewhere. So the answer to the original OP could very well be YES, the royal families DO believe they are chosen by God. If, as you are suggesting, they are (or claim to be) descendants of a biblical royal lineage.


OOHHHH. I get just so tired.


With all due respect to this remark... your original post was this:


Would you settle for the divine right to exist? They would have that at the very least.


Which you then you respond:


Yes Bill...101...we all have the right to exist. No question.


Do you understand how the first quote has no substance, following logic, if we ALL have the divine right to exist, then it is obvious that THEY have this divine right as well.

I am trying to remain respectful at all times, but it seemed like you could have been implying something in addition to this statement of obvious fact.

the Billmeister



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Bill, i dont think that any of your choices are relevant, but i will bite, for me the queen and her ancestors have caused indentured servants for the masses since the fall of Egypt. There border line schizophrenia and entitlement have created a feudalist society with the pheasants dying at an early age at best, with no real hope in life, i guess that is the reason that most Americans which know their history are so eager in defending our constitution, as the monarch - NWO in which they are trying to implement would create and set back the masses Constitution and unalienable rights, thus, once again setting the sage for a feudalistic and totalitarian society, and this my friend in a technology advantaged society would take millenia to overthrow



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by allprowolfy
Bill, i dont think that any of your choices are relevant, but i will bite, for me the queen and her ancestors have caused indentured servants for the masses since the fall of Egypt. There border line schizophrenia and entitlement have created a feudalist society with the pheasants dying at an early age at best, with no real hope in life, i guess that is the reason that most Americans which know their history are so eager in defending our constitution, as the monarch - NWO in which they are trying to implement would create and set back the masses Constitution and unalienable rights, thus, once again setting the sage for a feudalistic and totalitarian society, and this my friend in a technology advantaged society would take millenia to overthrow


Yes, I totally understand this stance.

The original premise is not whether or not the royal families are actually chosen by God, but more precisely whether they believe this to be the case, and use it to justify their positions of extreme privilege.

the Billmeister



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Billmeister

Do you understand how the first quote has no substance, following logic, if we ALL have the divine right to exist, then it is obvious that THEY have this divine right as well.



Logic? Logic says that for one to have the right to exist does not mean that another cannot.

But anyway Bill I am out of here. Its clear you are an eat the rich burn the royals but were trying to go unnoticed. You probably rather like what happened to the Czar and his family.

All I am saying at this point is that it looks like the House of David is alive and well whatever power the people have unto themselves. If the Royals believe they have right they have backed off of it considerably or have had it demanded from them over the years (power shareing). Either way they are still there and that is a fullfillment of hebrew prophets and the word of God.




top topics



 
5
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join