AboveTopSecret.com Video and Media Portal.Books, posters, and more.T-shirts, mouse pads, cups, and bags.Member podcasts.Conspiracy theory wiki.Alternative news headlinesBelowTopSecret.com - off topic and general chit chat.AboveTopSecret.com - conspiracy theories and


 

 

This topic is in the Conspiracies in Religions discussion forum.  (rss)


Was "Jesus" a "bastard" & the Church tried to Cover it up with the VirginBirth Stories?


<<  12    13    14    15  >>



reply posted on 24-2-2007 @ 01:00 PM by madnessinmysoul


Originally posted by deesw
No man that has ever set out to disprove the Bible has ever been able to do it.



copernicus and galileo sure did quite a number on the biblical model of the universe


Why would it be so important for anyone to try and disprove Jesus' Deity? That is a question that I would really like a rational answer to. Madness......

^
(long call for me to try to disprove that "jesus" was a deity)

basically, i don't care
i'm not going to disprove it because you cannot prove or disprove whether or not someone who supposedly lived nearly 2000 years ago was divine



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 24-2-2007 @ 02:00 PM by deesw



copernicus and galileo sure did quite a number on the biblical model of the universe


No they did not. The Bible said nothing much of the universe.
Lets get back to the topic onhand.
tell me that the basis of this whole thread is not the Davinci Code. It is sold in the fiction section in all bookstores. It is a fictional story.



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 1-7-2008 @ 12:42 AM by The angel of light


The Peace of God to all that belong to the light,
Dear Readers,

The virginal conception of Jesus was announced 8 centuries before it happend by One of the Great prophets of Israel in reference to the coming of the Messiah. The discovering of the Death Sea scrolls in 1947 confirmed the authenticy of the existence of this prediction at least 1 or 2 centuries before Christ.

Isaiah 7:14-15, The New International version


Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a Son, and will call him Immanuel. He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the the wrong and choose the right.



St Mathew 1:22-23, The king James version

22
Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.



Being revealed by God through the prophets as an outstanding sign of the accomplished of the promised arrival of the King descendent of David, this is a core truth not only of the Christian faith but also about the Jewish one, for which the Messiah is so important, and also concerning the Muslim, since Jesus is one of the Great prophets in that religion.

So this is not a problem of any specific church, as somebody out of his mind can think, it is a fundamental Article of faith of the three Great Monoteist Religions, so the claim of Amadeus is not only insensate but also completly false.

I am going to tell only one more remark with respect to this thread that please be careful in the opinions that you give about it, specially in the ones that are in the line of skepticism with respect to the immaculate conception of the always Virgin St Mary, since any attempt to desprestige it can be automatically considered as Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.

Why is so important this warning? because the Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is the only sin that never would be forbidden neither in this world or in the great bejond, that was clearly stated by Jesus Christ:



St Mathew 12, 31-32 King James version
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.



So if you value in something your ethernal salvation please think twice before to dare to post any comment here, weight carefully your words, or perhaps better bite your tongue. Of course Amadeus as a possible partner in the hell is not going to be a great consolation for any of you that follow him.

Thanks for your atention,

The Angel of lightness




[edit on 7/1/2008 by The angel of light]



   copyright & usage 
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.


reply posted on 1-2-2009 @ 02:51 PM by Anonymous ATS


reply to post by Illmatic67


If YOU believe anything written in the new testament you've got problems!



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 2-2-2009 @ 11:01 AM by badmedia


reply to post by The angel of light



Oddly enough, I was just listening to a Jewish Rabbi a few days ago, and the topic was talking about how people who didn't understand things tried to fulfill OT prophecy. Interesting enough, this "sign" you mention of the virgin birth was one of them.

He made 1 very good point. And that is what you call a "sign" is not actually a sign at all. And he had a good little story that goes along with it. I'll try to repeat it and hopefully I won't butcher it too much.

So there is this small town outside of Chicago, and it's very windy in the town. They have a problem because all their stop signs kept getting blown down. This can be dangerous because it might fall on someone, and it takes a good bit of resources to put them back up all the time, not to mention any wrecks that may occur from the missing sign.

So the town decides to have a town meeting to try and solve the problem. And they are all arguing back and forth about what to do. Suddenly, this little old lady stands up and says - I have the solution, just listen to me and I will tell you have to fix it.

And then the lady says, well all we have to do is bury the entire sign in the ground. And then you won't have to worry about the sign getting blown over any more. It will stay there. Problem solved.

Disagree? Why? Is it because it's not a sign when you can't see it?. So how can the virgin birth be a sign?



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 3-2-2009 @ 01:14 AM by Kapyong


Gday,

Originally posted by irdulili
there is a definite parallel between the 'immaculate conception' of christ ( the holy spirit descending apon Mary in the form of a dove)


You have confused the virgin birth (of Jesus) with the immaculate conception (of Mary.)

They are NOT the same, but often confused.



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 3-2-2009 @ 07:57 AM by sir_chancealot


Originally posted by The angel of light
...with respect to the immaculate conception of the always Virgin St Mary, since any attempt to desprestige it can be automatically considered as Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. ...


While most of your post is accurate, this I take issue with. Was Mary a virgin when Jesus was born? Absolutely. Of this I have no doubt.

The "immaculate conception of the always virgin St Mary"?

Ummmm, no. Mary was not immaculately conceived. There is no biblical proof of this.

She was no longer a virgin at some point after Jesus was born. How do I know this? BECAUSE JESUS HAD BROTHERS. (half-brothers, to be technical).

Why do people always try to make the bible say things it doesn't say? (Rhetorical question, don't answer.)



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 3-2-2009 @ 12:24 PM by badmedia


reply to post by sir_chancealot



I'm pretty sure Mary wasn't a virgin. In the bible, it still shows Jesus as being from the line of Joseph. If Mary was a virgin, then that line and claim is a lie.

Is there still a "virgin" birth involved? Yes. Let me explain.

Jesus in the flesh is born of Mary and Joseph. These are his flesh parents, this is his "line" as mentioned in the bible.

The virgin birth is not of the flesh, it is of the soul/consciousness. The virgin birth is when Jesus realizes who his true father is. Meaning, when he realizes his consciousness and soul is an extension of the father, and who/what he truly is, then he no longer recognizes himself as being born from the flesh. He see's himself as only being born from the father, and thus a virgin birth. The virgin is god himself, not mary.

Joesph is told to take Jesus anyway and such because Jesus will not recognize Joesph as his true father. If anyone has kids, imagine if your child didn't recognize you as their parent. It would be quite troublesome and a heavy burden on anyones heart. My parents would be crushed.

I say this from my own experience. I have 2 flesh parents. For the majority of life, these are who I considered my parents. When I had my vision and experienced John 14:20 for myself, then suddenly I realized who my true father was. I no longer seen myself as a child of my 2 flesh parents, but rather I seen myself(my true self, consciousness/soul) as being a child of god/ the father.

Thus, son of man(flesh), becomes son of god. And of course, while on the earth in the flesh you are both, but the 2nd one is the only true one and the parent for eternity.



[edit on 3-2-2009 by badmedia]



   copyright & usage 


<<  12    13    14    15  >>

















































ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.030 seconds
Page processed in 0.278 seconds
6 total database queries (1)









The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.