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.

 

The Mysterious Birth of Jesus Christ

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Riffrafter
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I'm not a particularly religious person but one of the most interesting parts of the story concerns the 3 wise men. "Wise Man" is actually a poor translation. The 3 Magi is a far better translation and description.

From Wikipedia:

"Magi is a term, used since at least the 4th century BC, to denote a follower of Zoroaster, or rather, a follower of what the Hellenistic world associated Zoroaster with, which was – in the main – the ability to read the stars, and manipulate the fate that the stars foretold".

There are some fascinating accounts (not in the Bible) that speak of incredible things associated with these particular Magi regarding certain knowledge, objects and secrets - where they are the "main characters" so to speak, and their trek to see the Baby Jesus was just one of the events associated with them.

BTW - in all earlier occurrences of the word "Magos" or "Magi" in the Bible it is interpreted or translated as "magician", yet in Matthew it becomes "wise man". Interesting, no?



Thanx for that information, do you have any links to these other wise men stories? And yes, it is interesting about the translations. Thanx again.




posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImAwareSC
When it comes to the "Virgin Birth", technically this happens every day.
My neighbor comes from over seas, and he and his wife do what they call "scooping".
No penetration, he ejaculates on her thigh and she "scoops" it with her fingers inside her.
This MAY be a plausible explanation for "THE" Virgin Birth.


Eewwwww....huh



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by billy197300
 


You must be a child, but there is alot to learn on the subject. If my wife is a virgin, which means there is a high possibility of the hymen being in tact unless she was playing soccer. You know they played that all the time. But, yes if my virgin wife, became pregnant, it would be my duty as man of the house to accept the product as my child. Grow up, man. Sometimes insolence and ignorance is laughable, but no one is pointing and laughing at you.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by AKINOFTHEFIRSSTARS
 

Sorry for thinking like a child and thinking infidelity is wrong. I must have never grown up I guess, but, I have always thought that the father is supposed to be responsible for their child.....call me crazy. I guess my dumbass parents were wrong when they told me where babies come from too.


edit on 25-8-2011 by billy197300 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by billy197300
 


the father is responsible

If a woman's hymen is in tact and she is pregnant, what would you say then and how is it infidelity???? You keep ignoring one word virgin. People always assume science is definite and it has it figured all out. Science disproves itself every year with new discoveries....... So no your parents weren't that, to assume that there is no other possibility is foolish.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by AKINOFTHEFIRSSTARS
 


Come on now, you HONESTLY think that if a woman gets pregnant and you have never had sex with her it could be yours.
If you do I am not trying to dis your beliefs but that kind of thing doesn't happen where I am from unless there is some kind of artificial insemination happening and I think that was the OP point in a round about way.
edit on 25-8-2011 by billy197300 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


You have taken a small account out of the Bible, assumed many things that were not in the account, or supported by the most rigorously verified data, or in the rest of the Bible, or referred to in similar supporting documents, and posted them for public comment.

Your theories, in the context of the known facts, are invalid.

edit on 25/8/2011 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Lots of good, coherent answers so far. I did not see your question about the inns being full addressed though. So... if I remember what the nuns beat into me in Catholic school correctly, there was a Roman census going on and everyone had to return to their place of birth to be counted. Hence, an influx of non-permanent residents in Bethlehem. I guess Joseph didn't call ahead for reservations... or name-drop "God" to get a room comped.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven for his words. You will be judged by every one of your words.



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Can we please have some kind of rule on ATS where if somthing cannot be proven as fact it cannot be stated as fact rather a posters opinion....

The bible does exsist...FACT
the bible holds Stories and opinions written by varying people over the course of many years.... Fact

these are the two facts relating to the bible, quran and any othe religous book people want to throw out in an argument about god,

All holy books have been translated from there original writtings many times and taught by people who have taken what they believe to be the word of god from it, also re written by these people (for a source.. see historical fact)

(easy way to show this, i was brought up as catholic using a christian bible, my protestant friends were brough up as odly enough protestant with a christian bible, we were both taught slightly diffrent ethics, rules and understanding of the same text)

There is very little historical merit in any piece of literature written from a one sided view as it will always be bias to the source.

So we can see is we cannot prove God exists any more than we can prove aliens exsist
we can not prove any of the mundane day to day or finer points in any religous book occured we can only porve larger facts (census, Floods, Egyptians having a real joy of persecuting jews etc.)


There is a much higher chance of aliens being proven in the next fifty years than God (mainly because any life anywhere not on earth will fall under that catagory and to be honest even bible thumpers have to like reason and the laws of averages, i mean you base your thoughts on the fact that a super being created us because someone a long time ago said so)

I am not saying i think Jesus was a alien, or human alien hybrid, i am not really into the ancient alien bit as generalisation for any achievement prior to the 1800's, at the same time i will not sit quietly and watch people preach that the bible has any real historical merit or any proof it can be used (with other holy books) as anything other than a group of people (mostly misguided) understanding of the world around them when science was less advanced.


ATS are always looking for a Poll... how about... should ATS Ban any post which contains Fact based on sudo-science which cannot (and never is) backed up with proper reasearch?



Just my thoughts


edit on 25-8-2011 by GonzoSinister because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikesk8s247
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven for his words. You will be judged by every one of your words.



Also the other thing that grinds at me is this half quoting bible passages by people who half understand religous texts all the time (not saying the poster of the above post falls under this catagory but using it as an example (for all i know you could be like some kind of super priest))



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by GonzoSinister
 


it bothers me sometimes that people require proof. What exactly is proof??? Close minded people will always use everything they have encountered to establish a logical explanation. If were are trying to figure out something outside of our everyday understanding it is foolish to confine or limit our understanding. We see something in the sky, you guys say weather balloon. We bring recorded and documentation of the same object before weather balloons existed you guys conclude someone is missing screws.
Is this not arrogance at its finest. We trust science so much, but it disproves itself every year with new discoveries.

How about this for ATS if we can respect someone's personal experience we shouldn't be allowed to speak. If one properly understood the knowledge found within religion one will conclude the science they were using was a natural-non-invasive approach that accomplished more that we ever will. I was watching a video of an ancient relic that showed the growth of a human from sperm and egg to adulthood. It showed a fertilized egg, which can only be seen with a microscope, and here's the funny thing. It showed other microscopic "events" that occur that we could not recognize. With all of our modern sciences we still can't figure out things they did with ease. We have yet to master morality and reciprocity, some things that 'advanced' people shouldn't have to struggle to accomplish. Things the 'less advanced' as you put it, mastered.

I hate to say this, but who gave you guys this authority to walk around and tell people whats credible and whats not. How can one prove God exist???? We have 5 senses to 'translate' the electrical impulses. Egyptian are said that if one in his proper state he a hundred something. Scientist only use 2, sight and touch. Once upon a time science argued that blackholes do not exist. They said because they couldn't prove it. But it was because they could see it. The same for Dark Matter. People laughed at these radical attempts to explain the world around us, now these are accepted as facts. The knowledge found within religion was established as a vehicle for enlightenment, if its not your thing, then hey........That's fine, but it doesn't give you or anyone the right to tell someone they can't express what is real to them.

From the matrix: What is real?? Do you think that is air you are breathing??>>>When I have this in mind, it is pointless trying to prove anything. Proof if something designed for someone who refuses to open his mind. Someone who has a death grip on the matrix. He must be held by the hand and given things to persuade him from his own arrogant understanding.
Wake up



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by AKINOFTHEFIRSSTARS
 


But this is what i see as the problem, i am far froma close minded person.. i am very interested in space, in Science, in the unerstanding of religon, and especially mythology,


I dont however claim things to be fact that i cannot prove....

i feel if you want to beleave somthing then fair enough think and feel as you wish, however do not come on a forum and say that this is fact without showing somthing that can be seen as fact.

what is proof, the ability to show that what you are saying has more too it than somthing you decided...

to yourself and anyone who may be religous...if i said i was the second comming... right now... would you not expect me to prove sucha claim?? would you not expect me to show you how i could possibly be the second comming of christ?? i mearley ask for the same evidence as you would/or will at somepoint, i am just looking for it earlier in the chain of events!
unless if someone claims they are christ you will follow blindly?


proof   /pruf/ Show Spelled[proof] Show IPA
noun
1. evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth.
2. anything serving as such evidence: What proof do you have?
3. the act of testing or making trial of anything; test; trial: to put a thing to the proof.
4. the establishment of the truth of anything; demonstration.
5. Law . (in judicial proceedings) evidence having probative weight.


How about if we cant respect someones personal experience we shouldnt be allowed to speak?
you mean like all those telling people that christ is real, that aliens cant exsist? that you will be judged by a god you dont believe in? - Clear signs of the religous folks (as ever) respecting other peoples beliefs?

nope once again a hypocritical stance defending the religous side of things, you only expect there to be respect of someones experiences if the experiences are based on religon, any talk of a devine creator who is alien, or evolution from apes is seen as somthing to be mocked because it doesnt fit with religous views!!

how can one prove god exsists? the same way one can prove magnatism exsists or wind exsists and if you cant prove he exsists then you cant preach he exsists, soo few religous post start.. in my opinion, or because what i feel or i believe that... the posts are stated as fact... blind fact with no evidence.


I absolutley disagree... proof is somthing you should always search for for everything, close minded people accept things they have been told from birth and never question!

i am far from arrogant as i like to explore, learn and uinderstand, those who follow holy books teachings like to be fed one side of a story..

i have sat down (albiet with english translations) with holy books and read them, i didtn always opppse religon, i just need to see evidence of things or they are theories, not fact and in the holy books nothing is presented as anything more than theories based on gut feeling, incredably no scientific way of thinking.


you hit the nail on the head.. once upon a time science argued that balckholes did/didnt exsist based on theories of black holes.. people said they cant because....x and the reverse argument is they can because...y

i would like to see the same basic outline applied to religon.. i say God cant exsists (in a religous text sense) because an omnipitent being with superpowers who transends space and time is ridiculous, i base this on my understanding of the building blocks of life, genetics, evolution, physics there is my X argument... would you like to supply a Y argument to argue against these things?


i do however feel our argument will need to have sources, and will be quite legnthy, feel free to u2u me or start another thread, i have a few hours left of work today but if not i will be back online at somepoint saturday or sunday and will happily cntinue this with you then




Also with all thing relating to my opinion, i put at the bottom, just my thoughts,
because what i post is just my thoughts, i never claim it to be fact or otherwise unless i have some kind of proof to back it up, it would be curtious if others would understand that and do the same



Just my thoughts

edit on 26-8-2011 by GonzoSinister because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
Urantia book

I BELIEVE THIS ADDS TO THE CURRENT DISCUSSION: LAST PARAGRAPH


4. Joseph’s Dream (1347.3) 122:4.1 Joseph did not become reconciled to the idea that Mary was to become the mother of an extraordinary child until after he had experienced a very impressive dream. In this dream a brilliant celestial messenger appeared to him and, among other things, said: “Joseph, I appear by command of Him who now reigns on high, and I am directed to instruct you concerning the son whom Mary shall bear, and who shall become a great light in the world. In him will be life, and his life shall become the light of mankind. He shall first come to his own people, but they will hardly receive him; but to as many as shall receive him to them will he reveal that they are the children of God.” After this experience Joseph never again wholly doubted Mary’s story of Gabriel’s visit and of the promise that the unborn child was to become a divine messenger to the world. (1347.4) 122:4.2 In all these visitations nothing was said about the house of David. Nothing was ever intimated about Jesus’ becoming a “deliverer of the Jews,” not even that he was to be the long-expected Messiah. Jesus was not such a Messiah as the Jews had anticipated, but he was the world’s deliverer. His mission was to all races and peoples, not to any one group. (1347.5) 122:4.3 Joseph was not of the line of King David. Mary had more of the Davidic ancestry than Joseph. True, Joseph did go to the City of David, Bethlehem, to be registered for the Roman census, but that was because, six generations previously, Joseph’s paternal ancestor of that generation, being an orphan, was adopted by one Zadoc, who was a direct descendant of David; hence was Joseph also accounted as of the “house of David.” (1347.6) 122:4.4 Most of the so-called Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament were made to apply to Jesus long after his life had been lived on earth. For centuries the Hebrew prophets had proclaimed the coming of a deliverer, and these promises had been construed by successive generations as referring to a new Jewish ruler who would sit upon the throne of David and, by the reputed miraculous methods of Moses, proceed to establish the Jews in Palestine as a powerful nation, free from all foreign domination. Again, many figurative passages found throughout the Hebrew scriptures were subsequently misapplied to the life mission of Jesus. Many Old Testament sayings were so distorted as to appear to fit some episode of the Master’s earth life. Jesus himself onetime publicly denied any connection with the royal house of David. Even the passage, “a maiden shall bear a son,” was made to read, “a virgin shall bear a son.” This was also true of the many genealogies of both Joseph and Mary which were constructed subsequent to Michael’s career on earth. Many of these lineages contain much of the Master’s ancestry, but on the whole they are not genuine and may not be depended upon as factual. The early followers of Jesus all too often succumbed to the temptation to make all the olden prophetic utterances appear to find fulfillment in the life of their Lord and Master.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Again, many figurative passages found throughout the Hebrew scriptures were subsequently misapplied to the life mission of Jesus. Many Old Testament sayings were so distorted as to appear to fit some episode of the Master’s earth life. Jesus himself onetime publicly denied any connection with the royal house of David. Even the passage, “a maiden shall bear a son,” was made to read, “a virgin shall bear a son.” This was also true of the many genealogies of both Joseph and Mary which were constructed subsequent to Michael’s career on earth. Many of these lineages contain much of the Master’s ancestry, but on the whole they are not genuine and may not be depended upon as factual. The early followers of Jesus all too often succumbed to the temptation to make all the olden prophetic utterances appear to find fulfillment in the life of their Lord and Master.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
I just find it strange that only the bible and one or 2 romans mention him. No where else in history, is he mentioned. So he supposedly fed thousands with a loaf of bread and a couple of stickle backs. Walked on water ect ect and yet no one of his time, mentions this in any news or reports except for the bible. I mean if I walked on water today. It would be on every channel and in every news paper world wide. Yet no one of his time mentions a word about him or these so called miracles. I would have thought that every one in that area would have headed over to see this miracle man...

edit on 25-8-2011 by illuminnaughty because: (no reason given)


...or, it would find its way onto youtube or ATS, and so the discussion, questions, and ridicule would propel it into the Hoax or Myth category! How do you reliably know what is happening across the globe (even with the interweb), when, claims are so reliably shot down in ignorance?!
If you dont believe in a virgin birth, you must at least admit that this is one hell of a story! (excuse the pun!)

Akushla



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by GonzoSinister
 


You have to include all of my points, do not pick and choose. You failed to mention why is proof required. Why are we even so arrogant, that we will discard another fellow human beings testimony???Here is a scenario. Lets just say you sat down and was able to converse with an alien or God, but all you did was talk with him. What proof could you provide??? The truth does not require proof. It doesn't require you to agree! The idea of proof can only exist when doubt is present.

I can think for myself, and here lies the problem. People have been fed an understanding, rather then searching for ones own. Even if you don't recognize, even if you reject it you have accepted it. The holy books are parables and historical accounts that require no proof. If you are trying to prove something about it, then you read it wrong. It has nothing to do with fact or fiction. They are codes, for the right reader. So, the second coming means something completely different to me, compared to the common 'christian'.




you only expect there to be respect of someones experiences if the experiences are based on religon


Not, true. But if you have never read, analyzed, or studied scripture for real then some of your views and comments are offensive. The Non-believer always tends to mock the believer. Just for the sake of the post and the analogy, this could all be a fairy tale, at least the believer walks away with morals and standards. The Non-believer ridicules and will discard anything the believer has to say.




how can one prove god exsists? the same way one can prove magnatism exsists or wind exsists.

I disagree totally. These are elements. Trying to prove so called God exist would be like gold fish from japan trying to figure out 9/11. Do you understand????

We interpret an electrical impulse, and it is perceived as wind, or magnetism, so in a nut shell how do you know that there aren't other elements of wind and magnetism that can be perceived??? How can you assume that we can perceive or even 'translate', articulate, or observe every-single-thing in the universe????You can't see heat, sound, or taste colors right/?? Do you know that there are creatures and humans that can, and even taste music??? Let me guess, you don't believe me.
Just because you have yet to read it, or because your understanding is limited on the universe you are apart of. Research it for yourself, I would be doing you a favor by "proving" it to you and life doesn't work like that, its a journey


If you see a big huge purple circle outside, and no one else does, how can you prove it??? Oh thats right its delusion???But, if every thing is based off of in impulse and chemical reaction based of stimulus, what makes it not real???? Like a dream, watch the matrix???

Okay the same outline applied to religion.....This is the oldest one in the book that is from science. If something is in motion there is a first mover, if there is a program running, there is a program.



because an omnipitent being with superpowers who transends space and time is ridiculous, i base this on my understanding of the building blocks of life, genetics, evolution, physics there is my X argument

This is 'your' limited perception on the manifester. Science has proven that there are sub-atomic particles that move faster than light, teleport, communicate with each other and we consider the distance it would be the distance between the earth and the sun if not further in the sub-atomic world. How does this seem impossible??

Perfect examples, genetics, evolution, and physics are all complex laws. There is a saying as above so below. These laws magically formed themselves right.That would be like telling me the constitution wrote itself, or there is no governing body.
What were the conditions that caused the big bang, which allowed a perfect universe to exist. I wonder what are the odds of that??? Tell me and then tell me what are the odds of water magically hitting one planet, in the midst of thousands we have checked so far, then life forming, and some where along the way consciousness hoped in the picture, now we can single handily alter the course of the universe ......... I mean this sounds really really insane to trust so many 1 in trillions when we know the universe DOES NOT operate this way. Thats like everyone hitting the lotto on the same day. This sounds bizarre.
Peace and many blessings



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I love the instant attack on religion instead of answering my questions!! It is absolutely funny!!


I am actually still laughing!!

Do you want to know why I didn't post my response in the religion section??

BECAUSE I AM RESPONDING TO YOUR REDICULOUS OUTLOOK ON JESUS CHRIST AND GOD!!!

Thanks for confirming that I am not crazy though, I really appreciate it....


I will respond. You attack the OP asking him why it is easier to believe that jesus was a hybrid alien baby than believing he was the son of god?

Seriously?

The OP's suggestion is no more out of the realm of possibility than your beliefs. A virgin conception? Really? In order to believe in something as impossible as this, you would have to believe that it was divinely manufactured. Therefore you must also believe in something that you have never seen, heard, or otherwise have any concrete evidence that exists -- god.

Instead, we have hundreds of thousands of people across the globe, over centuries, who have seen with their very eyes, UFO's, aliens, and what not.

Yet you discount that in place of a belief in a creator who NOBODY has ever seen, or can prove?

First, let me state that I am NOT an atheist. I don't believe in the GOD that you believe in. I believe in a greater power than myself, which could be the creator of all things, but I have never bought into the God/Jesus story. Its WAY too simple, created for simple minds to understand and put into context.

Jesus Christ may have been, instead, the Son of GOD, but arrived here on earth from another race or civilization far removed from what we could possibly understand. Maybe the letters "GOD" were on the writings seen on Jesus's ship? After all, Ezekiel saw something that he could not explain...or, did Jesus performed miracles because he had advanced technology. He rose from the dead because he was rescued, or, was able to heal his wounds using advanced medicines or was the only person known to human kind to just vanish in thin air from his grave because he returned to Heaven?

I think those theories are a lot more in line with reality than your beliefs that Jesus was a gifted magician who miraculously created wine from water.

Lets take a vote: Which is more plausible? Jesus was an ordinary man, Son of God, and was able to perform strange miracles, or, he was from an advanced race, being supported by his co-travelers, and used advanced techniques in moderation to make those think he was Divine?

And I bet you think that Roswell was all about a weather balloon, too?



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by GonzoSinister
 


well actually i was speaking from what i do understand. im not going to say something if i dont understand it. If im speaking about something philosophically then it comes from the understandings i get when reading the scriptures. Im ot going to write about something I dont understand. These are just common learnings and rules that I have picked up over reading several times. I do not like my words being used as an example in any case.



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by phantomjack

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I love the instant attack on religion instead of answering my questions!! It is absolutely funny!!


I am actually still laughing!!

Do you want to know why I didn't post my response in the religion section??

BECAUSE I AM RESPONDING TO YOUR REDICULOUS OUTLOOK ON JESUS CHRIST AND GOD!!!

Thanks for confirming that I am not crazy though, I really appreciate it....


I will respond. You attack the OP asking him why it is easier to believe that jesus was a hybrid alien baby than believing he was the son of god?

Seriously?

The OP's suggestion is no more out of the realm of possibility than your beliefs. A virgin conception? Really? In order to believe in something as impossible as this, you would have to believe that it was divinely manufactured. Therefore you must also believe in something that you have never seen, heard, or otherwise have any concrete evidence that exists -- god.

Instead, we have hundreds of thousands of people across the globe, over centuries, who have seen with their very eyes, UFO's, aliens, and what not.

Yet you discount that in place of a belief in a creator who NOBODY has ever seen, or can prove?

First, let me state that I am NOT an atheist. I don't believe in the GOD that you believe in. I believe in a greater power than myself, which could be the creator of all things, but I have never bought into the God/Jesus story. Its WAY too simple, created for simple minds to understand and put into context.

Jesus Christ may have been, instead, the Son of GOD, but arrived here on earth from another race or civilization far removed from what we could possibly understand. Maybe the letters "GOD" were on the writings seen on Jesus's ship? After all, Ezekiel saw something that he could not explain...or, did Jesus performed miracles because he had advanced technology. He rose from the dead because he was rescued, or, was able to heal his wounds using advanced medicines or was the only person known to human kind to just vanish in thin air from his grave because he returned to Heaven?

I think those theories are a lot more in line with reality than your beliefs that Jesus was a gifted magician who miraculously created wine from water.

Lets take a vote: Which is more plausible? Jesus was an ordinary man, Son of God, and was able to perform strange miracles, or, he was from an advanced race, being supported by his co-travelers, and used advanced techniques in moderation to make those think he was Divine?

And I bet you think that Roswell was all about a weather balloon, too?


Thank you very much. IDK maybe i posted this in the wrong section, but to me it seems like a religious conspiracy. If the church didn't want you to find out who Jesus really is, then why do they have manuscripts and whole books taken out of the Bible locked away underneath the Vatican???

You are thinking at the same level i am. But Bible Thumpers don't like to questions things about their own BELIEFS. And that's just what the Bible is a Belief that the stuff in their actually happened. But I am taking the Bible literally in this post and asking a few questions, and of course answering them, logically.

If you asked the Christians these questions, they just say, "I know," or "I have faith in him."

Personally I think the whole believing in one (Christian) God thing is kinda mind control. If God was all knowing, all powerful, and all forgiving, wouldn't he want you to seek out other religions and other forms of thinking to broaden your mind and ideas??? I bet the Vatican edited the Bible long ago and brainwashed people into following the Christian religion when it really doesn't make sense and is full of the paranormal!!!!

These are questions I have about Jesus if in fact he was a real person. I don't see why people get all touchy about this conspiracy. And the answers I gave are just as crazy as the one's in the Bible. But the Bible doesn't allow you to question Jesus. It wants you to follow him blindly. Why? I think anybody could think of the things he taught if they are truly on their own spiritual quest. All religions teach the same basics. It's just the traditions and customs and myths that are different.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join