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.

 

Official Religion of the United States

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Yes, the only state capable of giving freedom and liberty to all is a secular one. So no there is no official religion, the majority of people are Christian but that in no way infers it is a Christian nation.




posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Yes, the only state capable of giving freedom and liberty to all is a secular one. So no there is no official religion, the majority of people are Christian but that in no way infers it is a Christian nation.


Exactly...



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 

Sounds like to me, If the Jews say to me, "You, gentile, keep these commandments!" and I say, "What commandments?", and they say, "the commandments given to Noah!", and I say, "Funny, it doesn't say anything like that in my Bible.", then I am now guilty of Blaspheme because I questioned the word of the Jews.

edit on 5-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by pthena
 

Sound like to me, If the Jews say to me, "You, gentile, keep these commandments!" and I say, "What commandments?", and they say, "the commandments given to Noah!", and I say, "Funny, it doesn't say anything like that in my Bible.", then I am now guilty of Blaspheme because I questioned the word of the Jews.


And vice versa


And since most religions are mutually exclusive, billions of people on this planet are wasting their time claiming they are "right" and everyone else is "wrong"


You'd think in the 21st century people would realize this, but I guess we need a few more decades or, god forbid, centuries



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 

At this moment, in the US, I am free to be a Christian and not be considered an idolater by a Jewish court and killed.
I would like to keep it that way.
I don't see in the US, people were ever tried in a court for not being a Christian and killed for being a Jew. What I do see is quite the opposite, for example, when Sunday Laws in the US were strictly enforced, Jews were given exceptions from them if they could demonstrate that they were practicing Jews. I see no reciprocity coming from them, the second they have the power, blood will flow.

edit on 5-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60

It should be seen as a reason to question all authority actually. What the Rebbe claims in the video is the ability to change times and the law. That should ring a bell to Protestants who saw Catholicism as Antichrist for claiming that authority for themselves. As in authority to establish holy days, or adding rituals and calling them sacraments.

The Rebbe is claiming that same (papalesque) authority is inherent to the Jewish soul. (beast/image of beast?) "As you(Rabbinic Court) agree on earth, so shall it be in heaven."

By what authority was Hanukkah established? (long after the Torah was supposedly closed) Or Purim?

Does the authority to order a man's life come from God, or does it come from man? If from God, then how does a man know what is expected? If from man, is it from some man to tell another, or does each man follow the leading of his own heart? Is there a priest class of people or is there a priesthood of all?

The politicians of the United States seem to have chosen, probably for corrupt reasons, that authority comes from some deity, handed down through a Jewish priesthood, that all must follow.

Now a general statement to all those who think I'm overreacting and getting worked up over nothing:

If tyranny of the majority is hateful in a democracy, then how much more hateful is tyranny of the minority!
edit on 5-10-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 

Is there a priest class of people or is there a priesthood of all?
I was just reading about this, a little while ago, in Bart Ehrman's book, Forged, Writing in the Name of God. He was talking about the arguments against the authorship by Paul of the Letters, First and Second Timothy. He was saying that the historical Paul was expecting the return of Jesus in his lifetime, so there were no church leaders to write letters to, while in the Timothy's (much later forgeries), there was, with Pastors, Deacons, and Bishops. So the original system was each person, on baptism, received a particular spiritual gift, and as a group they all functioned as a single body, with no hierarchy.
edit on 5-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60


So the original system was each person, on baptism, received a particular spiritual gift, and as a group they all functioned as a single body, with no hierarchy.

No priesthood it seems. Since you mention it, Ehrman also suspects that the book of Acts should be considered as probably less accurate about Paul's biography than what Paul wrote himself about his bio.

Here's my own thought about the First Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, which shows a proto Noahide Law thinking. Acts has Peter and Paul both at the council. Then Paul takes the proto-Noahide letter to Antioch.


28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay no greater burden on you than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality, from which if you keep yourselves, it will be well with you. Farewell.”

When it is altogether possible that Paul didn't go to the Jerusalem council at all, and Peter was the one arriving with the proto-Noahide letter to Antioch.


Galatians 2:11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I resisted him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before some people came from James, he ate with the Gentiles. But when they came, he drew back and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews joined him in his hypocrisy; so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that they didn’t walk uprightly according to the truth of the Good News, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live as the Gentiles do, and not as the Jews do, why do you compel the Gentiles to live as the Jews do?

Paul's anti-Judaising sentiments may have been more than just matters of circumcision, and extended all the way to the very idea that Gentiles had to get any "instruction" at all from any Jerusalem council. As if Christians could only be allowed to be Christians with Jerusalem's permission.



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 

Since you mention it, Ehrman also suspects that the book of Acts should be considered as probably less accurate about Paul's biography than what Paul wrote himself about his bio.
In this book, Forgery, he does get into Acts and basically condemns it. It apparently is a certain type of forgery since the writer does claim to have been personally present with Paul.

Paul's anti-Judaising sentiments may have been more than just matters of circumcision, and extended all the way to the very idea that Gentiles had to get any "instruction" at all from any Jerusalem council. As if Christians could only be allowed to be Christians with Jerusalem's permission.
Right, that is exactly what Bart gets into, that it directly contradicts Paul about his really getting some sort of authority from other people.

When it is altogether possible that Paul didn't go to the Jerusalem council at all, and Peter was the one arriving with the proto-Noahide letter to Antioch.
You just nailed it.
edit on 5-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60


You just nailed it

Does that mean I can skip buying that book?

I grew suspicious of Acts, while looking at the resurrection stories at the end of each gospel. Luke was the Gospel that had the "risen" Jesus telling the disciples to stay in Jerusalem, whereas the others, Matthew and John, have the disciples going to Galilee. Why does Luke have them staying in Jerusalem? For that Pentecost thing. And the establishing of a permanent Apostle headquarters associated with the temple. Kind of a Papacy right there!

An interesting note also, Paul's version of communion, which was written before the Gospel accounts:


I Corinthians 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed took bread, 24 and after he had given thanks he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." 25 In the same way, he also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, every time you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26 For every time you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

He says he received it from the Lord. Does that mean that Jesus himself told him about this somehow? Was the vision of Jesus to Paul altogether different from what is depicted in Acts?



posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 
I downloaded the Kindle version after getting part way through the Orthodox Corruption book because I thought I needed to look at the things he was pushing off to his other book. The download version is not expensive.
They just came out with a new Kindle device they are loosing $50 a piece on, to get people to load up with books. It is getting good reviews on the show I listen to on Genesis, which is The Tech Night Owl.
You should get it (the book, not the device) to use to back up what you already figured out on your own, so you have another witness or whatever.
I wrote a little review of the God Who Was Not There video on the Are You Being Fooled thread where the movie claims that Paul did not have a real, grounded Jesus. That he only had a Jesus who only existed in a mythical realm. To make the point, they quote Hebrews 8:4. I pointed out that is a joke.
It could be that acts was actually minimizing Paul even though it seemed to be doing it respectfully.
Part of Acts that bothers me and seems fake is where it claims he learned under this famous rabbi, Gamaliel.
They may have over-used this character because he also shows up in chapter five.
Also, to add to this thought, the wording, "under his feet" shows Paul as being submissive and accepting the authority of men and to treat them as kings or gods (which of course is contrary to his know personality).
edit on 6-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   

The Rebbe and President Ronald Reagan


On the Chabad.org website is a page archiving various Presidential Proclamations of President Reagan concerning the national celebration of Rabbi Menachem Schneerson's birthdays, starting with National Day of Reflection, April 4, 1982. Also various correspondences between the Rabbi and the President.


The Rebbe and President Ronald Reagan
Mr. Reagan displayed a profound respect toward the Rebbe and his teachings. The President was an early and enthusiastic adherent of the Rebbe's call to make all people aware of the Seven Universal Laws, based on the belief in a Supreme Being. The Rebbe's call for a moment of silence in the public schools, and his persistent belief that America must export to the world faith-based moral values, were among the themes that found a welcoming ear in President Reagan.

"The Seven Universal Laws, based on the belief in a Supreme Being."

Unfortunately, it isn't a generic Supreme being that is involved in these 7 laws, but a very specific one, namely YHWH who supposedly spoke with Adam, the legendary first man and supposedly spoke to Noah, the boatman during the legendary worldwide flood. Therefore, the blasphemy prohibition, when fully implemented, would include my very writing the name YHWH in a disrespectful way, just as I already have in this very sentence.

Moreover, if I say, "Well yes, Zeus* is the supreme being, since he defeated his father to become the All Father", that would also be blasphemy. If I say, "today, I have decided to be a Neo-Marcionite, and therefore consider YHWH to be obsolete, and the Unnamed Father God that Jesus spoke of as the true One", then I would still be a blasphemer. If I say, "The One gave His life so that life could become, and therefore does not exist as a distinct entity", that is blasphemy. And if I say, "and the Blue Sky is the symbol of Him Who was, and now is not, and yet is becoming in us", then I would be a blasphemer and idolater according to these 7 laws.

"America must export to the world faith-based moral values"

Now that is a very dangerous attitude to have. I suppose that would explain why Christian Missionaries are funded through USAID (State Dept) and work hand-in-hand with the CIA.

The servant class religion, handed down to the Gentiles by Babylonian Talmudists wasn't born in America. Is America to ignore its own native wisdom and understanding and serve the Babylonian Talmud in its quest for world domination? The Rabbi thought so. Reagan thought so. Should we?

Note:* I don't really care a bit about Zeus, that was just an example.
edit on 6-10-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Before I learned to detest neo-cons, I used to listen on the radio to the Michael Reagan show.
He was adopted by Jane Wyman who at one point was married to Reagan and somehow Michael ended up with Reagan as his last name. She (Jane) was Catholic and he (Ronald) was Protestant. She was in big demand (as an actress) so was traveling away from home a lot and Ronald ended up taking care of Michael. On Sundays, Ronald left Michael home while he took the other kids to his Protestant church. He just figured this one was Catholic and didn't want to take him.
I finally figured out the ACLU thing last night. The older doctor was more afraid of prisoner advocacy groups than his own professional licensing board, when it came to treating his patients. It seemed weird when I heard it and I guess went over my head, but no matter how you understand it or not, a regular person would come away with a negative feeling for the named entity.
edit on 6-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
the US already has a official non religion that is Deism.

the ethical values and principles fit as good as any and are non religious

Deist Principles

You shall honor and worship the Creator in a fashion that suits you

You shall treat others with dignity and respect and you shall insist that others respect your dignity as well

You shall live life pragmatically and use Reason as the cornerstone for all you think, say and do

You shall be honest and not lie, cheat or steal

You shall not harm another unless it is in defense of yourself or loved ones

You shall treat others as you want to be treated

You shall take responsibility for your actions

You shall have faith in yourself

You shall honor and be faithful to your Father, your Mother and your Loved ones

You shall learn from the mistakes that you will make

You shall find awe, inspiration and beauty in the creation and the natural order of the universe

You shall search for truth and be willing to accept new ideas based on reason as you are exposed to them

------------------------------------------------------------------

Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.


By the way Jefferson was a Deist

so were Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED

Thank you. Those Deist principles seem to be very much easier to live with than the 7 Talmud laws under discussion. The Deists do have a generic creator as opposed to a specific named deity, whose name must be revered above all reason.



You shall have faith in yourself

You shall honor and be faithful to your Father, your Mother and your Loved ones

These two principles do sometimes come into conflict. How can you be faithful to a father's demands if he demands that you revere a specific deity to the extent of killing other people for the reason of "protecting the name" of that deity. What if faithfulness to self includes a personal vow to never kill for the honor of some deity?


By the way Jefferson was a Deist

so were Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine.

How silly it is then, for any American to call it a Christian country, and think that patriotism includes forcing Christian morality on others!



posted on Oct, 6 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 

the US already has a official non religion that is Deism.

That is as it should be.
No distinction between men based on creed.
That is American.
Having a holy God who from time to time manifests himself to punish those who do not hold his name sacred is not American nor should our government recognize such insanity.
Now we have this injected into American churches by turning, in people's minds, Jesus into Jehovah, or the name, Jesus, into a Yahweh name and making him the virtual Yahweh, who will do just that, kill all who do not bow down to The One Who Serves Yahweh.
Just looks like one conspiracy, to me.
These are the people who own the patent for money so they can infinitely fund any movement they want to promote the agenda of total world enslavement, as spelled out precisely in their holy book.

edit on 6-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Here's a youtube video of some Gentiles who went to Jerusalem to be confirmed by Rabbinic Authority as Benai Noach.

Accepting the Torah, But Remaining a Gentile
Here is my transcript of how one of the participants explains his relationships.
4:42 - 5:15
"I used to think that I was superior to the Jewish people.
But as my eyes were opened I realized that the Jewish people have a role in the scheme of God's plan.
But yet, I thought there should be dialogue.
Now, I place myself in this position.
Now, there is a clear channel or conduit, from:

HaShem
|
Torah
|
Benai Israel
|
Benai Noah"
----------------------------------------------------------
So this now rabbinical acknowledged Noahide Gentile considers that any understanding he may have concerning HaShem or Torah is subservient to what is handed down to him from Jewish authority. So he is twice removed from his named deity.



The Seven Noahide Laws

1. Prohibition of Idolatry

2. Prohibition of Murder

3. Prohibition of Theft

4. Prohibition of Sexual Promiscuity, including adultery, incest, bestiality and male homosexual intercourse.

5. Prohibition of Blasphemy: You shall not blaspheme God's name which includes speaking It (a strict ban of Rabbinic Oral Law).

6. Dietary Law: Do not eat flesh taken from an animal while it is still alive.

7. Requirement to have just Laws: Set up courts of Law.


According to the Jewish Tosefta Avodah Zarah 8.4, quoted in Talmud Sanhedrin 56a.
-----------------------------------------
"It is forbidden to read the glorious and terrible name as it is written, as the sages said "He that pronounces the name as it is written has no portion in the world to come". Therefore it must be read as if it were written Adonai." (Mishnah Berurah 5:2)

- - cited from: jewsandjoes.com...

The most authoritative discussion I've found so far is the Boston College Center for Christian - Jewish Learning, quoted below. Underlines are mine.

Noahide Covenant: Theology and Jewish Law


The descendants of Noah were commanded with seven precepts:

to establish laws, (and the prohibitions of) blasphemy, idolatry, adultery, bloodshed, theft, and eating the blood of a living animal.
---Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 56a

There is debate in Jewish law as to how and when humanity became aware of the Noahide commandments, and whether these obligations are exclusively moral or also entail theological commitments. Normative Talmudic opinion (Sanhedrin 56a-57a) derives the commandments from Gen. 2:16, but the generality of the verse and rival opinions citing other texts indicate that this text is probably only post-facto support for the concept. No explicit universal revelation of these commandments occurs in the Bible, and some Jewish thinkers maintained that they were derived from reason or natural law. Maimonides maintains that six of the prohibitions were given to Adam, and after the flood Noah was given the additional obligation not to eat blood or a limb from a living animal.
. . .
Medieval and modern rabbinic opinion is divided on whether Jews have an obligation to force gentiles to observe Noahide standards, with Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings 8:10) maintaining that Jews are obligated to enforce these standards on gentiles and Nahmanides (commentary on Gen. 26:5) disagreeing.


So here is the actual textual basis for the Noahide Laws: Babylonian Talmud. And though rabbinic opinion may be divided concerning the forcing of Gentiles to observe the rules in Babylonian Talmud, the Rebbe was not. He was firmly within the camp of Law of Kings 8:10.


The ultimate goal of the Jewish people’s divine service is “to rectify the world under the sovereignty of the Almighty,”[4] i.e., to reveal G–dliness in the entire universe, as it is written, “The kingdom shall be G–d’s”[5] and “G–d will be the King over the entire earth.”[6]

This task is accomplished by being given “the lands of nations” in order to influence the gentile nations found there. As Maimonides puts it, “to compel all the world’s inhabitants to undertake the laws commanded to Noah’s descendants.”[7] This labor brings the world to the most perfect state of rectification, which will actualized when the Messiah comes, for “He [the Messiah] will rectify the entire world to serve G–d together, as it is written,[8] ‘For then I [G–d] will transform for the nations a pure tongue, that all will call upon the Name of G–d, and serve Him with one purpose.’”[9]

This is why “the lands of nations” were given to the Jewish people—in order to that they influence gentiles, and thereby “keep His statutes,” for this labor is needed for the Jewish people to complete their task to rectify the entire world.
- - Hitva’aduyot 5746, Vol. 1, pp. 85-90.

And there you have it. In the Rebbes own words. All the nations to be given to the Jews for them to control. So that they may compel obedience to the Noahide Laws.

So the United States is owned by the Jews. See my thread also: Obama Reads Psalm 46 at 9/11 Ceremony
edit on 7-10-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   
"The Talmud laid down the statutory punishment for transgressing any one of the Seven Laws of Noah as capital punishment, by DECAPITATION, (which is considered the least painful of the four modes of execution of criminals). " en.m.wikipedia.org...

After reading your thread the other day, I ran across another subject which instantly raised another red flag...
I was reading a review of a book called Final Events, about a "supposed" secret "Christian US military group" who believe that the UFO/alien phenomena is demonic. The part that is worrying is that this "supposed Christian group" is now advocating that the US should consider a partial martial law to impose and encourage worship by as many Americans as possible to avert this demonic infestation that is leading our country to ruin. Follow? The worship they propose is Christianity "based on the Old Testament."

Now, for those of you who are not Christian, this statement would NEVER be stated by a Christian. Please believe me. There is no "Old Testament Christianity". The Old Tedtament were the laws of God in the physical world. Jesus Christ then came for the spiritual development of mankind. One is physical, one is spiritual.

Now, can you see what is being set up? I truly believe that Talmudic Judaism is/is part of Mystery Babylon - the whole system around it. A final beast and the Whore is being set in place. Can you see how they are laying the groundwork?
Many Christians rightfully believe that the whole ET thing is demonic. These spirits must have an invite in - and the name of Jesus Christ has power over them. Many people in the occult are very susceptible.
But the vast majority of Christians wrongfully believe what their infested churches tell them - 7 year tribulation, the temple must be rebuilt, Jews will all be 'converted', israel must be supported at all costs....they are lazy and have accepted a 'once baptised go to Heaven philosophy" - completely forgetting that Jesus said that many would be turned away because he didn't know them.
I can truly see the picture whereby all of these lazy Christians, weak in their faith, go along with these things. They know that our society is rapidly going downhill, and will use this feeling to accept any call to "get the US back to it's glory under God". They think "Noahide laws" and "Christianity under OT" would be a solution to society's ills, all the while condemning us to Mystery Babylon. All because they were deceived.

Then they sneak in the capital punishment.

Please, if anyone is a Christian, or has a family member that is a Christian - please ask them to read scripture for themselves. Stop listening to these infested church leaders. People are lazy, they "fall away". Tell them to look at Revelation - "Come out of Babylon!" .For those that are not Christian - please know in your heart that any true follower of Christ would rather die than hurt another human being. But many will follow man - just as these Talmudic Jews do , and they will never come to Christ Jesus. Wake up your families.
.



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 
What strikes me is how there is not the one thing in these "laws" that could actually be well argued for, from the Bible, which is the Sabbath. The slaves to the Jews would be gentiles who pledge obligation to be slaves to this upper class, while not keeping the Jewish day of rest, themselves. My guess is that this somehow makes it acceptable to the Jews to have these slaves working for them on the Sabbath, the Sabbath only for the Jews. That makes a lot of sense to me, what is really behind this, the movement to create the whole world as one big slave-holding plantation for a small, elite, privileged class, who get a day of rest out of every seven.


edit on 7-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by WhoKnows100
 

Stop listening to these infested church leaders.
Look at a church itself, lets say a small non-affiliated church, loosely based on Baptist theology, in a community of working class people. It has small attendance and half the people are out of a job. Then you see the pastor driving a Cadillac, and his (good looking) wife wearing designer clothes and expensive Jewelry. How does this happen? The pastor is preaching that the time of "the gentiles" is over and now is the time for the Jews to take over.

As a note: gentile is not a word in the Bible. Ethnikos is the New Testament Greek word. Think, ethnic, since this is where the English word comes from. The Greeks had a practice of inviting everyone to be a Greek. To be accepted as a fellow Greek, you accepted the ethnicity of the Greeks, which means, the culture. We are all the ethnikos by following the culture of love, acceptance, and fellowship. The opposite is the philosophy of Judaism, which we do not ever want to accept you as one of us, no matter how hard you try to immerse yourself in our culture.
edit on 7-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join