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.
l. The fake ‘midrashic’ (i.e. haggadic = legendary) 14-set genealogy of ‘Iesous’ in the 1st canonical Greek gospel ‘according to Matthew’ (whoever he was) skips over a number of Judean kings (who reigned between c. 680 BCE and 621 BCE) in order to keep his fake sets of 14 going (D-V-D = i.e. 4 + 6 + 4 = the geometrical number for the Messiah based on the ‘number’ for the name ‘David’) –
Yet ‘Matthew’ adds FIVE whorish (sexually compromised) women to the set (odd for a genealogy for the Messiah) including Rachab the Harlot, Tamar (raped by her brother Yehudah), Ruth (who threw herself sexually at her late husband’s cousin Boaz, then lived (possibly as a lesbian?) with Naomi her mother in law) , then there’s the promiscuous Jebusite princess Bath-Shebiti (‘Bath-sheba’ lit. ‘daughter of the 7’ i.e. gods) who married to Uriah the Hittite commited Adultery with ‘David’ to produce the (illegitimate) clan chieftan Jedediah (i.e. ‘Sholomon’, lit. ‘peaceful’) – then Miryam of Galilee, the 5th in a long line of whores….or as AMADEUS asks (quoting C.K. Barrett) ‘what exactly was ‘Matthew’ trying to tell us about her character?’
2. The so-called ‘Magnificent’ poem of ‘Mary’ in the 3rd canonical council approved Greek gospel (‘according to Luke’ whoever he was) includes phrases like ‘blessed be YHWH, who has looked favorably upon the ‘gross-defilement’ of his handmaiden…’ –
Now if Miryam of Galilee was an old woman at the time, post menopausal, her ‘gross-defilement’ i.e. ‘sexual humiliation’ would naturally (for a middle eastern woman of the time) be barrenness (=biological inability to produce ‘sons’) – but since she was supposed to be young at the time, the ‘gross defilement ’ (in its CONTEXT) that ‘Luke’ mentions in his Greek (‘TAPEINWSIN’) can only mean RAPE (or possibly ‘seduction’ i.e. date-rape).
3. The weird bastardry (i.e. MAMZER) echoes in the 4th council approved Greek Canonical Gospel ‘according to John’ whoever he was) about ‘WE (in the Greek intensive) were NOT born of fornication:
John 8:41 “WE (in the Greek intensive) know who OUR father is !’
(the Greek intensive for WE in this pejorative sneer could be better rendered into modern English as something like ‘At least WE ourselves know who OUR OWN Father is…”) – which carries a kind of double-entendre underneath it.
At any rate the ‘sneer’ (C. K. Barrett) seems to indicate that there was some kind of bastardry insult hurling going on in the scene – although admittedly, these are not recorded historical literal word for word notes being taken here – and the pejorative language (being hurled at R. Yehoshua’s parentage may well be more general against all Galileans whom the Judeans (at least in the 4th ‘gospel’ !) apparently equated with “Samaritans” (i.e. half-breeds) e.g. John 9:34
‘You were steeped in defilement from the day of your sinful birth (i.e. bastardry), and do you dare to teach US? Then they threw him out of the hall….’
John 8:48 ‘Are we not absolutely right in labeling you a Samaritan, and one possessed of Belial?’
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by casenately
Makes you wonder how much the bible was rewritten using pagan myth.
Hello, even if it is a "maiden", a devout Jewish girl 2,000 years ago wasn't sleeping around like your average 14 year olds today. This was before miniskirts and clear heels. And also, how would a simple "maiden" having a child be a miraculous sign from heaven?
hey you were actually right about the Irish famine. Twice a fungus caused the harvests to fail. Just thought I'd admit I learned something today, Man I am going to write to the dunce teacher that taught me that with a very wordy email. You get a star for that.
Any ways, let's just agree to disagree. I dont hold the bible as an infallible book of a magic entity. I respectfully disagree. If you would like to continue the debate with fact based arguments then please do, We stand to learn in a manner that is mutually beneficial. I dont actually like bible interpretation as it is like reading a poem and passing what sentiment it inspires as fact.
To get a good idea of anything it is just better to use more than one source. In fact the more the merrier.
I dont exclusively use any one source. All are valid in giving a little bit of information. When they coincide you can align yourself closer to the truth they all aim at.
Originally posted by banishedfromthisarea
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by casenately
Makes you wonder how much the bible was rewritten using pagan myth.
Hello, even if it is a "maiden", a devout Jewish girl 2,000 years ago wasn't sleeping around like your average 14 year olds today. This was before miniskirts and clear heels. And also, how would a simple "maiden" having a child be a miraculous sign from heaven?
I think 2000 years ago 14 year old girls were married and having babies. I think there's a lot of data to support that, even in relatively modern times.