It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Bible and the war against God's true and only work.

page: 48
<< 45  46  47    49  50  51 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 06:34 AM
reply to post by MagnumOpus

One has to keep in mind that most every Christian Churches have the Cross, and this is part of their death and resurrection story that they all worship. The Cross is generally part of their altar, and they worship the god Jesus.

Do you have any examples of anyone worshiping a cross? I've never seen it in all my years of attending a Christian church and I have done so in 6 different states, and in several churches in my own state. Can you link to any Christian church's statement of faith that says "the cross is God" or says "the cross represents God" that we should bow down to it or pray to it? You're talking completely out your rear end.

Not once have I ever seen this or heard a preacher tell people to do this. But you are correct about Christ, we do worship Him as God, because He was. God who added humanity to His divinity, who entered human history. Now, I will grant you that Catholics do this. They have idols of Mary, or the dead saints, and they will kneel before and pray to the people these idols represent. They even have a graven image of Christ on their cross which is called a "crucifix".

I will not deny Catholics have idols, tons of them. But look here, there is no wooden cross sitting on the throne in heaven as we speak, there is a man though, Jesus Christ, that's who we worship.

edit on 27-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 09:49 AM
reply to post by MagnumOpus

Alright, I am kind of getting tired of your derailment of this thread. Go back and read the OP. This is a thread about the Bible as God's Word revealed to us. I don't understand what symbology, aincent sects, and the other stuff youve been adding has any thing to do with that.

We are Christians. We worship Jesus Christ. Not an alter, not people, not symbols, not a cross. You want to say that the majority of Christians are idolitors, then why hasent there been a single person in this thread agreeing with you regarding those statements?

Faith is PERSONAL. Its is a PERSONAL relationship. Its not about how the majority of the churches are decorated, what the priests or pastors say, or how you worship. Nobody knows the extent of my relationship with God, or NOturtypical, or anyone's for that matter. Just as nobody can sit there and tell me they know the full extent of my relationship with my husband. You could have studied us and writen a book about us, but are realtionship is personal. This is a metaphore for a relationship with God, not mediated through anything but Jesus Christ.

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:08 AM
Well "Nimrod", the title of the thread is"

"The Bible and the war against God's true and only work"

Which means there is a topic of discussion of the pro and con issues of religion. even to the points of false claims of Jesus being god and god wrote the Bible.

The alleged war involves the discussions of the Islam beliefs that Jesus is not god and those that promote that he is are Infidels. We get to investigate if the Bible was written by god, as these Holy Rollers acclaim, or if it was written by men. Is the Bible full of contradictions and human concepts of fallabilty, then it isn't anything one would associate with god, just human panderings to one another.

Everyone know "NoturUsual" wears his religion on his signature line and is the resident Jesus is god type, who is like the guys in white shirts on bicycles, the little door knockers leaving pamphlets to attempt to get more people into an endless quagmire of belief that a man is a god. Most of us exclaim "Oh god" and close the door and refuse to answer when we see those coming.

It has been going on for 6,000 years, since the times of Nimrod, was cloned by Jesus Disciples, and it affects issues of if humans know all the concepts of god and how they can be had.

I do think the thread is right on theme, pro and con. I just don't support that Jesus is god, like around 2/3 of the planet does not. I am in proud company as the most brilliant US Stateman, Thomas Jefferson, shares my same observations. You can have your opionion based on fantasies of faith that don't get backed up with reality. It is only the few that read one book that seem to agree with you, which doesn't speak of intelligence.

Most of you are just those that continue the 6,000 year old myth that man can be god. Most consider it an insult to human intelligence and the expousing of those that read one book and declair they have become the all knowing and lifted themselves of the duty to read and learn from all books and all known science.

With that you fail the test of being servants to man, and become servants to only yourself and your limited reality and fantasy. imho With that failing you also fail to be servants to your country as well, as it falls into disrepair due to not following Jefferson's ideas and the Essene's.

Most of you are like the theme of Promethius, or the theme of one that flew too close to the Sun playing god theme, only to come crashing down to Earth in flaming discredit.

Nimrod is burried deep, along with his faith that humans were god.

Jesus has a fitting box in a nice symbolic tomb with his family and he was as mortal as everyone else.

Thus, we don't have a Biblical Narrative that can be associated as written by any god, only man.

Yours is Only a long running confusion that harms human intelligence and duty to country.

Such flawed ideas and lacking intelligence from You, I don't respect.

edit on 27-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Those that follow Nimrod in any fashion ususally don't look intelligent

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:24 AM
It appears archiology is getting down to the simple truths. From Nimrod/Osirus tomb being found down in the underworld of Egyt we find the theme of Satan with cow horns on his head with Nimrod's games to be god. Satan depicted as a bull with horns, which is all about Nimrod. Add in the Egypt theme and we find he also is the god of the underworld.

Add in the discovery of the tomb at Talpiot and it appears Jesus was just a man, and has bones, children, a mother, brothers, all moral.


It was during this symposium that Ruth Gat, while accepting a posthumous award for Yosef Gat, announced: "My husband, the lead archaeologist of the East Talpiot tomb in southern Jerusalem, believed that the tomb he excavated in 1980 was, indeed, the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth and his family."[18]


It all goes to show there is much mumbo jumbo nonsense in the bible from those that can't break an old bad pagan habbit of trying to worship a man as god. Their is nothing new under the Sun except the same old games of Beasts that are too dumb to rise out of a 6,000 year old pit. imho

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 01:39 PM
reply to post by NOTurTypical

He had already been dead for 3 or so hours at that point.

Whups... i have issues with this... blood would not have flowed from the wound if he had been dead for three hours my friend... after about an hour the muscles start to relax and so do the blood vessels. Blood begins to pool in the lowest parts of the body due to gravity.

IF he was dead for three hours his blood would have started to coagulate after an hour... and thus the biblical account would have been false... It is not possible for blood to flow in a body thats been dead for three hours...

Even IF the soldier actually did hit his heart, which is a VERY long shot... the blood would not have flowed... water in the body would have... but the blood in the heart and the lungs would have been coagulated after three hours...

Gotta love finding holes in the story eh

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 01:51 PM
reply to post by Akragon

Medical doctors presenting their research in AMA journals disagree with your claims. Where did you go to medical school friend?

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 02:02 PM
reply to post by NOTurTypical

I haven't got there yet... and likely won't in all honesty... but i do work in healthcare. And i know quite a bit about biology and the body...

Now consider what "medical examiners" are working with.... As you claimed he had his arms nailed to this crossbeam making it hard to breath... and they almost all agree he died of asphyxiation.

NOW consider what you just stated on the previous page... IF your arms are above your head it makes it EASIER to breath, not harder...

Its a fact that there is not a single passage in the bible that states there was a cross beam... the Romans did not use a cross beam in Cruxifictions... His hands were nailed above his head... on a single pole/stake... not a cross... thus prolonging the torture.

And also considering the bibical account said "blood and water" FLOWED... from the wound, which would have been impossible if he was already dead for 3 hours as you stated... The only way blood would have flowed was IF his heart was still beating... blood does not flow if the heart is dead...

IF you give this situation to these "medical examiners"... they likely would not have came up with the same results...

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 02:50 PM
Science appears a little hard on the story makers. It is what happens when they don't read other books.

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 04:31 PM
reply to post by Akragon

I think you should go read the studies done by the AMA. But again, u don't have to either.

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 04:50 PM
We have had the critical thinking discussion, but that alludes some.

Critical thinging tells that Jesus was nailed to a tree, meaning no cross. None of the Cross criteria applies.

Harod even is wondering why Jesus died too quickly.

Most likely Jesus passed out for what ever reasons. Looked dead and motionless. Got a spear in the side and blood flowed because he is still alive, but barely.

They get him down to the tomb and patch up the holes, let him lay for a while on the cool rocks.

Next thing ya know----he wasn't so dead after all.

Some suggest that his Father it is Done pass out comment was speaking to his father Joseph about their plans for Jesus to be the Messiah. Nice sponge with liquid and Jesus takes a snooze.

===== 7Csec1_lnk1%26pLid%3D146763

With a US release date of April 3rd (in other words just in time for Easter), the book claims that it was encounters with the shroud itself, rather than seeing a risen Christ, that convinced the apostles that Jesus had risen from the dead.


posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 09:36 PM
Then there comes this smoking hot rendition of what really happened:


There is a curious incident recorded in the Gospels that may be explained by this hypothesis: while on the cross, Jesus complained that he was thirsty. A sponge soaked in vinegar was placed on the end of a long reed and held up to him. But far from reviving Jesus, the drink from this sponge apparently caused him to die. This is a curious reaction and suggests that the sponge was soaked not in vinegar, a substance that would have revived Jesus, but rather in something that would have caused him to lose consciousness—some sort of drug, for example. And there was just this type of drug available in the Middle East.


But there is yet another oddity that we need to note: in the Gospel of Mark, Joseph of Arimathea is described as visiting Pilate and requesting the body of Jesus. Pilate asks if Jesus is dead and is surprised when told that he is indeed, for his demise seems very rapid to Pilate. But since Jesus is dead, Pilate allows Joseph to take the body down. If we look at the original Greek text, we see an important point being made: when Joseph asks Pilate for Jesus' body, the word used for "body" is soma. In Greek this denotes a living body. When Pilate agrees that Joseph can take the body down from the cross, the word he uses for "body" is ptoma (Mark 15:43-45). This means a fallen body, a corpse or carcass. In other words, the Greek text of Mark's Gospel is making it clear that while Joseph is asking for the living body of Jesus, Pilate grants him what he believes to be the corpse. Jesus' survival is revealed right there in the actual Gospel account.


And when all is said and done, we have a nice rational explantion of what happened. Jesus gets to be a man just like he tried to claim, but kept playing with fire in getting too close to the theme of Jewish being like touching the face of god.

Jesus gets to live, taken down early, no legs broken, nice sponge.

Jesus has a wife, children, and lives happily ever after somewhere besides Jerusalem.

edit on 27-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Jesus gets to be human, and he does manage to get his message delivered into this day.

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:57 AM
Looks like the JW's get this part right. They even speak to the faked up day of Christmas being held on Nimrod's birthday. Isn't it amazing what one learns when the can read more than one book.

Even Islam gets it right on the survival of Jesus.


You must show faith in God and in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Adhere to the practices, requirements, commandments, laws, and sacraments of the faith. "Witnessing" and active sharing of their faith with others is fundamental. Avoid behaviors that God dislikes, including celebration of birthdays and holidays originating from false religions.


There is one God Almighty--a Spirit Being with a body but not a human body. There is one God and no Trinity.


Everyone should know that Trinity is a pagan theme taken from Nimrod, Semaramis, and Tammuz and to apply that to Jesus is false religion.

edit on 28-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Cuttting past the Christian worship of Satan

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 09:29 AM
True Bible scholars, those following the Mason's methods, and so on like the information exposed in this book.
It tends to get down to the root of the problems.


The Jesus Papers: Exposing the Greatest Cover-Up in History (Hardcover)
I enjoyed this book. Before I get into the review, I want to make some general comments.

On some of the hoopla surrounding this book

There is an enormous gap between Catholicism and Christianity, if you base Christianity on the Gospels or anything else in the New Testament. That's not "an opinion." Just start reading and comparing. It's also helpful to remember that Martin Luther--a Doctor of Divinity and Biblical scholar--sought to reform the Catholic Church to principles of Christianity back in the 1500s. The two religions are fundamentally and diametrically opposed. Luther exposed the Catholic Church for the fraud it was, over half a millennia ago. And yet it's still going strong today. So, no book is a threat to Catholicism.

This book isn't a threat to Judaism, which is more a hereditary religion than one based on conversion.

Nor is this book a threat to "Literal Bible Christianity." Yes, it sheds credible doubt on many of the key Biblical concepts--such as the resurrection. However, it has long been beyond doubt that the Bible was concocted many decades after the Apostles died--and is thus full of errors (or, as many scholars hold, fraud). So, the "Literal Bible" folks already live with delusions. They aren't going to be swayed by even more evidence piled on what is already before them.

Would this book be a threat to other Christians? Probably not. Most Christian groups have officially come to terms with the errors, inconsistencies, and deficiencies of the Bible. That's why they don't take it literally. They take from the Bible and from tradition the core concepts on which they build their religious system. They have a faith that sustains them and through which they help make the world a better place. They don't pretend that their faith is based on knowledge, they know it's based on faith. So, they aren't threatened by research that provides even more evidence of fraud in the Bible.

If Jesus had survived the crucifixion, rather than having died and being resurrected, would these people live any differently? My guess is most Christians are far more inspired by the central message Jesus gave rather than the messages imputed to him long after his ministry concluded.

Conclusion: This book will not change the face of religions that claim to be Christian in nature.

On the Dan Brown controversy

Brown lied to the readers. That's what a novelist does. Brown's book, while entertaining and a source of millions of dollars of income for the author, isn't history. It's fiction. The fact that Brown pretended to present fact does rankle many people, and it certainly rankled Baigent and other scholarly types.

The dispute between Brown and Baigent has nothing to do with this book. That dispute has to do with an earlier Baigent work. And the decision in that dispute basically says Brown is a novelist (fiction, by definition) and Baigent is a researcher (fact, by definition). Plagiarism is not an issue because the works are inherently so different. Where Baigent and others are correct is in their claims that Brown made incorrect claims in his book. But Brown can legitimately do that because he wrote a work of fiction. If Brown had written a research piece, then we could all get upset and make him play by the rules of published research. If you simply remember that Brown is telling a story and not teaching a class, the controversy (as stated) is moot.

The review

I like Baigent's approach. He gives extensive background information, so the reader gets a feel for how he arrived at his thesis that Jesus survived the crucifixion. He also provides us with insight as to why the crucifixion story, if false, would have come to be in the first place. That insight fits well into the current literature from others in this field of historical religious studies.

Some readers may have expected a one-sided approach that clearly sets forth the thesis as fact. Such an approach is what we find when people want to convince those who already agree with them. This is not what Baigent did; he took a much more fair approach. Context is a huge factor when trying to understand Christian texts and beliefs from any given era. This is why Baigent took the time to present the context. He didn't meander, as some impatient readers claimed in other reviews, he provided the necessary context.

This book is not a novel. There isn't a plot, and there are no cliffhangers at the ends of the chapters. It's a non-fiction work produced by a researcher for the layman. Baigent could have hidden behind jargon and unexplained concepts, but he didn't. I found myself intrigued after reading the first few pages. I think Baigent did a good job of making his case. But he was also careful to present his conclusion as an alternative to consider. He did not present it as the only logical conclusion. In no way does he imply the reader has to be an idiot to disagree with him.

Baigent does not claim that the resurrection absolutely never took place. He shows the weaknesses in the claims that it did, and explains those weaknesses in historical context. He then explains what most probably did take place, and why that's probable--again, in the historical context. I found his scholarly approach appealing.

Something else I found appealing in this book was the inclusion of a large number of informative photographs. Even if you (mis)read the text by coming at it with preconceived notions, this book is worth more than its price for these photos alone. They even have good captions to go with them.

When reading this book, you have to remember that it's an examination and presentation of the research, not an opinion piece developed to defend or attack a particular dogma or belief set. Baigent does challenge the reader to examine traditional beliefs, and by necessity some particular dogmas and belief sets aren't treated kindly. That doesn't, however, diminish the value of the book. Imagine a book on plate tectonics accommodating a belief that the earth is flat--it just doesn't work. Similarly, this book can't accommodate certain ideas. It does present ideas that make sense, especially when you understand the historical context in which those ideas are presented.

If understanding is something you desire, then you will like this book. If your self worth is wrapped up in holding to a particular belief set, then you probably won't like this book.


edit on 28-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Finding the reason using logic

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 09:46 AM
Rennes-le-Château symbolism


In The Jesus Papers, author Michael Baigent claims that after having being taken down alive from the Cross, Jesus was removed from the tomb at night by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, then smuggled away to Egypt along with his wife, Mary Magdalene. They moved to Narbonne in the south of France in AD 38, following unrest in Cairo, close to where they had settled (in or near the Temple of Onias). Other Jewish families had settled in Narbonne claiming descent from King David.

Michael Baigent claims the source of Bérenger Saunière's wealth was derived from his knowledge and discovery that this was all historically factual, after the priest had found hidden documents (also taking for granted that the source of the priest's wealth was mysterious). Baigent argues that Station XIV of the Cross in the church of Rennes-le-Château, showing a Full Moon, indicates that the Sabbath/Passover had begun, and showing Joseph of Arimathea carrying the live body of Jesus out of the tomb.


Most that know about the lost tomb of Jesus and family-----also know about the Chevron and circle image.

It also appears on a church dedicated to the truth on what happened.

The Rennes-le-Château Entrance with the Chevron symbol:

And the folks at Rennes-le-Château also get it right with the chevron risen symbol

And the Vapid Christians, that read one book, are wrong and don't even have the slightest of grips on the subject of Jesus and the Essene.

edit on 28-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Rennes-le-Château Entrance with the Chevron Risen symbol

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:34 PM
reply to post by NOTurTypical

No, that part isn't true. The centurion didn't break Christ's legs because He had already been dead for 3 or so hours at that point.

NOTurTypical, you and I have been here before. You were not there, friend, so you do not know. Please stop acting, and talking, like you were there in first person and an eye witness to it all. I could ask you to produce records to prove what you said, but you will just throw up the NT, which even it's authors are in deep doubt. I myself, even though every Christian in here thinks me wrong, is the Roman Family of Piso wrote the entire thing, made up everything in it, and probably did it for money.


The True Authorship of the New Testament


posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:57 PM
reply to post by NOTurTypical

I don't care about the Essenes.

Yikes. Jesus was a member of the Essenes, in his childhood in Egypt, and also after his trial and punishment. The Essenes are the closest thing to Jesus that we can discern.

It's not that scary. Just...please, NuT, look it up. Look into the actual history of Jesus Christ.
Nononono, the Essenes were the folks among whom he grew up, and to whom he returned after his debacle.

Hug, bro.

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 09:08 PM
reply to post by autowrench

I myself, even though every Christian in here thinks me wrong, is the Roman Family of Piso wrote the entire thing, made up everything in it, and probably did it for money.

I don't think you're wrong, auto....but then again, I can only claim to be 'Christian' inasmuch as I think he (real or imagined...but possibly somewhere in between -- like King Arthur) was spreading the idea of love, tolerance, and a peaceful humanity.......

I'm certainly not one of those exclusionary, divisive, 'you are wrong and I am right' type of people.....
But, I think you know that.

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 09:20 PM

Rennes-le-Chateau church entry detail.

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:23 PM
reply to post by wildtimes

You blaspheme the Lord and then offer hugs.

Knock it off wildtimes, enough with your new age hippie love BS.

I'm done hearing you disrespect Jesus Christ, take your "he was a good teacher" crap elsewhere.

posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 07:32 AM

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by wildtimes

You blaspheme the Lord and then offer hugs.

Knock it off wildtimes, enough with your new age hippie love BS.

I'm done hearing you disrespect Jesus Christ, take your "he was a good teacher" crap elsewhere.

If you are one of the ones running around telling the Bible was written by god and that Jesus is god, then you are the anti-christ and won't get an invitation to heaven. Nor the respect of others as you violate truth.

Everyone knows the laws of natuire and if you run around promoting things that violate those laws, then you are the untruthful one.

Like it or not, there was an Essene sect and Jesus was part of that order. Respect for Jesus would also mean that one also must observe that element of his history.

Of course doing that would tend to ruin your fantasy story telling and expose you as the supporter of big lies against Jesus. imho

edit on 29-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Those who resist truth

<< 45  46  47    49  50  51 >>

log in