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.

 

How can any religion based on Jesus work?

page: 10
6
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Exactly. That would explain his "miracles", which we could all perform today if we had the discipline and training he had. That's why I say we are "sleeping demigods".

But it is so very, very immensely difficult to learn, especially given the conditioning in today's world...and honestly, we don't deserve the power. Not until we all awaken spiritually.
edit on CThursdaypm505023f23America/Chicago26 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon

Hi Akragon-

You wrote: QUOTE

"Nope i don't speak anything other then English... the issue was that your post made no sense in the context of the passage you were quoting...I think you'll find racist this and that in any litterature if that is what you're looking for... I make my beliefs quite clear...so why don't you? "

UNQUOTE

The CONTEXT I was showing in my quote is to point out the inherent zionist-racism in the earliest strands of the earliest Nazorean Chrsitiainities (or Messianic Apocalyptic Judaeisms) that were running around immediately prior to the 1st Failed Jewish Revolt against Rome (CE 66- CE72) in which 900,000 Palestinian 'Jews' lost their lives and which virtually wiped out the Galilean Aramaic speaking 'christians' who had anything to do with 'Iesous' (i.e. R. Yeshoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir - c. BCE 12 - 36 CE) personally.

The point of this threadlet is : How can any religion be based on Iesous' work?

My point is to say that the earliest Christianities that flowed from Palestine and into the Diaspora Jewish communities were all racist-zionist in their verbiage-preaching content quoting from racist zionist documents (such as the Dead Sea Scrolls which show ample proof of this Tendenz, sometimes in the extreme) in the context of gentile (i.e. Roman) occupation of the 'chosen people' (a racist idea in the first place) in their own 'promised land' (another racist-zionist tenet) - and in the context of Roman Occupation, we understand terms like MARA NATHA in their original meanings which were written in the Dead Sea Scrolls - i.e. "May YHWH quickly come (which was originally continued as : 'to utterly destroy all the sinful gentiles occupying the land of Yisro'el') a tenet of the so-called Book of Revelation

(see all those passages in the stinky Greek (full of 'Greek Grammatical Howlers' which are often impossible to translate into anytning comprehensible without adding or changing lots and lots of Greek words...an editor's nightmare)

Now when the Red Serpent saw that he had been cast out of Heaven
And saw also that all of his Angels fell down to the earth with him,
Neither was there any hope of returning to their former places :
Lol, he began to persecute the Woman who was in Travail giving birth.
And lo, the Serpent stood before the Woman in Childbirth
Hoping to devour the child as soon as it was delivered.

And behold, the Woman gave sudden Birth to a son,
Even the Nazir of David who will rule over all the Goyim with an Iron Rod,
[The same shall bash the Kings of the Gentiles into pieces as a Potter’s Vessel] :
Lo, the Child was immediately lifted up to the Throne of EL in Heaven
Where the Angels of Heaven fed him with the Bread of Manna
Even for a Period of 1260 days...

or see other anti-gentile passages in the tattered fragments of the impossible Greek of the Book of Revelation:

And I looked & behold, I saw : the Heavens opened & lo, a Great White Horse :
And he who sat thereon was called Faithful & True :
And the Title [on his Banner] read, Debir-EL, even the Word of God :
And there was a Sacred Name engraved on his Thigh
Even one that no son of man knew
One only known to he himself alone.

And lo his Eyes were glowing as brightly as the sun at Noon,
Even as the very flames of Fire
And upon his Head was an interlaid Ring of many Crowns :
And he was clothed head to foot in the Linen Lebush of the Martyrs
Even in garments that had been bleached a pure White
By the shedding of his own Martyr's blood

And lo, the Vesture of his Thigh were engraved wiith Royal Titles
Among them were written, ‘The King of Kings’
And also engraved upon it were the words, ‘The Lord of Lords’’ :
And behold, upon his Banner the words, "The Winepress of the Wrath of EL"
And he went forth to Wage Holy War in Righteousness
Even against all the sons of Beli’al.

And lo, Great Armies in Heaven were following behind him in Companies
And behold they all were mounted upon White Battle-Horses
And dressed in the fine-white linen of the Martyrs :
And lo, they all began to form into companies
Even of 1000s, and of 100s and of tens
And behold, they followed behind him wherever he marched.

Even the One seated upon the White Stallion in front
From whose mouth was dangling the Sharp Two Edged Sword
With which he shall rule the Goyim with an Iron Rod
Yea, he shall dash them all to Splinters
Even as a potter’s Vessel is smashed
When it is hurled down to the Floor by the Potter.

etc.

These anti-gentile passages are all over the earliest Nazorean texts - the question remains, why do modern day 'Christians' (whatever that means, exactly) still try to deny the existence of such inherent racist anti gentile zionism in the texts which they consider to 'defile the hands' i.e. be sacred enough to be regarded as 'inspired' scripture to live their lives by ??



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Starchild23
 


Yet no monks nowadays can perform miracles like Jesus did.

Because they are not God.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 



the question remains, why do modern day 'Christians' (whatever that means, exactly) still try to deny the existence of such inherent racist anti gentile zionism in the texts which they consider to 'defile the hands' i.e. be sacred enough to be regarded as 'inspired' scripture to live their lives by ?


You would have to ask a christian that question i guess... I have little to no use for most of bible... and especially no use for revelation...




posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
I think the op did not do much research for stating this thread. His original question was how a religion based on Jesus work . Some believe Jesus was the embodiment off God, and he came to the earth as a sacrifice for humanity. If you accept Jesus as your personal savior, all your sins will be forgiven. It is that simple.
edit on 26-4-2012 by redneck13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Text
Thinking can undermine religious faith, study finds
Those who think more analytically are less inclined to be religious believers than are those who tend to follow a gut instinct, researchers conclude.
By Amina Khan, Los Angeles Times

April 26, 2012, 9:05 p.m



www.latimes.com...
edit on 27-4-2012 by redneck13 because: ok



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by MamaJ
 


A standing ovation for someone who didn't say a single original phrase. Everything he said has been spoken dozens of times before by millions just as blind as him.

Go ahead with that ovation...it just sounds like hollow, shallow approval in my ears.


This is true.. however just because one hears the message does not mean said message isn't falling on deaf ears.

It was an ovation by me because the poster I was replying to was spot on with the understanding of Jesus IMO.

Again, not many understand his words/ messages.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


aren't we quaint! at least your polite and knowlegeable!
yes i am aware of what you speak,but i was speaking of the king james version of the gospels that most people know,where the pretty story of jesus is told. being righteous is how jesus is portrayed.
and yes before his arrest he did tell his crew to sell their stuff to buy swords. he was ready for an insurrection!
yes he was crucified,punishment reserved for political enemies of the state of rome.
most people do not know of the books you are referring to.
which jesus was which? Barrabas was crucified along side jesus,and his name means son of the father,or lord!



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by reficul
 


I've never encountered that version before...strangely enough, I've met someone who claimed to be the reincarnation of Barrabus, also known as Barrabus the thief. He is currently in prison with multiple pyschiatric disorders.
edit on CFridayam575733f33America/Chicago27 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

biblical masc. proper name, Gk. Barabbas, from Aramaic barabba, "son of the father," or "son of the master." In Hebrew, it would be ben abh.
reply to post by Starchild23
 


hope this helps. better definitions out there but no time to search.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


Did you know the 88 gods of Egypt are based upon the chromosomes of the body?

They were arranged in a heirarchy that explained which chakras empowered which pieces of our DNA, allowing the miracles that Jesus performed. Immortality, healing, and everything else.

The knowledge was lost, but is slowly being recovered. Hence, "New Age"..or as I call it, "Rediscovery".

See, you can argue all you want, but when you do your research, you actually find yourself arguing less. Those who don't bother studying matters will argue more because they don't understand the subject involved. What does that say about you?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


There's thinking you understand, and then there's actually understanding.

How can you be so sure you understand, besides the conditioning you grew up with, and your desire to believe anything you're told for the sake of hope?

That's the problem with Christians. They have repeatedly demonstrated they are willing to believe in anything that provides hope, therefore they cannot be trusted, for they have displayed the propensity for believing the most absurd of lies if it guarantees lack of fear in the face of the unknown.

Do you understand?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by reficul
 


Why thank you. I had not known this.

How did you find that he was crucified alongside Jesus?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Starchild23
 


it says so in the bible! hes the one the romans 'let go' instead of jesus,as they like to tell you was the roman custom(which is an absolute lie) he was supposedly a theif and a murderer,but pontius pilate asked the jews which one should go free. jesus,or barabbas. the jews (according to scripture) picked barabbas! (earliest form of anti semetism created by romans!) instead of jesus. this makes very little sense to let a killer go free,and crucify a rabbi(teacher),unless of course you think of jesus as a political prisoner against rome,while the pherisees of the jewish temple liked their comfy existance with their roman overlords. then they could make up this story to make others hate the jews for throwing their 'messiah' to the roman wolfs!
look up luke 23:18.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by reficul

Hi Reciful --


You wrote:

QUOTE

"...most people do not know of the books you are referring to. Which Iesus was which? Barrabas was crucified along side Jesus,and his name means son of the father,or lord..."

UNQUOTE

Interestingly, Bar-abba means 'son of the father' in Aramaic which can certainly be construed to be a Messianic (deliverer) title sort of like 'son of god' or 'son of the gods' etc.

Several very old copies of the 1st canonical Greek gospel ('according to Matthew' whoever he was) show 'iesous bar abbas' (i.e. Jesus barAbbas) in the Pilate offering to the crowd : 'which shall I release to you now, Iesous who is called the Messiah, or Iesous who is called Bar-Abbas'? and they called out for Iesous Bar-abbas...

The name Bar-Abbas (Aram. bar-abba) might not be the regular Bar Abbas at all but perhaps the phrase bar-Rabbi, son of a great one (i.e. a rabbi) , or even Bar Rahab, i.e. son of Rakhab - the Greek text is not very clear in its presentations of transliterations (foreign letter carry overs into Greek)

The Rebbes have a lot of fun with the name, which can also mean 'son of an unknown father' i.e. a Mamzer or illegitimate child. One version of the story runs something like :

"When a new Tanaitic student came into the Schul, he immediately asked the Rebbes sitting there if they knew where Bar-Abba was- and they answered him, 'which Bar-Abba do you seek?' and he said, "Abba-Bar-Abba' and they said which Abba bar Abba do you seek? We seem to have several Abba BarAbbas and Bar Abba bar Abbas here..."

Although there is no evidence in the Greek canonical gospel material that a Bar-Abba was the name of one of the fellow cruficied seditionists strung up during The Insurrection (Mk. 15:1-5) of Passover in 36 CE (the 100th anniversary of the Invasion of Palestine by Roman Army in 63 BCE, and the 200th anniversary of the Macabbean Revolt in 163 BCE).

Where (i.e. what hard evidence can you cite specifically ... ) do you get ANY connexion to be drawn historically between the armed Messianic Political Christ Liberator figure of Iesous Barabbas (Yehoshua bar Abba) and the other crucified armed seditionists arrested by the Temple Police that week strung up with the Daviddic Pretender R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir ('branch of David') ?

Are you just making stuff up or what ?



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


friend,your research ha s been well done. i applaud you. but if you were to speak of this to a regular everyday chtistianthey would have no idea what you were talking about!
i used the king james bible as reference,because that is what most people read (or try to!)
this bible doesn't have the books of macabees in it!
so i tried to put my words and thoughts into laymens terms to try to get my point across with the hope that maybe
i could get one of these better than thou christans on this site to do some historical research on their 'faith'.
i don't expect to have a response with someone that actually has read about religious history as yourself,or even someone who is well versed in rabbinical history. who reads the greek gospels? the nag hammadi library?the dead sea scrolls?or even the book of enoch for that matter?!!!
how about the Ethiopian book-the book of the mysteries of the heavans and the earth?
i admire the knowledge you have gained,but you can't honestly think that the average member knows what you speak of. (i really hope yo didnt copy and past what you posted!!!
) my original point was that in the nkjv of the bible,his name is barabbas,which means son of the father. and most people only think he was a theif and a muderer without realizing the meaning of the name.
i enjoyed the debate though thank you!
nice to know some people bother to learn about the truth



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


very interesting.... Again my friend i will have to appoligise for my previous assumption... its rare that we get someone who actually understands these languages to the apparent extent that you do on these forums.

Let me ask you this...

You say you wonder why "christians" stick to their book...

Would you say that this passage is accurate?

35Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,

36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38This is the first and great commandment.

39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.



IF you believe it is... you have your answer as well...




posted on May, 1 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon


Hi Akragon

Thanks (& also to Reficul) for coming around a bit in terms of tolerance of other opinions on this thread – we all come from different places in life and all of us have something to add to this discussion – my angle just happens to be 'academic' which always confuses persons not 'in the know' about these things...

Pursuant to ‘loving one’s neighbour as one’s self’ – the idea seems to have been borrowed from some of the earlier Rebbes active in Palestine – e.g. R. Gamaliel’s grandfather, Rabbi Hillel, the Presbuteros (The Elder) c. 110BCE to c. 9 BCE , who died apparently as a very old man around the time that R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean [ Gk. Ho Iesous] was born - was said to be one of the first formulators of the so-called Golden Rule of Rabinnic Judaeism and when asked to sum up the entire Torah concisely to a goy (i.e. to a non-Jew or ‘gentile’) who wished to become a god-fearer (non circumcised-Jew) he was said to have answered (spoken around c. 50 BCE – some 80 years before R. Yeshua’s apparent preaching campaigns…

"What is hateful (‘abominable’) to be done to you, do not do to your fellow human being : this is the whole of the Torah. All that remains apart from this is Commentary" (Shabbat 31a).

The language caan be construed as a Rabinnic Midrash (didactic expansion) on Lev. 19:18 - also the later famous R. Akiva ben Joseph (c. 57 CE to c. 132 CE), another old Rebbe who died just before the ill fated 2nd Jewish Revolt against Rome (136-138 CE) although he lived after the time of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef (Gk. ho Iesous) was said to have postulated something along the lines of "You will take care of your fellow-Yisro’elite just as you take care of yourself as the "greatest principle of Judaism…"

How far one extends this dictum of ‘neighbourly concern’ is a personal choice. Jews tended to think only in terms of making sure that fellow Yisroelites were not allowed to starve etc. and in the case of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean (Gr. ho Iesous) he seems to have extended this to the non Judaean Yisroelites which were called the Samaritim –

See e.g. the so-called Parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-40 (a story unique to the author of the 3rd canonical Gospel, according to Luke, whoever he was…the verses are thererfore classified as "L" or sometimes called "Sondergut-L" material in the 3rd Gospel – i.e. verses the anonmyous writer of the 3rd Gospel alone seems to know about!)

Interestingly, the Samaritim were a northern mixed blood (Greek, Assyrian, Syrian, Persian etc.) group of Torah observers (in their own very ancient version which still survives to this day !) with whom R. Yehoshua was sometimes confused because he was a Galilean from the 'north' (‘are we not justified in calling you a Samaritan and possessed of a daemon?’ in the 4th canonical Greek gospel ‘according to John 8:48’ whoever that particular John was !)...



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


That didn't actually answer my question but thats alright... i was leading you in this direction either way...

Buddhism, and Hinduism are both religions that have origins that date back well before christianity....

And both relgions also have a "golden rule" as well... Christ wasn't the originator of this idea... not by a long shot... and judism most definatly is not either...

Gautama Buddha lived around 500 - 400 BCE...

Krishna's life on the other hand has been dated as far back as 3100 BCE...

The masters always have known Gods law... the golden rule likely came even before these individuals lived as well...


edit on 1-5-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
He is talking about false prophets and false disciples who pretend to be one of his flock but they are not. Think Roman Catholic Clergy and you will have an idea of what he was referring to. These are the people who think they can come to him on their own terms instead of his. They are of "babylon", which is man coming to God on their terms and not his.
edit on 25-4-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)
Ah, so you mean that people who are pretending to believe will cast out demons, prophecy, and do marvelous things in the name of Jesus? Why would they do that if they didn't believe in Jesus?







 
6
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join