Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by troubleshooter
More unscholarly disinformation...
What? Why should I take your word for it and not look into it myself, please? I don't believe Klassified is giving "disinformation"....
what is your angle here?
But he is simply telling you correct info.
To put it mildly, semiramis was a slut.
She made many babies. When her husband, Nimrod was killed after being judged and his body dismembered to prove to all his claims of being the anointed
one (prophecy:not a bone of his will be broken) was dismissed she became pregnant after failing to reanimate nimrod(she was a witch). She was no
virgin by any means and the immaculate conceprtion was that she claimed Tammuz, her son, was Nimrod reborn and he was also the father.
She was to later marry Tammuz.
So no, she was never a virgin for the story and the conception was simply storyline, nothing close to the story found in the gospels.
She elevated Nimrod, as did he, to god status so her claiming she was impregnated by him was her claim of giving birth to the son of a god.
But like I said Seth judged him with the council and he was proven to all he fell short in fulfilling the prophecies.
All religions especially those from the mystery schools come from either Semiramis or Nimrod or both.
The RCC with the depiction of jesus as a babe in his mothers arms comes from the mother/son cult of Semiramis and Tammuz for instance.
Hey, but don't take my word for it either.Look into E.W. Bullinger's and others work on the Mazzaroth if you want to know where the storyline came
from that posers like Nimrod and those behind him used as framework to engineer their stories for godhood.
There have been many poser Christs but only one has ever fulfilled all the prophecies. But maybe He simply never existed...except all the posers, they
existed fer sure.
ok, I have to elaboprate a little since so many are being fooled by so little.
Both the Pisos and Flavians have modeled their stories around a christ character that existed at the time of Yeshua. That was Appolonius of Tyana.
The Indian sages claimed him as the christ.
They say Jesus gave up "the christ principle" at His death and it went to Appolonius.So when you read these stories that the new age historians use to
reinvent what the Sophists allready did at the time simply insert Appolonius as the christ they refer to and the confusion begins to fade the more you
The claim the Piso's wrote the New Testament becomes evident that no, they didn't write the New Testament and yes, they were confused with what to do
with Appolonius so they used him as their model for their gnostic works.
They plagiarized the letters of Paul but were never concerned with the Christians as they were simply lion feed and lamplights. It was Appolonius they
went to work on.
The Christians simply were no concern at the time outside of the healings and the legend from eyewitnesses of Yeshua's ascention from the empty
No, Appolonius was alive and that was their concern.
But some of these pseudo-anthropologists today that pose as historians want to focus it now on Yahsyah....why? Because nobody today even knows of
Appolonius of Tyana so the bait and switch is for a Red Herring distorting the distortion the Sophists made at the time.
Appolonius was made out to be the pagan christ of their day.
Today they want to make Yashayah the pagan equivalent due to ignorance of historical precedence.
There is a reason this never took hold in centuries past.
They knew more history from books and research and not wiki and google.
What a miracle they found in controlling search engines.
edit on 8-5-2012 by manna2 because: (no reason given)