The identity of Jesus' wife is..

page: 7
2
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by MeesterB
 


There is no judgement for those who are in the "Spirit." Jesus said so.

But I'm not a Christian as I don't subscribe to many of the Christian beliefs of Jesus' divinity. I believe that Jesus addressed reincarnation and taught "the way" to break the "wheel of karma" and to be self determined souls, free as the wind.

I do believe in a spiritual hierarchy and look forward to falling into the healing ocean of God's love, before reevaluating my goals and my position in continuing in the participation in the "Great Work."





posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Just going to pick and choose religious doctrines to fit your needs? Seems legit...
Well, good luck with that.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MeesterB
 


Key words: RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE. Kinda like "Military Intelligence!"

Isn't spirituality supposed to be a personal experience?

How can I trust a "Church" claiming to have the "Holy Word of God" that they have kept pristine, because they care so much about my salvation, when they have a history of lying, coercion, slavery, murder and other dehumanizing and wicked things?

I have more faith in GOD than the need to look for "him" in a book or a church or some preacher pretending to know more than me, about me.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Did you know that Paul's parents are never mentioned in the bible? The only reference to them is Acts 2:25 where Paul says he is a Roman, which means one of his parents had to be Roman.

Peter's fathers name was Judah/Judas who the the Roman province of Judea was named after and who also shares a name with the disciple who betrayed Jesus by selling him. Simon had his name changed to Peter; Saul had his name changed to Paul. Their first names both start with S and both of their second names both start with a P. Coincidence? Maybe, but maybe not.

Peter was even crucified upside down, that is a sign of the antichrist. Paul and Peter may be the same person. After Jesus died Peter moved to Rome, where Paul was a citizen. Peter was even called Satan by Jesus himself. What they talk about is stuff made by the antichrist and that includes the ideas of salvation and faith in Jesus' death.

Paul isn't even mentioned until the book Acts which wasn't written until around 60 AD, that's a whole 30 years after Jesus died. Paul is first mentioned in Acts 7:58. Peter is not mentioned in Acts 7 but is in Acts 6 & 8. In Acts 8:9-25 it mentions Peter talking to a man named Simon who was a sorcerer who was believed to be the "Power of God". Peter's previous name was Simon, this is where Peter begins to become Paul.

Acts was written somewhere between 62-70 AD, Paul wrote his letters sometime between 66-69 AD, Peter was also crucified in Rome upside down right around the time Paul wrote his letters in 67-68 AD.

Funny how Peter decided to be crucified upside down because that is a sign of the antichrist. Peter was never crucified, he just defected to Rome and changed his name to Paul where he made up the ideas of salvation.

Peter even agrees with what Paul says in 2 Peter 3:15, saying what he says is "hard to understand". I thought Jesus' yoke was easy and his burden light? Something that is hard to understand is not easy or light, yet you base most of your beliefs on what Paul said.

The timeline lines up perfectly with them being the same person in my opinion.

edit on 22-9-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Pline the Younger wasn't born until around 61 AD and was said to have tortured suspected Christians and sentenced them to death.

How is anything he says relevant? He killed Christians.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Religious doctrine... Religious Ideology.... Spiritual Ideas.
Call it whatever you want, but I'm venturing to guess that your opinions on God were formed from something you heard.
"The Way," "Wheel of karma(samsara)," "reincarnation," Sounds a lot like Hinduism mixed with a little Taoism.

You complain about the church for making up religion, yet you make up your own religion. I hope you see the hypocrisy.
You seem to have it all figured out though, so I don't really have anything left to say.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by MeesterB
 


We're actually trying to say there is no need for religion because everyone has eternal life no matter what they believe. You don't need to fear death because you will have life after death forever, no strings attached.

Karma is involved as well, Rich Man and Lazarus is a story about karma and reincarnation.
edit on 22-9-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


So you are saying that you won't be judged by the Most High, the creator, for the life you lived?
You arrived at this conclusion.... how?
Sounds like wishful thinking to me.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by MeesterB
 


Karma is the judge and you judge yourself by the way you live this life. If you follow what Jesus taught and ignore anything by Paul you would realize this, especially when you realize you have eternal life with no strings attached no matter what you believe.

Read Rich Man and Lazarus, it's an excellent story that supports reincarnation and karma.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by MeesterB
 


How do you pick your music? Your hear it, you like it, you buy it. Some like Heavy Metal, some like Frank Sinatra. There's a big world of music out there.

It's the same with spirituality. We hear all kinds of things. The truth and the way is etched on our souls, and if we are sincere, we know it when we hear it. Everyone is on an individual path, but all seekers find. Jesus said so.


I don't believe in the God of the Old Testament, the angry, insecure and needy one, that is. I'm not afraid to be in (the real) God's presence after this life. I've known it already.

Jesus never preached to fear God, but to love God, yourself and others. Quite the novel approach actually, in the Biblical narrative.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Did you know that Paul's parents are never mentioned in the bible? The only reference to them is Acts 2:25 where Paul says he is a Roman, which means one of his parents had to be Roman.

Peter's fathers name was Judah/Judas who the the Roman province of Judea was named after and who also shares a name with the disciple who betrayed Jesus by selling him. Simon had his name changed to Peter; Saul had his name changed to Paul. Their first names both start with S and both of their second names both start with a P. Coincidence? Maybe, but maybe not.

Peter was even crucified upside down, that is a sign of the antichrist. Paul and Peter may be the same person. After Jesus died Peter moved to Rome, where Paul was a citizen. Peter was even called Satan by Jesus himself. What they talk about is stuff made by the antichrist and that includes the ideas of salvation and faith in Jesus' death.

Paul isn't even mentioned until the book Acts which wasn't written until around 60 AD, that's a whole 30 years after Jesus died. Paul is first mentioned in Acts 7:58. Peter is not mentioned in Acts 7 but is in Acts 6 & 8. In Acts 8:9-25 it mentions Peter talking to a man named Simon who was a sorcerer who was believed to be the "Power of God". Peter's previous name was Simon, this is where Peter begins to become Paul.

Acts was written somewhere between 62-70 AD, Paul wrote his letters sometime between 66-69 AD, Peter was also crucified in Rome upside down right around the time Paul wrote his letters in 67-68 AD.

Funny how Peter decided to be crucified upside down because that is a sign of the antichrist. Peter was never crucified, he just defected to Rome and changed his name to Paul where he made up the ideas of salvation.

Peter even agrees with what Paul says in 2 Peter 3:15, saying what he says is "hard to understand". I thought Jesus' yoke was easy and his burden light? Something that is hard to understand is not easy or light, yet you base most of your beliefs on what Paul said.

The timeline lines up perfectly with them being the same person in my opinion.

edit on 22-9-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)


Do you care to reply to this Warminindy?



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by WarminIndy
 




edit on 22-9-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)


You make a great pretense of having read the Bible. Paul was of what tribe? Benjamin, correct?

Now let me ask you this, when Paul addresses something about Peter in several letters, and these churches had MET both men, then how can they be the same person? Huh? Care to explain that one?

In Acts 23:6, he says his father was also a Pharisee, his mother was a Roman citizen because they were from what is now Turkey. His teacher was Rabban Gamaliel I, who told him to refrain from killing Christians. Gamaliel was an authority in the Sanhedrin, a Jewish sect. Now I wonder where you can find information about him? OOOHH yes, the Talmud.

Paul was a Benjamite, studied under Gamaliel, his father was a Pharisee, and when asked, he explicitly states he was a HEBREW.

I want to know this, as you seem to be very much against Paul, why is this so? Why do you keep wanting us to know he killed Christians? We ALL know he did this. He never hid that fact from anyone. Why are you fixated on Paul? It's like you have a vendetta against him.

It seems almost that you have no concept of Rome as an empire before Christianity and that Rome was pagan. When we give you writings from Roman authors, you say "they were killers", yes, we know they were. But this was before the Catholic church. If Christianity was pagan, why didn't the pagan Romans recognize it?

Before Constantine became a Christian, what was he? A pagan. Why did he convert, if it was pagan as you propose? What would be the need for him to convert if the religions were the same? Do you have a problem with Rome being pagan? I think that must be it, you have trouble accepting that pagans killed people and want to believe pagans have always been innocent victims of the Christians. You present this so much, you can't even read historical documents without denying them. Even when those documents are accepted as true from liberal universities.

I remember you posting in another thread about how you challenged some men in your church, then you walked proudly out as though you had proven a point. What was it you said you worshiped in that thread? Oh yes, paganism. The Roman empire was guilty of killing Christians, but you can't seem to process that. Instead, you keep pointing out about Paul killing Christians, implying Paul was a secret operative for Christian Rome. Because to you, if it is now Catholic, and Catholics killed pagans, then Rome must have always been a Christian empire.

What you really are saying is that Paul was really killing pagans. I think by now, others will have picked up on that as well. And don't say I put words in your mouth, we conversed about this on another thread. You just can't seem to grasp history.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by MeesterB
 


Karma is the judge and you judge yourself by the way you live this life. If you follow what Jesus taught and ignore anything by Paul you would realize this, especially when you realize you have eternal life with no strings attached no matter what you believe.

Read Rich Man and Lazarus, it's an excellent story that supports reincarnation and karma.


Yes, lets ignore what the apostles say, who walked with him and learned firsthand from him. Seems fair enough, i mean what did they know really, i mean they only spent 3 years with him being taught by him
. BTW Yeshua didn't teach karma, him being the Word made flesh, he taught what was in the Tenach, and in the Tenach there's no such thing as karma, the teaching was God would reward you for what you did not some ideology but the Creator himself. Karma didn't create anything, it doesn't even exist. You can do good to others all your life and still get shat on, that right there proves theres no such thing as karma.

Matthew 5:43-45

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

This is Yeshua saying right here there's no such thing as karma.

Isaiah 45:7

7 I form the light and create darkness,
I make peace and create calamity;
I, the Lord, do all these things.

Here's the Master of Legions Himself saying there's no such thing as karma. Karma does not exist.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy
You make a great pretense of having read the Bible. Paul was of what tribe? Benjamin, correct?

Now let me ask you this, when Paul addresses something about Peter in several letters, and these churches had MET both men, then how can they be the same person? Huh? Care to explain that one?


Maybe because him writing to himself and the church meeting him were fabricated lies in order to push their agenda? People have always lied, why wouldn't they be able to lie about this? The letters Paul wrote were written 30 years after Jesus died. It's not really that far of a stretch if you ask me.



In Acts 23:6, he says his father was also a Pharisee, his mother was a Roman citizen because they were from what is now Turkey. His teacher was Rabban Gamaliel I, who told him to refrain from killing Christians. Gamaliel was an authority in the Sanhedrin, a Jewish sect. Now I wonder where you can find information about him? OOOHH yes, the Talmud.


So Gamaliel being mentioned in the Talmund has something to do with Paul how?

You forgot to mention that Paul also calls himself a Pharisee, this is at a time after his conversion so why would he call himself something Jesus despised?



Paul was a Benjamite, studied under Gamaliel, his father was a Pharisee, and when asked, he explicitly states he was a HEBREW.


And what documentation do you have that connects Paul to the Tribe of Benjamin? Oh that's right, his parents names are never mentioned so there is no proof.

Peter was a Hebrew as well you know.



I want to know this, as you seem to be very much against Paul, why is this so? Why do you keep wanting us to know he killed Christians? We ALL know he did this. He never hid that fact from anyone. Why are you fixated on Paul? It's like you have a vendetta against him.


The reason I seem to have a vendetta against Paul is because he is the one that changed Jesus' message from love to blind faith. He completely rewrites and distorts Jesus' original message.



It seems almost that you have no concept of Rome as an empire before Christianity and that Rome was pagan. When we give you writings from Roman authors, you say "they were killers", yes, we know they were. But this was before the Catholic church. If Christianity was pagan, why didn't the pagan Romans recognize it?


Because the pagan themes weren't added in until the Council of Nicaea in my opinion. Christianity had no pagan themes up until that point, that is why they didn't recognize it.



Before Constantine became a Christian, what was he? A pagan. Why did he convert, if it was pagan as you propose? What would be the need for him to convert if the religions were the same? Do you have a problem with Rome being pagan? I think that must be it, you have trouble accepting that pagans killed people and want to believe pagans have always been innocent victims of the Christians. You present this so much, you can't even read historical documents without denying them. Even when those documents are accepted as true from liberal universities.


Constantine is the one who ordered the pagan themes to be inserted. Why is that so hard to believe?

When did I ever imply that pagans were victims? That is a straw man. Pagans (Constantine) are the ones who hijacked Jesus' story so why would I have sympathy for them?

I'm not denying the documents or saying Paul wasn't a real person, I'm saying that the documents could have easily been altered and that Paul and Peter could have been the same person.



I remember you posting in another thread about how you challenged some men in your church, then you walked proudly out as though you had proven a point. What was it you said you worshiped in that thread? Oh yes, paganism. The Roman empire was guilty of killing Christians, but you can't seem to process that. Instead, you keep pointing out about Paul killing Christians, implying Paul was a secret operative for Christian Rome. Because to you, if it is now Catholic, and Catholics killed pagans, then Rome must have always been a Christian empire.


Where in the world did I ever say I worshiped paganism? You must be mistaking me for someone else because I have never said such a thing. Either that or you are just making stuff up.



What you really are saying is that Paul was really killing pagans. I think by now, others will have picked up on that as well. And don't say I put words in your mouth, we conversed about this on another thread. You just can't seem to grasp history.


You obviously aren't understanding what I mean. Paul first distorted Jesus' message after persecuting followers of Jesus' true message by adding in faith and salvation. About 300 years later Constantine adds in the pagan themes at the Council of Nicaea. Early followers of Jesus were not pagan which is why Rome was killing them during the persecutions. You are completely off base.
edit on 22-9-2012 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


How exactly does that disprove karma? God treating the just and unjust the same could be proof that salvation through Jesus is false.

The one from Isaiah doesn't even have anything to do with karma at all so what is your point here? Honest question.





top topics
 
2
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum