Thank you. I appreciate that you are mindful in your responses.
Printable View
Thank you. I appreciate that you are mindful in your responses.
Thank God we need no Explanation for doing Good as it is not enough for God to seperate man from Himself so that makind will love Him–this seperation has to be reflected back into God Himself, so that God is abandoned by himself. Pride and loving oneself or full of yourself Each mans humility needs no explanation as its not fascinating Its Christs humility that endures and endears .Getting arrested no doubt humility is all in your head. Thank each and all as every one is just between [Certificates ] The balance is what we share. What other philosophy makes God actually rejoice in the seperation of the universe into living souls. Dark Matter Light Matter We Matter
And now for some entertainment. Or is it more than that? This old song popped in my head for some reason, so, here ya go. Maybe they knew something most people didn't know back in 1989.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtcCwl_sUWw
Voices Of Babylon
Performed by the Outfield
Hit the message I can hear you calling
No one's going anywhere tonight
We conceived a modern generation
It was free but now we pay the price
We're the victims of our own creation
Chasing rainbows that are painted black or white
Watch the struggle of our own temptation
Instincts barely keeping us alive
Back to the rhythm that we all came from
Voices of Babylon, streets of London
Back to the people that we know so well
A space in time removed too soon to tell
Just a product of imagination
Patiently we wait for our turn to come
A small collection of the population
By the time our number's up, we could be gone
Back to the rhythm that we all came from
Voices of Babylon, streets of London
Back to the people that we know so well
A space in time removed too soon to tell
Back to the rhythm that we all came from
Voices of Babylon streets of London town
Class is just being able to afford everything on the menu and never paying for it. a musicial answer it seems i cant post a 6 min video if i could this is it https://youtu.be/3N_rNz2oAGA Fox on the HILL go see that Fox Christ and the wall builders .
Perhaps we need to start distinguishing between the "Roman/Babylonian Christianity" and the true saints as allodial has so clearly elucidated. Having a discussion whereby the two are lumped together by some and not by others creates fruitless discourse.
Also, the historical facts of Jesus' life and death far outweigh the theory that Jesus lived out the rest of his life in obscurity after the crucifixion, in my opinion.
Did Jesus Exist?
It took me a few years but I have quit judging my own ego.
If it serves you to make the distinction great.
I know a woman who is into Abraham HICKS - this is Eleanor HICKS channeling an entity named Abraham. I do not go there much except with ACIM (A Course in Miracles) but I heard a great quote from Abraham. Paraphrasing Abraham said, "The sure sign that you are in spiritual infancy is that you are listening to me."
That got me chuckling!
Chanelling Abraham HICKS of course entirely different from being in the presence of God. However, legitimate praise and worship at congregation meetings of the saints put the attendees strongly in the presence of God (in contrast to the separation of the Garden), ala Psalms 100:4 (a well concealed but powerful 'recipe' for intense communion with God):
That is to say, Psalms 100:4 answers two questions: (1) How do you enter into God's gates? and (2) How do you enter into God's courts? It is 100% verifiable by direct experience. One does not need shiny shoes and glittering jewels. This is why I would suggest that to really comprehend the Kingdom of David, one has to get one's head around the Tabernacle of David. David comprehended this. This very much relates to the incense wafting up into the Holy of Holies in the temple model.Quote:
Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto him, and bless his name. --Psalm 100:4
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...1&d=1446043048
Perhaps Thanksgiving is one doorkeeper and Praise might be another? Or perhaps the doorkeepers (cherubim?) only allow you to stand in the gate with thanksgiving and to go beyond the gate with praise. Consider "the Lord's Prayer" starts with blessing His name.
Related:Quote:
Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. --Hebrews 4:16
I saw a great movie about quantum physics called Tomorrow World. George CLOONEY is grumpy throughout but does a great job. There are two wolves always fighting with each other. One is Fear and Despair. The Other is Love and Hope. The Question is, Which one wins?
ANSWER: The wolf that you feed.
I said it out loud in conversation the other day. But it did not sink in what I had said. All this fictitious entity nonsense is fed and justified by the belief in the initial accusation against God of necromancy, that the God of Abraham would ever reanimate Jesus or any other unnatural (supernatural) act. - And so the attempt to quash Pragmatism.
In the doctrine Pragmatism Peter (BARRABAS - "My Father's Son" was alias) remains living around Jerusalem while Jesus moves north to Damascus (METRO organization, the oldest Capitol City). Shaul is an ugly bald Benjamite from Tarsus who is so desperate for a Herodean wife that he takes on the risky job of capturing Jesus. His offer of bounty hunter is accepted by the Guard but Peter gets wind somehow and runs up to Damascus to warn Jesus. Swords are at a premium but recall that Peter is a violence-prone fellow and has a couple swords in his possession. So Jesus and Peter come back a little on the Road to Damascus and isolate Shaul/Paul during their siesta with Peter armed with a sword. The event converts Shaul to Paul in the classical sense but we also find that Paul spent three years conversing with Jesus. Therefore we find that Mark was indeed a wealthy scribe (able to supply paper and ink) for Peter and with Jesus and Paul consulting up in the Jewish community of Damascus they write the first Gospel - the Book of Mark.
This Gospel amplifies how Jesus was hopeful that even with surviving the sword of Judas, and the subsequent torture staging his death, there might still be a chance for the throne as King of Israel. - Or maybe even his offspring, kept in Gaul (France) with his wife Mary MAGDALENE. So this is why we find an emphasis on Paul's correct feeling that the pagans of Asia Minor (Turkey) would be readily adopting the notions of life, death and rebirth with Jesus revealing himself survived as initially depicted - The Road to Emmeas. Remember? Jesus was incognito, but the two men were grieving so how the King had died (or so they believed) that Jesus pulled off his hood and showed them he had survived?
I do not prod the faithful selfishly.
What I am describing here is the simple notion that all this "being able to sue, and be sued" like corporations, trusts and contract agreements are living PERSONS stems from a justification in rationale that God originally did this necromancy with Jesus.
The "proof" otherwise is by law the distinction between 501(c)(3) and 508(c)(1)(a) in the IRS Code. The first, typical and proclaiming death upon every congregant accuses God of necromancy. The latter, the living church (Pragmatism) believes that the universe is a spiritual and supernatural phenomenon and all existence is the byproduct of ritual magic. The only permanent item is Love and Hope.
Therefore I might simplify the emotions you offer to that. Love and Hope. Feed the right wolf.
The God of necromancy... you really keep me in a chuckling state as well, thanks for that.
I agree with your description of the two codes (as best as one can when trying to decipher legalese) regarding 501 c 3 proclaiming death and 508 c 1 proclaiming life. However, I disagree with how you wrap it up. There exists a distinction between how the ROMAN church, and all of its stemming franchises of denominational Christianity, views the death and resurrection of Jesus as compared with how the true saints view it. Proof of that lies in the persecution and murder of these saints by the ROMAN church throughout history while being mostly obscured and barely talked about.
I may tend to agree with your "pragmatic" view regarding ROMAN Christianity and its use of Jesus' death, Mary worship and the worship of the apostles as "elite" super-saints as some form of witchcraft, divination and black magic. It's quite obvious just by observing the costumes, rituals and chanting (in the form of repetitive prayers) in order to make "penance". The modern denominational off-shoots of this ROMAN religion may not practice exactly as the original, but enough of the organization, rituals and form of "Church Hierarchy" has remained. Allodial has provided much insight and study material to back that up.
Does it serve me to make the distinction? Yes, I believe it does. More importantly, however, I also believe it serves this discussion and forum if we claim to be after what is true.
An excerpt from the above link..
As far as we know, no ancient person ever seriously argued that Jesus did not exist. Referring to the first several centuries C.E., even a scholar as cautious and thorough as Robert Van Voorst freely observes, “… No pagans and Jews who opposed Christianity denied Jesus’ historicity or even questioned it.”
Nondenial of Jesus’ existence is particularly notable in rabbinic writings of those first several centuries C.E.: “… If anyone in the ancient world had a reason to dislike the Christian faith, it was the rabbis. To argue successfully that Jesus never existed but was a creation of early Christians would have been the most effective polemic against Christianity … Yet all Jewish sources treated Jesus as a fully historical person … The rabbis … used the real events of Jesus’ life against him” (Van Voorst).
Thus his birth, ministry and death occasioned claims that his birth was illegitimate and that he performed miracles by evil magic, encouraged apostasy and was justly executed for his own sins. But they do not deny his existence.
Yes BL; that is the claim;
Peace and joy are found in the truth.
I know you might have written more into your post provided the time. So I will simply ask the reader to combine Babylon with Rome like in the culture of Israel from 520 BC had it. Then also consider that the doctrine of Christianity, the Epistles of Paul, were put to writing by and large while Paul was in Roman protective custody, in Rome. Romans 13 for example was written by a Roman citizen.
Interesting take on Paul. The idea that: instead of seeking asylum and protection as a willing Roman citizen, he was jailed against his will and used the opportunity to write Divinely inspired scripture is dismissed by you as faulty and archaic? I suppose we all need to justify our foundational beliefs by interpreting events and history in a way that fits our understanding.
The belief that matter and the physical realm is either an illusion or inherently bad leads to certain interpretations. The belief that matter and the physical realm is real and was created by our supernatural and spiritual Father in Heaven as "good" leads to other interpretations.
The beauty of it is that God is pro-choice. He did not create programmed robots to obey Him mindlessly; He created us with the ability to think and choose what we will believe and who we will worship. We will all get exactly what we want in the end.
Paul was in protective custody because the Sanhedrin had a capital conviction for treason against Israel. At least that is my reading. Two years in Tyre under jail conditions followed by maybe three years in Rome. Paul's choice was to risk the Sanhedrin capturing and executing him.
Even if you take everything Paul said out of the NT texts, and leave only the OT and the four gospels, you still have a consistency. All of the Epistles were internal to the Christ's assembly. Furthermore, the events surrounding Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection caused many Romans to really consider the difference between the doctrines of the Pharisees and the doctrines that Jesus taught.
Re: Abraham & Guilt
I'm not sure why Abraham would have had a reason to feel guilty about having married his half sister especially with the likelihood of him being among the exempted royalty class and that he was not under Mosaic law. Mosaic law was specific to a period. This doesn't mean that similar laws would be lacking. But Moses was over Israel subsequent to the exodus from Egypt. I'm not sure why that would be construed to have made Moses into a universal sovereign or trustee over all mankind.
Re: Paul & Moses
The parallels between Moses and Paul are astonishingly worth looking into. If one can ask "Where did Paul get the right or authority?" One can also ponder the same regarding Moses.
Re: Babylon, Rome and Salvation
That God was not out to protect the syncretism that resulted from Babylonian occupation or exile is clear in the Pentateuch alone.
Re: Resurrection & Necromancy
Furthermore, there is nothing in OT that suggests resurrection by a de jure priest to have been necromancy or for any full resurrection to have been necromancy. Consultation of the dead for divination was AFAIK deemed to be necromancy. If resurrection were necromancy, what of Elijah? What of God giving breath to Adam? What state was Adam in before he was given breath? Alive or dead? Necromancers fiddle around with death for the sake of gaining power or knowledge.
Is an executioner a necromancer? Are those who stone someone necromancers because they bring about death? Then why would someone be a necromancer for bringing about life or giving breath?
Re: Jesus and Moses Parallel
Looking at the text Moses Was Not A Magician we see a parallel in that Jesus said: "Truly, truly, I say to you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do: for what things soever he does, these also does the Son likewise."
Re: Paul In Custody
Paul confessed to being a Roman citizen. And the scepter had departed from Judah for over 30 years prior. The Romans under their own law had authority to protect Paul as a Roman citizen from harm from the Sanhedrin which had been stripped of authority exactly as foretold in Genesis:
It is also translated: "until he to whom it belongs". This is even written about in Rabbinical writings of the time and after--they know the scepter had departed but could not see that the one to whom it belongs had come. Babylonian syncretism perhaps made it difficult to discern? They didn't have authority to execute Jesus, they didn't have authority over Paul either. With Paul being a Roman citizen, the Romans owed him protection.Quote:
The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and to him shall the gathering of the people be. Genesis 49:10
Re: Deuteronomy Curses & Confusion of Mind
It might be possible that one reason those Pharisees in syncretism could not see is because of the Deuteronomy 28 curses:
Re: PaulQuote:
"The Lord will afflict you with madness, blindness and confusion of mind. 29 At midday you will grope about like a blind person in the dark. --Deuteronomy 28:28"
There is at least once instance when Paul speaks his own opinion, he makes it clear that it is his own opinion. That doesn't strike me as something someone with low integrity would do. Those with a knowledge of the OT and NT can nonetheless discern even if Paul were to make a mist-statement.
Re: What Jesus Drew On the Ground
At John 8:6 I know of someone who a vision where I saw what Jesus wrote on the ground. Now I could have dismissed it but shortly thereafter, someone else thousands of miles away saw the same thing and published it online. They were trying to stone a woman for adultery. What else could Jesus draw on the ground but the symbol of their own spiritual adultery--their involvement in a secret society of kind might have something to do with it.
Re: God and the Supernatural
From what I recall, in the OT, during exodus, when there was no water, miracles were used to bring about water. If there was water available, then the miracles were no longer needed.
Joseph was placed into Egyptian custody in consequence of his own brothers' crimes. Consider that in some way Moses was in Egyptian custody until the Exodus. Josephus was in Roman custody in consequence of being taken captive. The Babylonian Talmud was written or compiled during Babylonian exile (i.e. i.e. during Babylonian custody). The crown or mantle of Babylon itself came to be in the custody of the (Etruscan) Romans in consequence of Attalus III's will. To this day reign of the king of Babylon continues. On that note, regarding Paul I'm not sure what is so special or outstanding about Paul having been in Roman custody.
Thank you for itemizing.
This guilt was a consequence of realizing the nature of natural law. 50% recombined DNA is bad especially when compounded over generations.Quote:
Re: Abraham & Guilt
I'm not sure why Abraham would have had a reason to feel guilty about having married his half sister especially with the likelihood of him being among the exempted royalty class and that he was not under Mosaic law. Mosaic law was specific to a period. This doesn't mean that similar laws would be lacking. But Moses was over Israel subsequent to the exodus from Egypt. I'm not sure why that would be construed to have made Moses into a universal sovereign or trustee over all mankind.
I can see a few off the bat.Quote:
Re: Paul & Moses
The parallels between Moses and Paul are astonishingly worth looking into. If one can ask "Where did Paul get the right or authority?" One can also ponder the same regarding Moses.
Please describe... I think I may be miseducated about syncretism.Quote:
Re: Babylon, Rome and Salvation
That God was not out to protect the syncretism that resulted from Babylonian occupation or exile is clear in the Pentateuch alone.
I had to look through several dictionary definitions to apply necromancy to resurrection.Quote:
Re: Resurrection & Necromancy
Furthermore, there is nothing in OT that suggests resurrection by a de jure priest to have been necromancy or for any full resurrection to have been necromancy. Consultation of the dead for divination was AFAIK deemed to be necromancy. If resurrection were necromancy, what of Elijah? What of God giving breath to Adam? What state was Adam in before he was given breath? Alive or dead? Necromancers fiddle around with death for the sake of gaining power or knowledge.
No. The executioner kills. It is not necromancy if the executioner does not bring the dead back to life.Quote:
Is an executioner a necromancer? Are those who stone someone necromancers because they bring about death? Then why would someone be a necromancer for bringing about life or giving breath?
Agreed. We have the power to heal. Some have tried to master God - cabala.Quote:
Re: Jesus and Moses Parallel
Looking at the text Moses Was Not A Magician we see a parallel in that Jesus said: "Truly, truly, I say to you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do: for what things soever he does, these also does the Son likewise."
Interesting that they had no authority over Paul? I think that consent was Paul going into Jerusalem.Quote:
Re: Paul In Custody
Paul confessed to being a Roman citizen. And the scepter had departed from Judah for over 30 years prior. The Romans under their own law had authority to protect Paul as a Roman citizen from harm from the Sanhedrin which had been stripped of authority exactly as foretold in Genesis:
It is also translated: "until he to whom it belongs". This is even written about in Rabbinical writings of the time and after--they know the scepter had departed but could not see that the one to whom it belongs had come. Babylonian syncretism perhaps made it difficult to discern? They didn't have authority to execute Jesus, they didn't have authority over Paul either. With Paul being a Roman citizen, the Romans owed him protection.
Yes!Quote:
Re: Deuteronomy Curses & Confusion of Mind
It might be possible that one reason those Pharisees in syncretism could not see is because of the Deuteronomy 28 curses:
The whole interpretation Pragmatism is about how Paul was a participant in the writing of the Gospel of Mark. I cannot say that I would have stayed for execution.Quote:
Re: Paul
There is at least once instance when Paul speaks his own opinion, he makes it clear that it is his own opinion. That doesn't strike me as something someone with low integrity would do. Those with a knowledge of the OT and NT can nonetheless discern even if Paul were to make a mist-statement.
I am curious about that symbol.Quote:
Re: What Jesus Drew On the Ground
At John 8:6 I know of someone who a vision where I saw what Jesus wrote on the ground. Now I could have dismissed it but shortly thereafter, someone else thousands of miles away saw the same thing and published it online. They were trying to stone a woman for adultery. What else could Jesus draw on the ground but the symbol of their own spiritual adultery--their involvement in a secret society of kind might have something to do with it.
I imagine, maybe not a vision that Jesus wrote out the ineffable Name of God and in doing so expressed an authority they associated only with the Cohen Gadol - the high priest.
I sometimes wonder if the difference between magic and miracles is whether or not you put God out there or are inside Him.Quote:
Re: God and the Supernatural
From what I recall, in the OT, during exodus, when there was no water, miracles were used to bring about water. If there was water available, then the miracles were no longer needed.
Quote:
Joseph was placed into Egyptian custody in consequence of his own brothers' crimes. Consider that in some way Moses was in Egyptian custody until the Exodus. Josephus was in Roman custody in consequence of being taken captive. The Babylonian Talmud was written or compiled during Babylonian exile (i.e. i.e. during Babylonian custody). The crown or mantle of Babylon itself came to be in the custody of the (Etruscan) Romans in consequence of Attalus III's will. To this day reign of the king of Babylon continues. On that note, regarding Paul I'm not sure what is so special or outstanding about Paul having been in Roman custody.
If i understand why two thief's and Christ shared the same fate but not all 3 had the same destiny why is CAPITAL CRIME and theft the distinctive feature or dominant idea in an artistic or literary composition.now before us BLB i enjoy allodial ease and organization on any title/topic and Davids rocky moutain high in the Colorado neon cold beer refreshing disscusions and MJ with a Texas size try this first all horns in. and BLB your willingness to chuckle for that Abraham Hicks his/hers message its not my two thieves science thats agreeing that Christ was talking for God and the conversation got distorted only one thief got the message all Christ,s have the same message if one adds or subtracts a message is that just a thief's doing his [JOB] supersaturation just following orders and we know that never works on a final judgement Gods truth is nature distorted by who else but his creation can compliment the message or complicate it both at the same time the [thief ] betray one thief or meet nature in the middle no empty crosses just one message is to great for a tomb. a message in LATIN means papal/bill Christ is a True Bill a message thats registered never comes guilt/or debt free.
That is IMHO presumptive of defect or fallen state. Those in a fallen state might be more likely to compound carnality or flaws. Thusly, they would be restricted from reproduction in close relations. A diverse pool would provide dilution with time, not to mention allowing God to participate in mate selection through prayer, etc.
The mixing of God's truths with those of men's vain imaginations or with false/strange gods--foreign law mixed with domestic law can result in a new system and either way brings the ramifications of conflicts of law. But consider the benevolent side of of exile: if A has a son who was raised in a way contrary to his rules, A's laws requires that he be punished severely but considering that the son was raised contrary he then applies the contrary law by putting the son under the care of of a distant cousin--this way the son avoids punishment but has to leave his father's house (see Genesis 1-4). The placement under the foreign law is a blessing but it does not necessarily directly make the son suitable for direct service of father--but tutors could help him, unless the son rejects the tutors. Someone being placed on probation is much the same.Quote:
Please describe... I think I may be miseducated about syncretism.
It seems that with time, Israel and Judah started picking up ideas of nationality and nationhood from foreigners and began to loose sight of the Original Plan. When kings started relying on alliances with Egypt or Assyria, it was clear that they weren't getting the Message.
I'm convinced that Daniel saw the bread and wine of Babylon to be similar but not the same as the bread and wine of Melchezidek, that they were entreating or baiting him into syncretism.
God is very personal, one can simply ask. One doesn't need to study mysticism. When the white cord stopped turning red and years passed, it might be that people started to turn to various practices as a means of finding remedy.Quote:
Agreed. We have the power to heal. Some have tried to master God - cabala.
He might have put himself in harms way by traveling to Jerusalem. Putting a hit on him isn't lawful authority. Consider, while they didn't have lawful and governmental authority to put Jesus to death and so asked Pilate & co. to judge him, the scepter had departed and remained departed even through Paul's sojourn (lifetime).Quote:
Interesting that they had no authority over Paul? I think that consent was Paul going into Jerusalem.
Two triangles--one pointing up, one pointing down superimposed on each other. (Some suggest Amost 5:26 and Acts 7:43 to be pertinent). Something to do with Remphan which is also misspelled easily in Arabic as "Ramadan". However, your idea is plausible. But in the context, their spiritual adultery being pointed out while they accused the woman of adultery makes perfect sense and would be why they made exit--afterall, the law they were alleging to be enforcers of was against they themselves. This also resonates with John 5:45 (hardly 3 chapters before John 8:6) "Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust."Quote:
I am curious about that symbol.
I imagine, maybe not a vision that Jesus wrote out the ineffable Name of God and in doing so expressed an authority they associated only with the Cohen Gadol - the high priest.
You know, the revelations I have been given is that pop culture these days has errantly thrown mingled the term magic in with witchcraft. Magic is such a generic term which even used to describe natural phenomena. That is, I came to the conclusion (contrary to pop-armchair programming) that taking a purist view of the word magi/magic (relates to the term magistrate) has to do with applying wisdom--nothing to do with sorcery. We all feel, think or speak and our emotions, thought and speech can affect reality within and without. If we know that giving compliments and saying positive things will inure to better health and relationships, that is wisdom applied--its not subversive and it doesn't necessarily go against any laws. People's thoughts, will and feelings can effect others and this occurs naturally. So I'm not so sure that placing a positive and healthy reign on one's feelings would amount to sorcery or witchcraft. However, for the subverters or poisoners of good and noble things, that might be a wholly different matter.Quote:
I sometimes wonder if the difference between magic and miracles is whether or not you put God out there or are inside Him.
Each man or child or woman has a domain granted them--especially inwardly. When someone seeks to subvert someone else's domain or will without consent and for unlawful purposes (such as using toxins or mercury--a frequent component of voodoo spells), or if someone seeks to pervert or undermine lawful order even with lies and sophistry--the it might be well to throw up red flags as pertains to witchcraft or sorcery. Witchcraft relates to rebellion for a good reason: subversion of good order (this can be simply through group lying or PSYOPS). Unlike de jure miracles, witchcraft and sorcery may involve appealing to spirits, powers or principalities that are at enmity with God. Witchcraft relates to the word pharmakeia--poisoners of men (consider voodoo even its under the guise of 'vaccinations') or of poisoners of lawful systems/societies (governments, families).
Those miracles associated with Jesus or Moses are said to have purely involved requests made to God or to have been in consequence of faithful reliance upon promises made by God. Consider also their lives being purposed around God's will--which is obviated something like this: love God and love thy neighbor as much as you love yourself (the more you love your yourself the more you'll love your neighbor perhaps?). So AFAIK, exercising divine or lawful spiritual authority, such would neither be witchcraft nor sorcery. In both the OT and the NT authority was given by way of anointing.
A key point being that, there seems to be an intentional spin put to popular language so as to re-color the past. Another method of sedition by syntax? The Constitution has been attacked in that way: project a modern meaning onto a clearly conflicting past meaning as a way of hoodwinking people. Consider that vampires, favored by many these days, seem to be of class of necromancers.
Also, it may very well be that refusal for cause is a way to stave off undesirable and creeping side effects of 'conflict of laws'.
Thank you for such a simple take on R4C!
This is what is helpful to me. To be able to speak truthfully in simple terms and in a short enough time to keep the listener's attention.
The conflict of laws is METRO organization public policy verses constitutions and statutes. Like I brought up about the oaths of office. One might use the emotionalism of cyberspace, social media, to sway the audience to persuade the judge that this is the best thing, NOT to hear the case at all.
Again, I enjoy a quick overview from observer perspective. My point is focused on the Sanhedrin and other courts were bound by law and so they were not so draconian as to be executing thieves. BARRABAS is believed to be Peter, in Pragmatism anyway, which may be to say that I am the only one who believes it. BARRABAS is like John DOE today - meaning "My Father's Son". So it is much easier to imagine if it was a three-hour torture that Peter might be willing to turn himself in for "Murder" which was the non-capital rendition of carrying a lethal weapon (sword) in Jerusalem during the Holidays in Jerusalem. This scenario straightens out the Jurisdiction too, for Allodial.
Simply put, the Sanhedrin had no punishment statutes severe enough for what Jesus had done. Jesus had rightly accused the Sanhedrin of usury in the worst possible sense - the Gentile moneychangers in the Temple were a Herodean franchise! They confronted Jesus before he did it, about pretending to be King and Jesus revealed that he was crowned by Archelaus' prophet John BAPTIST.
Otherwise what I am doing is reverse engineering the synchrotism. I am finding out in Christianity Explored style classes and prayer studies where these erroneous interpretations originate in the Old Testament. The Sacrifice comes from Abraham on Mount Moriah (Temple Mount) about to execute pubescent Isaac, before a God who allegedly was ordering it out of some insecurity that Abraham believed He existed. The Blood of the Lamb substitution of Jesus on the Cross bleeding for sacrifice goes back to the Passover Lamb; which when you examine closely was not a sacrifice but a form of identification - the Blood of the Lamb.
Now I remind people that both of these have several interpretations. Mine is the simplest for me. Thank you for enduring the discomfort of viewing sacrifice as a way to appease a wrathful God. It strikes me contrary that God is Love, and then again...
re: life, death and the power to give life
"By the word Jesus declared, 'Lazarus come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with grave clothes: and his face as bound about with a napkin. Jesus SAITH unto them, loose him and let him go.' John 11:43-44" (source: The Tongue: The Rudder of Your Destiny, By Gideon A. Smart).Quote:
Death and life are in the power of the tongue. --Proverbs 18:21
Hosea references rescue from the hands of Sheol. That is pretty strong and clear language.
On a similar note, faith in God's promise regarding looking upon the brazen serpent saved Israel from the sting of death. Similarly, faith in God's promise in the NT provided also salvation from the sting of death.Quote:
"From the hand of Sheol I do ransom them, From death I redeem them, Where is thy plague, O death? Where thy destruction, O Sheol?" --Hosea 13:14 (YLT)
Re: the Cross and Brazen Serpent and salvation through believing/faithQuote:
“Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?” The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 15:55-57
The circumstance of the brazen serpent was a very clear OT scenario of salvation through faith--salvation from death by serpent. The cross was yet another circumstance of salvation through faith with Passover-style 'identification'. AFAIK it was always salvation through faith, rather than works. In the OT temple did the congregation do any work or did high priest do the work? The annual sprinkling of the blood it seems was also active through faith. Thus, Hebrews 10:4: "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins".
Now consider, the bite should have caused death but it did not for those who looked upon the brazen serpent ('the hair the the dog that bit you' comes to mind). So they SHOULD have technically died, right? But, due to divine intervention, they did not die--they lived.Quote:
And Jehovah saith unto Moses, 'Make for thee a burning serpent, and set it on an ensign; and it hath been, every one who is bitten and hath seen it -- he hath lived. --Numbers 21:8
Re: Abraham and Isaac
I would still suggest that a key point of the Abraham and Isaac scenario was that reverence for living God (rather than idols) and the contrast between Abraham those who willingly sacrificed their children to idols.
The contrast between those of his day who may have readily sacrificed babes to idols and his willingness to sacrifice to a living God + the fact that the sacrifice was not required.Quote:
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. Proverbs 9:10
Interpretations reflect foundational beliefs.
Allodial has presented, with great clarity, the difference between Christianity derived from ROME and the original intent of God when He became incarnate in the form of Jesus of Nazareth to preach the gospel and redeem His creation.
God's wrath is against evil and those who willingly pursue it. An in-depth study of Levitical Law may reveal that the sacrifices practiced were meant to cleanse the space where prayers were offered, not cleanse the man himself.
The God of order and justice does not simply wipe the slate clean and start over when His creation willfully chooses to seek out knowledge, power and "life" outside of His blessings and Will. When a true debt is incurred, payment must be made to settle it. Mankind incurred the debt of death when trust was placed in someone other than The Creator; yet, God so loved the world...
in order to redeem that debt, He gave His only begotten Son, so that everyone believing in Him should not perish, but should have eternal life.
Here is an interesting take on the choice of using the word "begotten".
“Only begotten” is an unfortunately confusing translation, especially for modern readers. It does sound to us as though the “only begotten” Son had a beginning because we aren’t used to the old English word. The confusion should never have happened, though, since monogenes actually doesn’t mean “only begotten.” The controversy extends from an old misunderstanding of the root of the Greek word. For many years monogenes was thought to have derived from two Greek terms, monos (“only”) and gennao (“to beget, bear”). Scholars of Greek linguistics have discovered, though, that the second part of the word monogenes does not come from the Greek verb gennao, but rather the noun genos (“class, kind”). The term literally means “one of a kind” or “unique” with no connotation of time or origin. The validity of this understanding is borne out by the New Testament itself. In Hebrews 11:17, Isaac is called Abraham’s monogenes—but it is crystal clear from the Old Testament that Isaac was not the only son Abraham had begotten, since he had also fathered Ishmael prior to Isaac. The term must mean that Isaac was Abraham’s “unique” son, for he was the son of the covenant promises and the line through which Messiah would come. Many of the more recent versions of the Bible have opted to translate monogenes as “only,” but this confuses readers when they come across references to other sons of God in the Old Testament.
source
When Abraham was chosen to be the Father of God's set-apart nation of people, He was tested to ensure that he realized what was necessary to redeem the world. The Isaac test was a message to Abraham, making it clear that the only way to redeem the debt of man was to offer something of such great value that settlement cannot be rightfully denied. Of course, God knew Abraham's heart and his willingness to give his most precious son for the sake of mankind, however, God stopped him since it was only the message of what was to come that He wanted to convey to Abraham. I believe Abraham understood fully the intent behind the request and went on to lead God's special nation of people, though which would be born the savior of mankind.
Wrath has nothing to do with that.
We have the power of creation. This is communication. God is supplying infinite energy for us to create the Universe. This is the Gift given by the Holy Spirit - communication/creation. Remember Pentecost? This was the Gift; people were able to communicate freely regardless of what language they were trained in.
The syncretism indeed requires a filtering system offered by the Holy Spirit. The truth is true. Facts cannot be attacked. Rules of evidence play a very important role. The only truly productive use of judgment is whether or not you get joy out of the teaching/learning process. If you receive anything else then you best re-invite the Holy Spirit.
Like I keep saying, the teaching/lesson on my mind lately is division between admiralty and land. Constitutions and laws as opposed to global municipal jurisdiction. I can find remedy either way because I am Patroon. Application of the remedy is a matter of stating my claim clearly. Once this is done I can show everybody what I do with it.Quote:
The mixing of God's truths with those of men's vain imaginations or with false/strange gods--foreign law mixed with domestic law can result in a new system and either way brings the ramifications of conflicts of law.
My remedy on land is constitutions and law (statutes from the Congress and general assembly). My remedy on the sea is my "perpetual inheritance". All in all it comes down to whether I feel the Shed Blood of Jesus was sacrificial or for identification purposes only. This takes us back to the Veil and whether it is something Jesus parted, or is it still something we bump into in getting to the Ark of the Covenant and the inner sanctum - the Holy of Holies.
P.S.
This is very agreeable. I feel that when reading the word "sin" in the Bible one is behooved to quit finding this an action or verb. It is the result of being unloving or unkind, in sanity - guilt. When one feels guilt, that is sin because one feels that they are separated from God.Quote:
God's wrath is against evil and those who willingly pursue it. An in-depth study of Levitical Law may reveal that the sacrifices practiced were meant to cleanse the space where prayers were offered, not cleanse the man himself.
Thank you BLB;Quote:
When Abraham was chosen to be the Father of God's set-apart nation of people, He was tested to ensure that he realized what was necessary to redeem the world. The Isaac test was a message to Abraham, making it clear that the only way to redeem the debt of man was to offer something of such great value that settlement cannot be rightfully denied.
It might have been abrupt to call God insecure, even though I still feel that way. That interpretation is an illusion that Abraham's understanding would have anything to do with the redemption of mankind. At least according to Pragmatism.
This interpretation comes from Jews and Christians alike distorting into euphemism that Abraham and Sarah were half-siblings and engaged in common incest. If you bring it up, you will see. I have plenty of commentary that they were actually half siblings and that there is no proper translation otherwise but I do not attach the research because the truth is upsetting to those upholding the illusions.
This develops a contradiction in the Christian mind/discussion. I do this regularly. I go to Bible studies and even Christianity Explored. I gather all the literature and do the homework. I read. I write. I teach and I learn. The contradiction is if you are In Jesus so to speak, how can you not be the Only Begotten Son?Quote:
The term (Only Begotten Son) literally means “one of a kind” or “unique” with no connotation of time or origin.
A member of the Body of Jesus is Jesus.
My Question for Christianity Explored (this sixth time) is, "If God is not within you, where did you put Him?"
That interpretation is an illusion that there exists no distinction between the Creator and the created. Also, it presumes to limit God as if He is unable to overcome any obstacle of man's state in order to have His Will fulfilled. Whether they were half-siblings or not is not the issue; the issue is whether or not one believes God has Providence over His creation regardless of our inadequacy or shortcomings.
Sin is a verb and a noun - both are forgiven if one's trust is in The Creator and His Plan of salvation through redemption in Jesus The Christ.
to be able to speak truthfully in simple terms and in a short enough time to keep the listener's attention.Paying close attention or pay no attention heated seats no option they come standard on this bus as we get use to listening its never a question of whats driving that bus or who owns it rather how many times it has to be sold to find its true owner.
Christ was talking for God and the conversation got distorted only one thief got the message all Christ,s have the same message if one adds or subtracts a message is that just a thief's doing his [JOB] supersaturation just following orders and we know that never works on a final judgement Gods truth is nature distorted by who else but his creation can compliment the message or complicate it both at the same time the [thief ] betray one thief or meet nature in the middle no empty crosses just one message is to great for a tomb. a message in LATIN means papal/bill Christ is a True Bill a message thats registered never comes guilt/or debt free.when a faith gets registered as Moses being first franchise in corner stone all the golden cow usury conversion worship wailing wall street bull market changers gentile store fronts babal offshore internation/al booths never lost out too Vatican Rome when God whent global all battles and conquest when Rome marched the front office mob ate kosher or Italian kabob's homos hag us Bar codes and temple tax city of london all people told eat fish or kosher Hebrew text is just to close to the garden who confounded the language and the law a page in Hebrew is one a word in latin is a page Job lost it all to who his completion or his competitive nature the State has no Competition in biology and sociology, is a contest between two or more organisms animals, individuals, groups, etc., for territory, a niche, for a location of resources, for resources and goods, for mates, for prestige, for recognition, for awards, for group or social status, or for leadership. whats a Competition but loss . forget a pin# in line ask the line how its getting over the loss.
What story do you want to tell? Who do you want to tell it to? What is your ideal outcome?
The Bible has a creative core of ideas behind it that speaks out to a reader on every single page. How many content marketing campaigns have this creative forethought behind them? At the heart who,s book is Moses heart with God and not the 10 Commandments. These 10 rules are the key set of laws that govern all hearts. It is a framework from which all of the Bible and other franchised teachings and writings stem from. This is what all content strategies need. You need to have your own set of brand rules, establishing tone of voice, target audience and story. No need to write them down how do you forget the heart of God u dont. u just forget to watch yourself written in stone is u are dead Moses took a tombstone down the mountain as we can only bury you not the truth heart and soul is not what the market can bear its the market itself.how much content marketers can learn from the Bible. expect investment with no gain have no head for business just a heart then its charity with plenty to gain.A virgin birth Joe how ordinary is Joe,s and Mary,s charity thats a big investment with no market so backdate incest add the father of nations and fetching his sister and incest out of Babylon is necessary for joe and mary and God fathering Christ joe accepts this as most hebrews have no reason to covet mary or any mans wife when they got a dozen at home herod is killing first borns why 3 wise kings are getting out of the markets following the heart as this message is not in stone guidanceIf and a night sky. Who is creating a illusion for Herod his ego is mary and joes illusion is limited to who,s survival what obstacle exists with free will Abe and sara are bloodlines of same father what is sara offering abe slave girl or peasant stock for in the first place this obstacle is more about more than one wife under the same husband abe guilt is loving more than his wife adultery is carnal incest is a defective practise a seed not devised by God.a jewish mom cant have a irish son witout a Man but nations dont seed nations the Biblical whore corruption seeds from all nations have no visible father.
"And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God the Almighty, and the Lamb, are the temple thereof." Revelations 21:22. The Lamb seems to be the Christ's lawful assembly which is said to be part of the Household of God. The Papal claim of being the Vicar of Christ might be that which obscures the significance of being of the Christ's lawful assembly. It is rather clear that Jesus remains alive having ascended, the saints remain ambassadors/agents on the planet. Perhaps it possible for a king to be in Christ and his subjects to be without?
This might give insight:
The Church: the Household of God
I am saying that sin is an emotion - guilt.
This is about ownership, from my perspective.
e=mc2 describes the energy it takes to make one atom. We align our will to God.\
Laws of Moses.
English translation.
I am having trouble finding any source for defining the word sin as only emotive guilt, perhaps you could help with that.
Incidentally, after Jesus wrote on the ground the second time, the discourse was as follows...
But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
John 8: 11
Strong's 264 hamartanó: to miss the mark, do wrong, sin
A man murders an innocent woman. Afterwards, the man emotes the guilt of having committed the act. Which is the sin in your view, the murder (act) or the guilt (emotion) afterward?
Paying for a sin is a mortal contraption if every one that commits murder payed with emotion we never be late for work u just kill the boss adultery is without emotion only if your caught. lets not invent sin lets invent emotions that express guilt honest guilt honest emotions needs sin as a act only the woman never became emotional because no rocks were thrown she cant believe how many sinners were in that crowd showing no emotion why guilt needs prove and emotion needs ownership a sin is a degree guilt witness a sin Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”dont lye to yourself as we are all surrounded with sin and guilt can measure punishment only against one an another stoning atoning to 10 commandments is only the law that separates punishment its remorse can be guilt. emotions cant be separated from God guilt u get over .u know you deserve what u get stick to your guns dye with a bullet or sin a dirty song is just that without emotion. try writing down emotions in a dirty song?thoughts are sin not emotion Christ stop us thinking like who is left who can throw stones.Emotional rescues God is or as my witness Moses dragging 10 stories down to a emotionally charge crowd they never put a phone # on a gravestone or list all your sins as next of kin The book is for a rowdy people [us] to hell with choice as a emotion sin needs no choice.
The act is murder. The emotion is guilt. The guilt is what causes a sense of separation from God. Separation from God is an emotion. That is sin. If you accept that you are born into sin, then you live with guilt.
Godless acts i get my emotions from God we share the guilt not the sin ownership is the deal breaker I agree with Separation one is the act and its inheritance.
Man is the Mind - Woman is the Emotion.
Pro 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.
Pro 4:8 Exalt her, and she shall promote thee: she shall bring thee to honour, when thou dost embrace her.
Be thou equally yoked - and don't plow the field with another man's heifer. Consider that last one for a minute or two before proceeding. Isn't this religion in its current practice. Come to the pew, sit down and let "us" tell you what to think. Is this not plowing in the field [world] with another man's heifer?
Pro 4:13 Take fast hold of instruction; let her not go: keep her; for she is thy life.
Take every thought captive and kill those that do not serve - for Armageddon happens in the Mind. Notice there was no man to be found with the woman caught in Adultery? Nevertheless many externalize the story and look for a physical reality - and it is to that end that they create their own prisons. Yet Abraham was considered worthy for he would command all in his house. Become the warrior priest - the true Joshua. For Christ must be formed in you!
The Valley of the Kings - is synonymous with the valley of Megiddo. The place of decision or the place called Jezreel - for I will sow and I will reap.
As long as the house remains divided in sin, then the man/woman remains in duality. But Jesus said let them be one as we are one. Nevertheless emotions will cause one to look back - only to be "preserved" in salt for the time when one comes back down the mountain. For we are told there comes a time when we are instructed to flee to the "mountains".
But what if I live in the valley? Perhaps, just perhaps, it is the metaphysical "mountain" - for yea though I walk thru the "VALLEY" of the shadow of death.....emotions unchecked can rule the house - for the woman is never to rule the man - the Mind should rule Emotion.
Abraham commanded his servants and his asses to remain in the valley....for carnality and emotion cannot ascend into the Mountain. Nevertheless in true marriage the two become one [Mind and Emotion are united]. Thus will can be birthed in Love.
Shalom,
MJ
Being mind full MJ the church is the mistress of guilt or the other woman.
I call the Gospel of Thomas - Slogans of Jesus.
Teaching results.
interesting video, mentions Helen of Judea as Jesus's mother:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWKopQB7nj8
these guys seem as close to truth as anybody else if not moreso IMO
David, you seem to be familiar with google stuff.. can you tell me if these two google books are freely available to read in english? they seem to be very good reading that a GLP member linked to.
https://books.google.de/books?id=Ooo...ngship&f=false
https://books.google.de/books?id=Y4I...NTABLE&f=false
I cant find them elsewhere, anyone?
thanks
george, this is a book I meant to link to earlier: The Ancient Egyptian Language: An Historical Study.
"Empire Strikes Again" all of the alleged 'debunking of Jesus' was foretold around 2,000 years ago. Those who reject the grace of New Adam and their adherence to the fallen Edom-ic/Adam-ic is allowed to come to finalization. Many 'debunkers' might be debunking ideas born out of syncretism rather than debunking the truth such as attempts to superimpose Zeus onto Y'shua/Jesus. Perhaps they are so blind in their interest in secular power and money that they cannot see that pure doctrines aren't about establishing Jesus setting out to establish secular kingdoms. However, there is much significance in preemptive authority in the spiritual and how such authority can affect the physical.
Those with an innate hatred of Jesus and of even life itself aren't likely going to write books with much any truth. There is a book titled Forged, it has the appearance of being insightful but like many books similar to that, so much propaganda and drivel posing as academics.
It is easy to construe two churches - the 501(c)(3) "church" and the 508(c)(1)(A) Mandatory Exception, outside the IRS Code.
It seems agreeable with the Jesus Family Tomb. That indicates the only "Mary" being Jesus' wife, who is unrelated by blood to Jesus. The word search you linked is interesting - are those who legislate above the law?
I think not. It would seem that during Rectification of Judiciary - where the oaths of office are faulty intentionally; breach of trust that I might seem above the law as Trustee for the Resulting Trust. However I am casting that illusion I am above the law by being bound to it while rectifying the judiciary; bringing the imposter/actors back into Rules of Court.
As my Legend becomes Fable Hallucination, Myth and Parable are likewise Illusion.
James Cameron, 33rd Freemason. Not sure if I can in good faith and confidence presume him to be anything other than extremely biased when it comes to religion. Nothing against Freemasons, just I don't expect him to be specifically un-biased especially these days.
Attachment 3167
Isn't this the kind of thing Albert Pike and company said they would do as far as undermining established law and government so they could establish what they want to establish? If the Protocols were a forgery I wonder who might have done such a thing....
James Cameron, a movie director, a special effects master, a proven specialist at making billions to accept as real that which is purely make-believe. What comes to mind is that of the most fastidious, sinister and disgusting liars I ever, ever met was a film editor. He had a way of taking bits and pieces from different people and events to 'prove his lies' in order to cover his own misdeeds and for slandering others. It took me a bit to crack the case, but I realized that is exactly what he was doing: convincing people of his lies by linking unrelated things together in a mish-mosh of trickery. For example, one of the many twisted things he was into: he was sleeping around with a man's wife. So what did he do, he 'scripted a fallacy'. She was afraid of being found out. He was terrified. So he convinced her to work with him to make the husband think the someone she would be sleeping with would be the one who actually knew what was going on and someone who the husband was quite afraid to cross but was good friends with. Basically to divert attention away from him. This upset me because her husband is quite a decent fellow--that they would add insult to injury through more trickery.
What did he do? Of course he spent a over a year dropping lies and linking together these fallacies with 'proof' which were unrelated. When they were out to blame came around a restaurant, instead of just a friendly hug, the editor-liar had her kiss him on the mouth. It happened multiple times on separate spaced out occasions (the interesting key is that it never happened with the Film Editor wasn't around). Of course, when you're hugging someone its not like you expect them to kiss you on the mouth and you're not in much of a position to stave it off--even if its on the corner. Eventually, I realized she only did this when the liar-editor was present: it served as a cover for the both of them. But after a bit of time, I put everything together and it clicked--not only is the guy a psychopath, he was using his film editing skills in 'reality' to create false appearances. He even would record people talking and then create remixes to leave impressions that were far from reality--his main objective was to slander those who had dirt on him or those who he envied or those men who weren't homosexual that he wished were or to simply create false appearances. He would even create lies to win the trust and faith of others who felt he had helped them. But the thing is, he dupes everyone and anyone he can--it is a game to him.
Attachment 3169
In ~2,000 years, no one thought to write about this tomb until now? Hmmmmm. Perhaps the Dragon is hungry and Cameron and Jacobovichi are steering as many as they can into its mouth?Quote:
The idea of the resurrection emerged very early in Christianity -- almost immediately after Jesus' death. This would, in theory, explain the Jonah image (if it were such) on the tomb next door.
But this presents a logical dilemma: We would have a tomb containing Jesus' ossuary -- his bones -- coexisting, temporally and physically, with the belief that his bones shouldn't be in there. And we would have to believe that a year after Jesus died and was supposedly resurrected, his followers went and reburied his decomposed corpse in an ossuary.
What's more, all of the other people from Jesus' family, all those other names on the ossuaries in the Talpiot Tomb, would have been buried there after Jesus, presumably years later.
In other words, early Christians, believing that Jesus was the resurrected son of God, were entering his burial chamber to deposit the bones of his relatives, and no one ever mentioned the place, turned it into a pilgrimage site or marked it for other Jesus followers.
Considering how dangerous the existence of Jesus' burial site -- and bones -- would be for traditional Christian belief, even very early on, we might be surprised that no one, in the years that they must have been returning to the tomb to bury everyone else, didn't think to destroy the best evidence that their central claim was a lie.
The media attention around this story is easy enough to explain: Jesus is hot right now, and this would be a blockbuster if it were true. Unfortunately, the evidence is faulty, and the story doesn't make sense. Source: CNN article.
As pertains to Zechariah, they want the right hand, so perhaps the left hand is what they will get.Quote:
I'm not even a Christian, but I did live in the neighborhood where this cave was found, and I've spent most of the last ten years spelunking in far more important caves, from Jerusalem to Baghdad, looking at the relationship between the Bible and archaeology. Here's why they're wrong.
1. Caves like the ones where the ossuaries were discovered are commonplace in the area and were very familiar features of this neighborhood in the 1st century B.C.E. and C.E. The archaeologist who traveled with me for WALKING THE BIBLE and WHERE GOD WAS BORN, Avner Goren, made the fascinating point to me today that bodies used to be buried in groups but with the introduction of individualism from Greece, they started burying people in single boxes and labeling them. Basically, the bodies would be buried for a year, the family would come back and collect the bones and put them in an ossuary (a stone box). Then they would take the box out once a year and have a memorial service, as Jews still do today with candle lighting.
2. A family from Nazareth would not be buried in Jerusalem. Jewish custom holds that a body should be buried within 24 hours. I recently heard of a family that hired a private plane to get a body from Cleveland to Jerusalem in time. It would have been impossible to get a body from Nazareth, in the Galilee, to Jerusalem in this time period. Also, there's no way for a family to tend a grave this far away. So the idea of a multi-generational family tomb for Jesus in Jerusalem makes no sense. Even the archaeologist who discovered the cave originally, Amos Kloner, has dismissed the show as "nonsense."
3. The names on the ossuaries are very common. As Avner pointed out, 21 percent of names of women are Mary; Joseph and Jesus (Joshua) are among the top four male names. The presence of these names in a tomb would not have been rare. The name Jesus has been found in dozens of tombs over the years. Further, we have no evidence that this is a family tomb; it could have been a communal tomb, or a neighborhood tomb."There is no likelihood that Jesus and his relatives had a family tomb," Kloner said. "They were a Galilee family with no ties in Jerusalem. The tomb belonged to a middle-class family from the 1st century CE."
4. The DNA evidence that Jesus was not connected to the Mary buried in the tomb does not prove anything, other than they are not related matrilnearly. For all we know, they could have been related patrilinearly. Or, they could never have met. There is no evidence the female body belonged to someone who was "married" to anyone else in the tomb. There is no evidence she was the mother of anyone else in the tomb. And we can be sure they checked that! So the claim that Jesus fathered a son with the "Mary" in the tomb is bogus. Source: The Jesus Hoax
Attachment 3168
So begs the question is why would someone defend Jesus when his lack of existence would possibly open them up to freedom to do whatever they want: kill, steal, lie, etc. They could become a Muslim and have 4 wives EVEN IN THE USA (although polygyny isn't necessarily against the Bible)! Its because when you know the truth, you know better. You know what is more precious and more valuable than all of the money, guns, armies and land in the whole world.