Don't get me wrong, but this video is off of youtube and i just wanna say that in its defence. its right in my opinion. i'm not a christian, so i dont believe in hell/heaven/jesus/lucifer or anything like that. my gods are egyptian and i shall not go any further than this on it right now.
but here is the video link. watch and pay attention. for it might just do more good than harm. and yes, it does sound like i am trying to harm those who believe that the "image" of jesus is correct. and i say image cause thats what i'm getting at. not jesus himself for he is who he is. i'm just getting at the fact that the image of who he is is wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCr5oeLaPvs&feature=related
enjoy.
This is one of the most ridiculous and inaccurate things I have seen.
Most of the images of Jesus we get were painted in the renaissance from (mostly) italian painters. Since lucifer is another name for Venus, I'm not sure how 'image' has anything to do with anything, especially since these italian artists had no idea of what Jesus was supposed to look like, and chances are they used their religious symbology to depict him (or old pictures of Apollo, or some other roman god, unrelated to either venus or jupiter, for that matter.
The satan of the bible is another name for Saturn, an entirely different planet, and an entirely different god.. This was the god of death, and the image that was used in the bible to mean man's adversary, or the 'angel' that God sent to test man.
Whether you believe this literally (a mistake, since the ancient texts were written in Hebrew, the new testament was written in greek, and the people in the new testament spoke aramaic)- it is ridiculous to make assertions as to what they meant as 'capstone' vs. 'cornerstone'- especially since the kings James bible was written centuries later by an english king. Since the images the video showed to indicate the difference between the 'capstone' and 'cornerstone' are eons apart (the cornerstone was used in historic times, the 'capstones' actually being prehistoric, to somehow go back and find some sort of relationship between them is ridiculous- like trying to prove rice is 'evil' because we mostly eat white rice, instead of the more heavenly brown rice, because in the book of revelation death is described as a white rider on a horse- these things have no relationship to each other, and whoever is trying to relate it is taking things that are of nebulous historical value and forcing it together- to conform to a preconceived notion- the theory was there before the evidence, and the evidence has been handpicked to match.
Cheeses crust!
Really?
ps. Since 99% of the 'theorists' that connect 'Zionists' to Templars and Masons, are really antisemitic racists, I doubt this does more good than harm.
Thank you for responding CFT, and as i've stated earlier, i only meant to put this up to start a discussion, since i'm bored.
but you are right. the theory was there before the hand picked evidence.
but isnt that just a hypothesis? making a theory before any evidence? least thats what i was taught in science class all those years ago.
but i do think something is up with J.C. its sorta like the cain and abel story. same thing was with egypts horus and set. as well as for J.C. and lucifer.
anyways, i'm getting off topic.
what does anyone else think about this video?
Quote from: Dragohad on March 27, 2010, 07:22:00
Thank you for responding CFT, and as i've stated earlier, i only meant to put this up to start a discussion, since i'm bored.
but you are right. the theory was there before the hand picked evidence.
but isnt that just a hypothesis? making a theory before any evidence? least thats what i was taught in science class all those years ago.
but i do think something is up with J.C. its sorta like the cain and abel story. same thing was with egypts horus and set. as well as for J.C. and lucifer.
anyways, i'm getting off topic.
what does anyone else think about this video?
I was going to say, that when I studied comparative religion, there was a comparison with Jesus and Osiris. It's been years so I don't remember all the details.
it is evident that jesus/mother mary are almost the same if not totally the same as horus/isis, and others that base itself even inadvertently off one another.
Yes, and even statues of Isis holding Horus were repurposed in later times. They call them "Black Mary" statues, but they originally were of Isis. I did remember that.
precisely. as well as the story of jesus upon the cross is too simular to osiris fixed upon a sacred tree and isis pleading for his return.
That video made me laugh
:lol:
:NoY:
The comparisons of Jesus and other ancient figures is that the story of Jesus was ripped off from older stories.
Jesus is not a person.
Lucifer, like saturn, is the archetype for the realms of imagination (i.e. the astral). We were made to fear that archetype so that we would fear our own inner realms. And so, his counterpart Jesus, was put up on a pedestal. The christ archetype is the yang to saturn's yin. It's the nonphysical and physical, the essence of duality. But the way we are taught about the luciferian archetype prevents us from uniting it with the christ archetype.
Hold up...
1. Christianity and Buddhism and athiesm aren't religions, for a religion is how man tries to get near a god/gods
2. Christianity is simply developing a relationship with the Lord
3. If everyone thinks athiesm is a religion, then wouldn't that cause a paradox? I mean, if no religions are right....then idk what what happen
There are my thoughts
-Tristan
Christianity is a religion, atheism is no beliefs in god(s) or deities, and buddhism is a philosophy.
...And, a religion is not about man getting close to god/s, but how man organizes how this relationship is going to be controlled. Therefore, you can subscribe to organized religion, and/or also have a relationship with god/s, regardless of religion.
A wise person (don't remember who) said that faith is about getting close to god, and religion is about separating man (human) from god.
organized religion is only a template one uses for their own personal religion.
[quote author=CFTraveler link=topic=31305.msg254467#msg254467 date=1269654057
ps. Since 99% of the 'theorists' that connect 'Zionists' to Templars and Masons, are really antisemitic racists, I doubt this does more good than harm.
[/quote]
Everytime I hear someone say "antisemetic" my face gets wrinkles, that word has been so worn out by the zionist worldkings wannabe's. It's time to stop using the word since "jews" are not the only semetic people (arabs are semites) around. As a matter of fact most of the "jews" of today are not semites at all.
and zionism doesn't have anything to do with judaism.
i mean it does, but it doesn't.
it has more to do with israel.
there's nothing anti-semetic about it.
joe biden said he was a zionist, and almost seemed shocked that anyone would ask, like "How can one not be a zionist?"
"they're" all zionists.
armageddon.
All climbing the Seven Mountains.
anyone watch the follow up videos?? the second one was more interesting to me.
That video made me excrement my pants.
The Light Bringer is Jesus.
What a terror!
Didn't bother to watch the video, but anyone with 1/10'th of a brain knows that the image of Jesus commonly accepted to be him is just a work of art fabricated by Italian artists who couldn't comprehend a divine being being anything other than a beautiful, well-clothed Italian man. I'm sure everyone here already knows this, but just throwing it out there to any stragglers.
Quote from: AlanRK on December 15, 2010, 19:13:05
Didn't bother to watch the video, but anyone with 1/10'th of a brain knows that the image of Jesus commonly accepted to be him is just a work of art fabricated by Italian artists who couldn't comprehend a divine being being anything other than a beautiful, well-clothed Italian man. I'm sure everyone here already knows this, but just throwing it out there to any stragglers.
Thank you.
Dude that is super weak sauce! Oh, I bet if you change the name Jesus in the Bible to Lucifer, it would make Jesus look like Lucifer! Who are these fools? "I'm going to change the word of the translated Bible into something else and arbitrarily deem it valid". How about: "This statement was only to prove a point and is in no way meant to be factual"! AAAAAAHAHAHAHA!