Living Descendant Of Jesus?

The bloodline issues are very interesting to me, and I will be doing lots of reading today so I can ad my two cents to this thread.

Here is one I came across today, I'm still reading throught the info, but I think you will be interested in some of the info offered.

The Merovingian Bloodline: Satanic Bloodline of the Antichrist and False Prophet

There are multiple pages so you'll have to scroll down and click to the next page (the 2nd one is very interesting). But there is alot of information on blood lines, and info that points to a possible blood-line to the Anti-christ.

Im not saying I agree with the information provided on these pages but it is interesting.

Could we of possiblity been dopped with the whole Christ blood line stories so to make the anit-christ appear to be somehow be the true Christ because he decended from a certain bloodline.





[edit on 9-3-2008 by whoreallyknows]

reply to post by sizzle


"I have no doubts that Mary M loved Him deeply and that he was terribly fond of her. Many marriages have been founded on far less.
I think that probably the one small factor that holds me back on falling for it, hook, line and sinker; is the story where Jesus went out into the desert (wilderness(?) for 40 days and Satan came to tempt him. He was offered all the usual temptations known to man and earthly kingdoms; and He said, "No." His kingdom was not of this world. "

well if he did marry Mary Mag i hope he did it before he went out into the desert for 40 days and 40 nights!

and not before..

now that would be temptation

and a rotten honey moon for her!

reply to post by whoreallyknows


sounds very interesting. i will look into this.
I have read a little on this subject, but never hurts to look a little further. Thanks for your contribution.

Ah let Me start this way and Leave a Question

How about in our TIME now! Can We Gentiles? can be called a living Spiritual Connected lines a Descendants of our Lord Jesus Christ By keeping and Continuing Obeying all his Commandments on the New Testament ?

(^^,) My Deepest Apology
with My Question since I'm not well in English Grammar




Please -reconstruct my Question if it's not clear to all of you

en.wikipedia.org...




Genealogy of Jesus Christ
The Messiah, in Hebrew

[edit on 9-3-2008 by johnb1]

reply to post by johnb1


Hi johnb1,
Although I really appreciate the sharing of the Word and the effort you have gone through to share it; the connection is somehow lost on me, as to how it relates.

reply to post by St Udio


of course if the "messiah" was indeed mortal, then naturally, that would sorta' wipe out your entire argument.

Another case in point of why this myth was needed and is still perpetuated in the first place. Just like the Trinity, the cross, the walking on water bit, marry being a virgin who yet still had a birth etc...etc...etc.

Yawn...

[edit on 9-3-2008 by skyshow]

reply to post by skyshow


Skyshow,
Was wondering if you could tell me why non-believers or people in general, hangout on thread topics in general, that bore them so thoroughly that they emit these profound, "YAWNS!?'

Seriously. I mean, I may not agree with Islam, wicca, witchcraft, voo-doo, satan worship, etc., so I just avoid them unless there is something I am trying to understand in a course of study. But I don't show up to tell them I disagree and yawn my boredom at them. If they truly bore me, I just stay away and find something stimulating. Do you think you could explain this to me from your viewpoint?

chiming in a bit late, here...

Originally posted by sizzle
I stumbled across this website in one of my many searches for truth. Not saying that this is, but it might be worthy of some close ATS scrutiny. The author presents lineage back to Jesus' younger brother James.

Which, if true, would also include nearly a quarter of the globe's population -- or more. Think about intermarriages, illegitimate children, and so forth.

The name has also been spelled as Puryer, Peryer, Purrier, Perrier,Parar and many others; "Neferkheperure".

That last bit is ludicrous. The alternate spellings are probably reasonable, but the association with "Neferkheperure" is just plain silly.

"Neferkheperure" is an "approximate pronunciation of one of Akhenaton's (also known as Amhotep IV) official names. Egyptians at that time (including the pharaohs) did not have last names and did not pass along names to their descendants. www.egyptologyonline.com... He had six daughters, so again there is the possibility that millions of people are actually his direct descendants.

For all we know, my husband is one of those since his lineage can be traced back to the de Medicis in Italy (my own ancestry is Scots-English and Native American... it's somewhat less probable that I'm related to Amhotep.)

Last names really didn't "happen" until the Middle Ages in Europe (where his ancestors come from, judging by the last name and by the fact that he's caucasian: en.wikipedia.org... )

He also attempts to present a "sanitized" Jewish background where someone in his family was Jewish and linked back to Israel but he, of course, is not. This presents a bit of a problem since generally you took on the same faith as your family and the Jews had a tradition of intermarrying. Marrying outside the faith was something that was not done lightly... and is still a strong tradition among the Orthodox.

IF there was a Jesus and IF he had siblings, then it's possible that most of us are related to him.

Let's look a little closer at the word myth. Most automatically assume that it means something akin to a fable or fairy tale:

Myths are not the same as fables, legends, folktales, fairy tales, anecdotes or fiction, but the concepts may overlap. Notably, during Romanticism, folktales and fairy tales were perceived as eroded fragments of earlier mythology (famously by the Brothers Grimm and Elias Lönnrot). Mythological themes are also very often consciously employed in literature, beginning with Homer. The resulting work may expressly refer to a mythological background without itself being part of a body of myths (Cupid and Psyche). The medieval romance in particular plays with this process of turning myth into literature. Euhemerism refers to the process of rationalization of myths, putting themes formerly imbued with mythological qualities into pragmatic contexts, for example following a cultural or religious paradigm shift (notably the re-interpretation of pagan mythology following Christianization). Conversely, historical and literary material may acquire mythological qualities over time, for example the Matter of Britain and the Matter of France, based on historical events of the 5th and 8th centuries, respectively, were first made into epic poetry and became partly mythological over the following centuries. "Conscious generation" of mythology has been termed

en.wikipedia.org...

There's much more there to read.

reply to post by whoreallyknows


The Bible tells there will be a "great deception" before the second coming of Christ. This Merovingian link to the anti-christ may be one of them.

I say this because, from my understanding, the anti-christ will come from the tribe of Dan.

reply to post by Byrd


Thank You Byrd!
This was the kind of input I was hoping for.
As I said, I don't mind speculation, it can be fun, but I also wanted some cold hard facts.

reply to post by Icarus Rising


Like you I have also read that the Anti-Christ will come from the tribe of Dan.

To Sizzle, thanks for starting such a good forum. I wish I could give you more stars

Sorry about the last POST I made If It is Confusing but it is not really it's just like the Intro is not well Explained. I'll just live the Question like that for those who will like to answer and to correct it by others

Okei' (^^,) here some HARD COLD FACTS





Lucas 20

20(A) So they watched him and sent spies, who pretended to be sincere, that they might catch him in something he said, so as to deliver him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor.

21So they asked him, "Teacher, we know that you speak and teach rightly, and show no partiality,[a] but truly teach the way of God. 22Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?"

23But he perceived their craftiness, and said to them,


24"Show me a denarius. Whose likeness and inscription does it have?" They said, "Caesar’s." 25He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s."

[edit on 9-3-2008 by johnb1]

Originally posted by idle_rocker

Originally posted by dismanrc
reply to post by Icarus Rising

 

He could be the ancestor if Jesus was married and had kids.

If I remember correctly, ancient Jewish law mandated marriage by the age of 30. With this in mind Jesus would have been married by the time he began to preach. The Bible never stated if he was or not.

Anybody have more info on ancient Jewish marriage customs and law to double check me?

My thought, if the laws were that one married by 30, and if Jesus did not marry by 30, there would have been something written about his rebellious behavior on that count... I would think, anyway.

I believe you are correct on the marriage requirements. However, remember Jesus was considered pretty much a rebel in his day, so believing he never married would not be hard for me to surmise. In fact, I would think doing what the rulers commanded would be exactly what he would not have done.

reply to post by sizzle


Ok, I'll be happy to give it "closer scrutiny".

Let's see, well, according to the oldest source of "Christian" written records, the Dead Sea Scrolls, James was the oldest brother of Jesus, not the youngest. James was known as "The Righteous Teacher", the "Wicked Priest" was Ananda, and the "Spouter of Lies" was none other than Paul.

You can find this historical record translation in "James, The Brother Of Jesus", by Robert Eisenman, or you can go to www.biblemysteries.com...

for a very good article on this matter.

Not that there actually WAS a "Son Of God" walking the Earth, mind you, so there can't be "descendants" of "Jesus" but this will explain the original written mythology, the source of the "Jesus" myth.

Just like there was no "Kingdom of David" (actually based on the first king of Israel: King Omri) nor any first "Temple of Jerusalem" (It was actually in Shechem) nor any builder of such temple called "Solomon" in the region the myths tell us. Wasn't and isn't there. (Both the "David and Solomon" myths were based on more ancient, real life pharaohs of Egypt, btw.

Get used to it, the entire Judiac/Christian/Islamic religious tradition is based on "borrowed" myths of the Sumerians, The Babylonians, Egyptians and the Hindus.

Right down to the "Brahmans" ( one of the sources of the "Abraham"" myth) and the historical Hammurabi of Ur, The law Giver, born in the same city, at the same time, as "Abraham." Who was supposedly also a "Law Giver." Huh, what a coincidence, eh? Get it? Ham UR Rabbi????? Rabbi Hamm, of Ur??? Both born in UR at the same time??? Both "Law Givers"???

Further, you should be very aware there was no "Exodus" from Egypt, THAT was "borrowed" from the earlier historical release from Babylon of Hebrew slaves by Phoenician King Cyrus The Great when he captured that city, indeed, the Jews called him "Mesach", or messiah in gratitude. No "Moses" wandering a small area for "40 years." The "Ark of the Covenant"? Found. You can see a photo of it taken when they opened King Tut's tomb. It's online, go find it and understand the deception.

ALL of the "Jewish" mythology was stolen from earlier civilizations. ALL of it, including the Jewish "Messiah" myth.

Lastly, to understand the "Yahweh" myth, you must understand he was NOT originally a "Hebrew" god. He was ONE of MANY "gods" the Semitic peoples of that region worshiped, along with El, Asherah and Ba'al: They were all "good friends" until the Hebrews decided to "borrow" one of the "gods" as their very own. One can still look at pottery from 800BC and see depictions of Ba'al, El, Asherah and Yahweh in front of a cow with her calf. Yahweh WAS the "Golden Calf", another of the clever ways the Hebrews stole a myth, and turned it on it's head.

The snake in the "Garden of Eden"? Nachustan, another of Yahweh original "good buddies", until the Hebrews came along.

"Eden"? The original Sumerian word (a few thousand years before "Genesis" was written) was "Edin", which described the very same region the Hebrews placed their "Eden." And guess what? Their Edin was a place were semi-gods had to tend the orchard for the "Big Gods", and didn't like it, so they created MAN to do their orchard chores.

The ORIGINAL source for "Adam and Eve."

"Yahweh" originated as "Huwawa" the semi-god (demiurge) guarding the Cedar forests of Lebanon. THAT'S why you have the "Old Testament"
(curiously first put into print from a text written by a Christian @ 1500 CE) myths of "Yahweh" instructing the Israelites to build things of Cedar. Just like Huwawa used to do.

That will conclude your deprogramming for today.

You're welcome, your mind is now free. All you have to do is accept FACTS (which I strongly urge you to verify on your own), instead of feel good stories with no basis in fact.

reply to post by alupang


Well, thank you for your kind input alupang. But I have been on the trail of these very studies you attest to for quite some time.
My mind is open for the truth. But as yet, I am not convinced that we have the complete unabashed truth in any of the texts yet. If you are, that is great! I am very happy for you.
But at the moment, I am still of the mind that if one text can leave parts out or change certain things around to suit themselves; then who says that the others didn't do the same thing?
So, in light of this, my studies will continue.

reply to post by johnb1


I apologize if the intro is confusing to you or others. The english language is such that even those that speak it fluently, sometimes misunderstand each other.
So let me also apologize if my words sounded unkind towards you. I was simply trying to understand, and was hoping you could offer a different explanation that would be clearer to me. As I truly do wish to understand, so that I can respond properly.

alupang, much of what you assert may be true considering the similarities of these stories throughout cultures of the mid-east. However, I am not convinced that the book of Exodus can be conflated with the liberation of Babylonian slaves by Cyrus. Cyrus died around 590 B.B. Events of Exodus concord with an earlier era, when the Hebrews were still in the wandering nomad stage. I believe the Pharoh Akhnenten is sometimes thought to have been influenced by Moses. Some think he WAS Moses, but I don't. Also, Cyrus was Perisan.

[edit on 10-3-2008 by centralcasting]

reply to post by alupang


Abraham was not the Law Giver. He received The Promise contained in the Covenant with God. God promised to bless those who bless him and curse those who curse him. He also promised to make Abraham's seed as proliferate as the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore. Most important of all, God promised Abraham a Redeemer, Jesus Christ. "And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God."(James 2:23)

Moses was the Law Giver. The Law was given to show man that it was impossible to attain salvation by works. Under The Law, man is condemned for his transgressions. Through The Law, man has no choice but to realize he is hopelessly lost. It is at this point that man can profess faith in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. "For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."(Romans 5:19)

Paul was called the spouter of lies by the Judaizers, who taught that it was not enough to believe on Christ for salvation, but that one must also follow Jewish Law and be circumcised. "This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" (Galatians 3:2)

You are entitled to your beliefs, of course, just like everybody else. I, for one, am glad Abraham acknowledged and professed faith in the One True God. The rest are just false idols. There is only one narrow path to the sheepfold door, and Christ is that door, the only One. As Paul said in Athens, "For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you." (Acts 17:23)

reply to post by space cadet


Thank you for taking an interest in my work. Yes, I am the author. You may wish to know I am planning a book on the subject. I would appreciate any help anyone could give me. I would give said persons a reference note in the book. You can contact me on the back pages of www.voy.com/40560/
, Thanks.