Bloodline

FYI there is this new movie about the supposed Jesus bloodline & Priory of Sion stuff coming soon. Just found out about it this morning.
Its supposedly took 3 years to make, looks pretty good from the trailer.

More information on the movies webpage:
www.bloodline-themovie.com...

What do you people think about this ?

[edit on 3-4-2008 by Kenny_NOR]

When I first read Holy Blood Holy Grail about 15 years ago I thought some of the bloodline argument seemed plausible, but the Priory of Sion stuff was clearly a hoax. IMHO, it hurt their credibility to include both in their book. I'm not even convinced by the Merovingian stuff... I would think that if a bloodline existed, it would have gotten diluted pretty quickly. I don't think there were any over-arching breeding plans to keep it pure. So if Jesus did have even one child almost 2000 years ago, the family tree starting there would be amazingly wide by now, what, 66 generations later?

Just to do some rough math, let's say on average a generation is 30 years, and on average 2 descendants each have 2 kids. It becomes like the shampoo commercial. "And they had two kids, and they had two kids, and so on, and so on..." That would mean today there'd be 2^66 of the current generation running around, and because the average life expectancy is greater than 60, you can add their 2^65 parents to the mix. Obviously this is greater than the population of the earth, and just as obviously, this doesn't account for descendants within a generation interbreeding. Nonetheless, the numbers get pretty staggering.

[edit on 4/3/2008 by JoshNorton]

LOL, For heavens sake there is no blood line of Jesus Christ except for the blood that he spilled for all of us! Do you really honestly think that God would have sex with one of his own children? It's just another fiction novel to rake in the dough and it's unfortunate.

Christians, stay on the straight and narrow path!

Originally posted by Kenny_NOR

FYI there is this new movie about the supposed Jesus bloodline & Priory of Sion stuff coming soon. Just found out about it this morning.
Its supposedly took 3 years to make, looks pretty good from the trailer.

More information on the movies webpage:
www.bloodline-themovie.com...

What do you people think about this ?

[edit on 3-4-2008 by Kenny_NOR]

I'm not even going to entertain the thought of our Lord molesting one of his children, it's garbage. Further more, why do you feel compelled to post this in the secret societies forum and why hasn't your fellow masons jumped all over this and WHY hasn't a moderater at least moved this thread to the proper forum for it?

Care to give us a synopsis?

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Straighten Arrow]

Wait a minute. You find it hard to believe that the man Jesus can be a father yet you believe that he is an all-knowing, all-powerful god and the Father of us all?
Jesus was just one person within the bloodline. He wasn't the beginning, nor the end. There also was a mechanism for keeping it pure. It was called incest. Since at least Egyptian times, the ruling elite would marry within their own families. First with relatives as close as sisters. Later, cousins and second cousins.

Originally posted by TheComte
Wait a minute. You find it hard to believe that the man Jesus can be a father yet you believe that he is an all-knowing, all-powerful god and the Father of us all?
Jesus was just one person within the bloodline. He wasn't the beginning, nor the end. There also was a mechanism for keeping it pure. It was called incest. Since at least Egyptian times, the ruling elite would marry within their own families. First with relatives as close as sisters. Later, cousins and second cousins.

Jesus Christ was none other then God in the flesh. That's where most of you get it wrong into thinking that he was just a man.

reply to post by Kenny_NOR


How to debunk the bloodline theory:

Jesus and Mary have a kid. Its a girl.

Jesus is a Hebrew, so having Women carry on the bloodline -- for those who did not know that about judaism.....)

Anyways.

Jesus's daughter has 3 kids.

The average age is 35-45 years old. Thats 3 generation per 100 years at a maximum.. I would guess more along the lines of 5 generations per century because women had kids at a younger age.

So 3 kids to the 5th power. 3x3x3x3x3 = 243

243 per century for 2,000 years is 243 to the second power.. is 59049 in the second century alone. this is again assuming that they had the absolute minimum children, as average family sizes where around 6 kids per family, on average.

In the end, it comes out to over, well over, 118 million descendants directly and loosely related to Christ's blood line.

For instance. My parents come from two blood lines. they had 4 kids. If we had 3 kids each thats 12 grand kids, is THEY had 3 kids each, thats 36 kids, this is in a matter of 36 years.. its over 100 by the turn of the century.

The idea that 2,000 years ago.. a guy had a kid.. and the kid had a kid.. and it carried this way for 2,000 years and only ONE or maybe a little more are descended.... lol..

Its ignorant to an EXTREME.

Its half the population of america.

And no.. its not impossible. 4 millions Irish citizens came to America. 44 million in 2007 could claim genetic decedents from Ireland.

thats 4 to 44 million in 100 years.

Bloodline BS is nothing more then BS. Half of France is genetically related to Charlemagne, albeit distant, regardless, mitochondrian DNA can be traced back to THAT single ancestor.

reply to post by TheComte


If Jesus was a Jew like he claimed to be, and I don't doubt he was.. in the era he lived in .. and seeing as he admitted to being a Rabbi .. If he DID NOT have kids... he would have one - not been a Rabbi for to long and secondly, would have been considered a lowly and poor Jew. Jewish men had to have kids, rabbis especially.

Christianity is its own religion, if Christ existed, they raped what he was and made their own story, and most likely it suited current belief systems. Jews did not just .. not have sex... and they did not just not have kids because "god" said so.. it was a cultural custom to do such.. and that alone tells you why Jesus was chaste --- to control priest.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by TheComte

 

If Jesus was a Jew like he claimed to be, and I don't doubt he was.. in the era he lived in .. and seeing as he admitted to being a Rabbi .. If he DID NOT have kids... he would have one - not been a Rabbi for to long and secondly, would have been considered a lowly and poor Jew. Jewish men had to have kids, rabbis especially.

Christianity is its own religion, if Christ existed, they raped what he was and made their own story, and most likely it suited current belief systems. Jews did not just .. not have sex... and they did not just not have kids because "god" said so.. it was a cultural custom to do such.. and that alone tells you why Jesus was chaste --- to control priest.

Well that's quite scholary but it's obvious to me that Masonry leads Christians off the path of the straight and narrow. I know that you don't claim to be a Christian and that's cool, you can believe what you want to and I respect that. The problem that I am having a tough time coping with is Christians joining the Craft and suddenly abandoning their faith and believing that Jesus had commited a sin and their's now all of a sudden a blood line. But heh, everyone can choose the path that they want to. As for me, I am going to keep my faith.

Are there any other scholars or otherwise Masons that want to jump to the defense of this thread? Masonic Light, Light in Darkness, Trinityman, Senrak, anyone? Bueller, Bueller, LOL!

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Straighten Arrow]

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Straighten Arrow]

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow
Are there any other scholars or otherwise Masons that want to jump to the defense of this thread? Masonic Light, Light in Darkness, Trinityman, Senrak, anyone? Bueller, Bueller, LOL!

Bueller here

No, not really. The bloodline thing is a load of tosh, for all the reasons already outlined earlier in the thread. Plus a few others I haven't thought of yet.

However there was something else in your post that caught my attention...

Well that's quite scholary but it's obvious to me that Masonry leads Christians off the path of the straight and narrow.

Well it's not obvious to me and I have been both a Christian and a freemason for many years. Could you summarize for me what you see as the problem?

The problem that I am having a tough time coping with is Christians joining the Craft and suddenly abandoning their faith and believing that Jesus had commited a sin and their's now all of a sudden a blood line.

I would doubt there's anyone who fits this description. A Christian who joins freemasonry is obliged to keep his faith, not abandon it. It's a condition of membership. Freemasons en masse do not have one fixed belief.

But heh, everyone can choose the path that they want to. As for me, I am going to keep my faith.

My sentiments exactly, and a very masonic statement too if I may say so

Well I do feel good that you still confess your faith to Jesus Christ as we know him in the Holy Bible, Trinityman. This means a lot to me as a brother and I hope that what you are saying about Christian Masons as a whole is very true.

Why cannot Christians mention Jesus Christ under the roof of a Masonic temple even though the bible is present? To me this makes a mockery of the bible rather then it does to honor it. Christians should proclaim Jesus Christ where ever they are! I know, I know, please don't go into the speal about past religous wars and the anomosity that it might cause between you and your masonic brothers of different faiths. So if you're referring to God as a supreme being and not Jesus Christ, then as a Christian you do not have a problem with this?

By the way, nothing against you guys and gals, I mean well.

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Straighten Arrow]

[edit on 5-4-2008 by Straighten Arrow]

Hi SW

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow
Why cannot Christians mention Jesus Christ under the roof of a Masonic temple even though the bible is present?

It's a good question, and one that a lot of Christians ask. It's all about context. Freemasonry is an organization that specifically includes people from different faiths and different spiritual backgrounds. Some of them may not believe in Jesus Christ. Whilst their beliefs make no difference to me and mine, it is clearly inappropriate to specify one religion over another in such an environment. Generic descriptions of God are used (Almighty, Heavenly Father, Lord, etc) which enables people to place the ritual and the lessons contained therein in a personal context. Just because Jesus is not specified does not cause me concern that I might be raising a prayer to a different God, for example. The Lord's Prayer does not mention Jesus either but I have yet to hear any complaint from other Christians about that.

To me this makes a mockery of the bible rather then it does to honor it. Christians should proclaim Jesus Christ where ever they are!

I don't see how you reach this conclusion. I would never stand up in the middle of a Sales Meeting at work and start badgering non-Christian employees to accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior. There is such a thing as "a time and a place" and a masonic meeting is neither.

So if you're referring to God as a supreme being and not Jesus Christ, then as a Christian you do not have a problem with this?

Correct. Why would I? Are you saying that "Supreme Being" is not a good way to describe Jesus?

There are semantics at work here. And the implication that a Christian's faith is so weak that he cannot interact with those of other faiths without being somehow "tainted" I find a little condescending, to be honest. Go and reread Luke 10:25-37 and have a think about "who is my neighbor?" and whether loving someone would include respecting them or not.

By the way, nothing against you guys and gals, I mean well.

I can tell, and I appreciate your interest in freemasonry.

"There are semantics at work here. And the implication that a Christian's faith is so weak that he cannot interact with those of other faiths without being somehow "tainted" I find a little condescending, to be honest. "

That is not what I was saying at all. I respect those who have different faiths and I can get along with them quite well because they are up front and honest. Being a Christian and a Mason is like having your cake and eating it too. You cannot have it both ways. Either you are following Jesus Christ or you are taught to question everything, including him. The oaths that you state during your ceremonies whilist the Holy Bible is present is not that of the Holy Bible but that of a Supreme Being which does not relate to dare I say his name, Jesus Christ.

So in response to your question, no I will never submit to a supreme being. I will only praise my lord and savior Jesus Christ. But I will also love thy neighbor.

[edit on 4-4-2008 by Straighten Arrow]

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow
...believing that Jesus had commited a sin and their's now all of a sudden a blood line.

How would it be a sin if they were married?

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow
...believing that Jesus had commited a sin and their's now all of a sudden a blood line.

How would it be a sin if they were married?

So now he married one of his children?

reply to post by Rockpuck


Thanks for the debunking

Still though, I think I'am gonna watch this movie just for the entertainment of it


[edit on 5-4-2008 by Kenny_NOR]

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow
So in response to your question, no I will never submit to a supreme being. I will only praise my lord and savior Jesus Christ. But I will also love thy neighbor.

You've just deconstructed your own argument. For Christians Jesus Christ is the Supreme Being and you do submit to him.

Originally posted by Kenny_NOR
reply to post by Rockpuck

 

Thanks for the debunking

Still though, I think I'am gonna watch this movie just for the entertainment of it


[edit on 5-4-2008 by Kenny_NOR]

Oh ya, I love the movies like this, just as I love Dan Browns books..

But its in the same context that I love Niel Gaimen as an author, and not as I love the book Civilization.

Just because someone makes a book/movie does not make it true.. still entertaining though.

And for the record, if Jesus lived I do believe he would have had kids.. who knows, maybe half of Palestine are indirectly related to him.

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow
...believing that Jesus had commited a sin and their's now all of a sudden a blood line.

How would it be a sin if they were married?

So now he married one of his children?

You didn't answer my question. How would it have been a sin if Jesus and the Magdalene were married and had children?

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by Straighten Arrow
...believing that Jesus had commited a sin and their's now all of a sudden a blood line.

How would it be a sin if they were married?

So now he married one of his children?

You didn't answer my question. How would it have been a sin if Jesus and the Magdalene were married and had children?

Where is your evidence that they were married? See, theories are just theories that only lead into another path that is far and away from the truth.