Is the USA Now Under God's Judgement?

Originally posted by hawkiye
By the way the Bible does claim Jesus was of the lineage of David.

Actually the way it works is that he had to be of the lineage of David from his father's side. He had no earthly father so.....

Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by zedVSzardoz

 

I am not making any claims one way or another I am just pointing out he doesn't know his own scriptures he claims to follow like most religionist. They hang their hat on certain pet scriptures ignoring all others for the most part attach certain traditions and dogma to them and think they have it all figured out. By the way the Bible does claim Jesus was of the lineage of David.

edit on 17-11-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

Quite true. The thing is and i pointed out this out earlier , Religion and believe therein cannot be reasoned outside of the extend that the religion itself allows, Even reasoning within the context of the bible will end up with a contradiction. Anyone can counter and reason what is written and claimed and ask proof of their believes. problem being of course that people who believe do not need proof to believe ... " So why should you" right?
That is why any discussion with a strong believer always ends in -..............-

Because they just know it is...
They one day realized somehow..
Or something happened in their life and they found god..

No grounded reasoning needed there


Which is ok , just fine. If people want to believe then they can believe.


But then they approach others and try to convince them a book like the bible is true by reasoning it. Preferably without any logic retort in return.

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by hawkiye
By the way the Bible does claim Jesus was of the lineage of David.

Actually the way it works is that he had to be of the lineage of David from his father's side. He had no earthly father so.....

Unless....the story had been "re-phrased" in such a way ......to cover the true story to make the immaculate birth claim and hide the fact that mary.....well....

Makes you think, In a book with that many words it is kinda hard to cover all tracks of course.

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by hawkiye
By the way the Bible does claim Jesus was of the lineage of David.

Actually the way it works is that he had to be of the lineage of David from his father's side. He had no earthly father so.....

More Modern Christian dogma... Like I said I am not making any claims one way or another. However having said that the virgin birth doctrine was certainly not a prominent doctrine until hundreds of years after Jesus death. Most Christians of his time thought Joseph was his father who was of the lineage of David along with Mary. Which accounts for the scriptures referring to him as a son of David.

Few if any in his time or shortly after his death believed in that myth. But technically if God was his sperm donor and God is the father of the human race including David, and Mary of the lineage of David well then you can extrapolate what you will out of that.

On another note I do believe the scriptures teach more of an immaculate conception rather then a virgin birth which was still scoffed at in those days but today is not unbelievable at all with artificial insemination a scientific fact which lends speculation to the whole God was an Alien thing possibility...

Evidence drawn from religious text such as the Bible gives no one the strength to defy the forces of a NWO and actually proves how easily we the majority can be fooled.
God is going to bring judgement ,hmm
What chance does the world have against a NWO if theories such as this are offered as a solution?

The actions of the NWO are real and the proof is there, available and ready to be exposed. Therefore, we need a real strategy - one that is not based on religion but on exposing the tangible, undeniable truths about how we have been mislead and the future of our existence on this planet.
Members of this elite group, namely the Rockefeller’s, Rothschild’s and Morgan’s have been known about for years.
Rothschild likes to be called Lord Rothschild
Sadly, our history and indeed present action against each other does not reflect an image of the magnificent human spirit you think these people are enslaving. If we truly are god like creatures, why were we taken so easily by a handful of men that turned us upon each other?
Perhaps the most telling question: Would you do the same thing as them if given the chance?

reply to post by DarthMuerte

I THINK you mean that we have not been able to have a "face to face" relationship with God since Adam sinned. God cannot abide the presence of sin. Adam was sinless prior to his fall. He could stand face to face with the creator. Since then, no one else could. His holiness would blast the sinful out of existence. Thanks to the sacrifice of Jesus, we will be able to come before the Lord when all is done.

Affirmative.

The Bible and in fact religions of all manner are and have been tools used (and strengthened) by the people involved in bringing about a NWO.
When they turn off your power its not Gods Judgement,when they cut off your food supply its not Gods judment,

crimes against humanity.
What government or army or police force would dare this feat knowing that the world’s armies are funded and intern controlled by these families and knowing that world wars have been fought, brother and against brother with both sides being funded by the same families.
Not by Gods Judgement,
What chance does the world have against a NWO if theories such as this are offered as a solution?

reply to post by hawkiye


Fair enough but,

Luke and Mathew are contradictory, you know that.

Luke traces Mary back to David, supposedly. The author of Mathew uses Joseph.

Joseph was not the biological father so no blood lineage. AND by tradition the "seed" is passed through the father to establish the tribal lineage.


Mathew also adds five sexually unclean women to the lineage and skips over several Judean kings. He established the lineage of Christ by numerology based on the name of David.

He uses a 14-set genealogy of Jesus in the Greek gospel of Matthew. 14 being the gemmatrical number based on the name of David, DVD 4+6+4. Because that makes sense when establishing blood lineage.....

the 5 unclean women (sexually) are

Rachab the Harlot

Tamar who was raped by her brother Yehudah

Ruth who tried to seduce and have sex with her deceased husband’s cousin Boaz and then lived with her mother in law Naomi in a "questionable" relationship

Then the promiscuous Jebusite (Canaanite tribe) princess, Bath-Shebiti. Her name, Bath sheba lit = daughter of the 7 gods. She was married to Uriah the Hittite and committed Adultery with David and bore an illegitimate son who became the clan chieftain Jedediah

And finally Miryam of Galilee, known to be a whore (unclean)


so with this much lying and sexually compromised women, you have to ask, was Jesus really a Davidic descendant?

EDIT:
I just want to add that I still think that Luke was speaking of Joseph. Why would he not say Mary if it was Mary. Why say "supposedly" and mean a different person. The lineage to me is as much a fabrication of Joseph´s ancestors as Mathews acount. Luke tries to use Jewish law of lineage by the father to link Jesus to David IMO, not Mary.

"Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli."...... and on and on.

Luke 3:23-38

I am not buying it. Why lie? that would not change his message, but you would not be able to try to force convert the Jews is all. (as was attempted by the church for many years).

these many lies and Your version of Jesus looks like an antichrist for lying and being linked to whores in his lineage almost referring to the whore of Babylon and idolatry by linking him to Canaanite tribes who practiced it.

and this, Luke is inaccurate and deviates from the OT lineages and makes stuff up.

Though they both name Joseph as the father of Jesus, they give different names for the father of Joseph (id est, the paternal grandfather of Jesus). Matthew gives Jacob; Luke gives Heli. And thence the lists diverge completely until we come to Shealtiel and Zerubbabel.

Likewise, Matthew and Luke give different fathers for Shealtiel. Matthew gives Jechoniah; Luke gives Neri. And thence again the lists diverge until we come to David. Matthew traces this part of the line through Solomon and the kings of Judah. Luke traces it through Nathan and an otherwise unknown bevy of names.

The matching names from Abraham to David are easily gleaned from the Old Testament, and even in this solid line of descent Luke manages to deviate with the names Arni and Admin. If Arni is the same man as Aram (or Ram), then the problem is alleviated slightly, but I know of no direct evidence for the identification. Admin, on the other hand, is an extra name no matter how one slices it. One wonders what independent tradition Luke could have had access to that he valued more highly than either the LXX or (what was to become) the Masoretic!

www.textexcavation.com...

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
Luke traces Mary back to David, supposedly. The author of Mathew uses Joseph.

Jews believe that... um... "Jewishness", for lack of a better word, lol, comes from the mother, so it would be important to demonstrate that Jesus was actually a Jew, through Mary. The lineage of the father, on the other hand, was a legal lineage, hence the demonstration from Matthew (which is the most Jewish of the Gospels) through Joseph.

In other words, they're both listed in those two Gospels because they were both important, for different reasons.

reply to post by adjensen


I don't think there is a doubt if he was Jewish or not. But he cannot have the house of David assigned to his lineage by his mother's side. You could be a descendant of Aaron on your mother's side and not have that distinction made. Only the fathers side counts for establishing your lineage. HE had no claim to the throne. Not to mention Josephs ancestors were cursed and so disqualified.

3.He was not descended from the House of David. According to Jewish law, tribal identification comes from the father's side, being Jewish, from the mother's side. According to Matthew 1, Joseph was descended from David (Although there are many contradictions between his genealogy there and that listed in Luke, however according to the same text, Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary, therefore Jesus was not related to Joseph, and not a descendant of King David.

Three answers to this problem are given in classic Christian sources:


a.The genealogy is that of Mary - This is inadequate, since if he is claimed to be the Jewish messiah, and according to Jewish tradition he must be descended on his father's side, Mary's genealogy is irrelevant.

b.He was adopted by Joseph -According to Jewish law, adoption does not change the status of the child. If an Israelite is adopted by a Cohen, (A descendant of Aaron the High Priest), the child does not become a Cohen, likewise if a descendant of David, adopts someone who is not, he does not become of the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David.

c.It doesn't matter, he was a spiritual inheritor of King David - If it doesn't matter, why do Christian scriptures spend time establishing his genealogical pedigree? And if he is claimed to be the Jewish messiah, then according to Jewish tradition it does matter!

ohr.edu...


Jesus was not the universal messiah, since he was not even the Jewish messiah. He may be to some, but not to all. He may even be just a prophet like Islam says. Maybe that is all there is to any "messiah" (teacher) stuff. A great guy with a good message we can learn from. Not a "magical" God man we give super powers to over time to validate his "godness".

Maybe all this son of God stuff is made up, and we are being lied to. Maybe we judge each other and cast God's wrath upon each other in hopes that we are right and our following his rules will somehow save us from the terrible things we see happen to each other.

Like they say "oh you are cursed, you see, you should have followed my god and his rules, look how great I am doing, no God wrath´here"

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by mc4denmark

 

try to open your eyes and stop being so "for god and country" -America is not the world saviour and anyone with the slightest ability to see things objective would know that

We don't want to "save" anyone. I am not "for god and country", your stereotyping of all Americans as ultra nationalist shows your ignorance. We have a VERY strong left in the US that I may belong to for all you know.

Oh, and you are blaming the US for technological waste? Every country for the most part with the exception of maybe brazil is horrible at recycling. At least we do recycle and led the world initiative to do so when no one was.

Does Africa's slash and burn farming count as a product of the 20th century or is it a product of irresponsible farming? Are their war lords a product of American imperialism or a natural state of African war fare stemming from tribal war fare?

You can try and blame us for the world's problems but you will just miss your opportunity to correct your own peoples flaws.

Get over it. And people say WE think we are the center of the world.

We are not trying to save the world as much as the world is trying to blame us for not doing so.

edit on 17-11-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

Well said, also for a country hated by so many other countries why do they all want to be like us? Yes, that includes Ozzy-land, the world is so infatuated with the USA and our trends that they try to copy everything from clothing to movies yet blame use for the worlds problems.
If it wasn't for the United States helping the British, Russians and Australia during ww2 you would be just part of The Axis!
Now quit trying to blame the USA for the worlds problems and bring it back on topic!
I also agree that hlf the members on here should read a few history books!

The number of religious posts on this site seriously undermines its credibility - this is just people posting crap in order to provoke useless commentary when there are actually so many things worth discussing.

Waste of time threads, meant to be divisive and waste peoples time.

reply to post by wulff


If it wasn't for Britain in ww2 America would have fell to Germany.

If it wasn't for Russia in ww2 America would have fell to Germany.

If it wasn't for America in ww2 the war would have dragged out longer.

Why do you Americans think you single handedly came in and saved the day? If you're so good why do you need the British in Iraq and Afghanistan showing you how troops should conduct themselves. Get over yourself.

reply to post by GafferUK1981


we don't "need" them. The UN and world community wants to spread the target practice around since they foresee the need to have battle hardened troops all around OUR empire. The west needs to stop crapping where it eats.

The US on behalf of the UN and NATO keeps OUR (west) interests in check. I don't like it, you don't like it, but we benefit from OUR empire.

So, get over the guilt. I can live with mine and the worlds human nature without being a dumbass to people.

We all need to look at our lives personally and get over this "save the planet" crap. It doesn't need saving, WE DO.

We all eat from the same plate. If you notice the more noble our intentions and the less we assert our control over the world while living in the current model of society we have, the more we need to crack down on our own people.

Empire needs tribute, from foreign lands or our own people. You decide.

Sucks huh? Alternative? why yes, small tribal communities and NO complex, convoluted and expensive CIVILIZATION.....decide then.

If you know a better way I think we are all ears.......well?

reply to post by Hydroman


I know that a fat man who's name is an anagram of Satan doesn't break in my house every xmas eve tho. (Cause I checked LOTS, when I was a kid!!!!!!).

I probably should have said:

What actually happens when we die is still 100% guess work tho, he hasn't a clue what's going to happen when he dies, none of us do. We can just guess.

So anyone who feels the need to verbally attack people who don't agree with, whatever his best guess is, is even further down the evolutionary scale than those who who believe or don't believe and just stfu about it until they find out, or don't find out, for themselves

Smug atheists are just as bad as devout believers, but at least believers have several thousand years of documented interactions with God, true or false, to research. Atheists have nothing but a smug feeling they've gained by having other smug atheists agree with their best guess

reply to post by Beavers


I believe in God, but not in the Christian, Judeo, or any other form of God worship. What does that make me?

I Know he /it exists personally, so I am not an agnostic. I refuse to worship or even entertain the lies anymore that I have had the misfortune of seeing for myself, documented and learned.

SO, if I don't believe in the God as presented to me by any religion, the Bearded man on a throne, single entity, that made everything with "magic", what then?

They would call me an atheist or just confused. I would say I have made my own spirituality. I am my own priest. I have my own way. I arrive at the same gnosis they do without the lies.

I know your post was not directed at anyone in particular, just wondering what you take on that is.

reply to post by zedVSzardoz


Are you for real, you don't have an empire at all let alone one that could compare to the British empire at its peak.

But that wasn't my point, my point was in ww2 all the allied countries needed each other for victory, if anything the biggest contributor was Russia who repelled the Germans and marched on Berlin. The British repelled the Germans in the battle of Britain and defeated Rommel in North Africa without American soldiers. At what point did you save our arses?

We did need America for manufacturing and they certainly helped mop up once we had the Germans on the ropes.

I appreciate you love your country and so do I but let's not invent history, Iraq and Afghanistan is turning into another Vietnam for America.

reply to post by zedVSzardoz


What proof do you have that your god exists?

reply to post by GafferUK1981


MY empire is YOURS.

The west is a global empire of like minded and benefited people.

Sorry, we are the muscle of OUR empire, that includes your country as well. The west. It is a global empire. We all eat off the same plate and get our marching orders from the UN. That is our Rome.

sorry. The illusion causes nationalism, to keep people from sharing the guilt and outrage. Also it keeps appearances and protect our leaders from uprising. Welcome to Reality. We are all still all living under a monarchy of a few blood lines.

The universal religion of OUR empire is Cristianity, or in its proper and original name, Catholic.

the word "catholic" translates into English as "universal" or "pertaining to the whole".

reply to post by GafferUK1981

Please stop going so far off topic. If you want to discuss the contributions of various nations in WWII, start a thread about it. Thanks.