• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Melchezedek- The Pure Enigma

SB Habakuk

Active Member
I will not interpret for you Soy- if you know that is so believe it with all your mind-
As for me- I will aspire to the invisible truth
 

SoyLeche

meh...
SB Habakuk said:
I will not interpret for you Soy- if you know that is so believe it with all your mind-
As for me- I will aspire to the invisible truth
Is it possible you don't think that "Christ had a mother" follows from the statement "Mary is the mother of Christ"?
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
SoyLeche said:
Is it possible you don't think that "Christ had a mother" follows from the statement "Mary is the mother of Christ"?
Perhaps he's trying to say that Christ, being the eternal word that has always existed with God, has no mother - and that Mary is only the mother of a temporary incarnation of Christ?
 

SB Habakuk

Active Member
SoyLeche said:
Is it possible you don't think that "Christ had a mother" follows from the statement "Mary is the mother of Christ"?

If you do not wish to meet me on an intellectual level - I will speak vanity- I have spoken enuff - to speak more will be vain
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Halcyon said:
Perhaps he's trying to say that Christ, being the eternal word that has always existed with God, has no mother - and that Mary is only the mother of a temporary incarnation of Christ?
I can accept that - but this "temporary incarnation of Christ" definatley had a mother.
 

SoyLeche

meh...
SB Habakuk said:
If you do not wish to meet me on an intellectual level - I will speak vanity- I have spoken enuff - to speak more will be vain
I'm willing to meet you - I have asked a simple question is all.
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
SoyLeche said:
I can accept that - but this "temporary incarnation of Christ" definatley had a mother.
Sure, but Christ existed before that incarnation and didn't have a mother (although i realise you don't believe that).
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Halcyon said:
Sure, but Christ existed before that incarnation and didn't have a mother (although i realise you don't believe that).
I can accept that a lot of people believe that.

The Bible never says that Christ didn't have a mother though, which was what got us to this point in the discussion.
 

SB Habakuk

Active Member
I am Saying Christ did not come into the world as a conception of the Holy Spirit- He came as An eternal being- appearing to angel as angel appearing to man as man
 

SoyLeche

meh...
SB Habakuk said:
I am Saying Christ did not come into the world as a conception of the Holy Spirit- He came as An eternal being- appearing to angel as angel appearing to man as man
And appearing to shepherds and wise men as a baby recently having left his mother's womb.
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
SB Habakuk said:
I am Saying Christ did not come into the world as a conception of the Holy Spirit- He came as An eternal being- appearing to angel as angel appearing to man as man
Wow! Habakuk explaining his beliefs in a reasonable coherent manner, i'm flabbergasted. Well done Habakuk, more like this please. :yes:
 

SB Habakuk

Active Member
How is one born into the world- one is given a body by the authorites- christ did not receive
such a body as the authorities thought he was Gabriel
 
HB's right about that one. One can discover this truth that confirms common sense in the "Q" Saying found in Matthew 11:11 (an 11-11 sign)-

"Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."

Jesus has already admitted that he is more than a prophet in verse 11: 8. And in 11:11 he is indirectly telling us he is not a human being born of women.

When one couples this to John's "Word" descriptions for Jesus in the beginning of his Gospel, and when one wonders why Paul, contemporary of Jesus and his supposed trial, crucifixion and resurrection never mentions that story as such, and why historians have been completely unable to produce conclusive evidence for the existence of Jesus, and add to this the Talmud stories of Yeishu ben Pantera living a century before but bearing the elements of the Jesus story found in the Gospels, a conclusion must be reached. Jesus Christ of the Gospels is a spiritual creation, not a human being but a literary Golem composed of words from the Old Testament remade to predict a man instead of referring to the nation of Israel with added Sayings that are the only clue we have to a real human being Jesus, and then given the Name of God placed on him to give him life which indeed the Story of Jesus Christ did.

Jesus Christ of the New Testament is a spiritual being and as such he joins the other biblical spiritual beings of which there are many, e.g. Adam, Noah, Melchizedek, Moses, David, Solomon, and Daniel.
 
I would like this thread discussion to get into what I call the Moloch problem with the God of Abraham.

If people research the origin of the name "Melchizedek" one immediately finds that "Melech", "Malik", "Melchi", "Milcom", "Malachai" all have the same god root and that god was Moloch. "Melech" in Hebrew supposedly a generic word to mean "king" but in Hebrew Moloch and Melech are spelled the same way.

The most striking feature of Moloch worship was Moloch's hunger for burnt firstborn children burnt in ovens and on altars. Archeologists have found conclusive evidence varifying OT reports of backsliding Hebrews, that ancient Hebrews worshipped Yahweh with Moloch rites outside Jerusalem in the site that became known as Gehenna when Israelite priests finally ended the Yahweh/Moloch worshipping there and turned the place into a garbage dump.

This history gives a new meaning to Jesus' warning, also another "Q" Saying so it's as authentic to Jesus as we are likely to get:

"Do not be afraid of those who can kill the body, but cannot kill the soul.
Rather fear the one who is able to destroy both body and soul in Gehenna."

What then is the connection between Abraham and God if the commandment the God of Abraham gives is a Moloch worship commandment and then we have the story of a high priest bearing Moloch worshipping name honoring Abraham and his God. But what God is it?

Abraham's grandson, Jacob builds an altar to God and calls it "Beth-el", i.e., "House of EL", the universal Canaanite name for the Heavenly Father God found throughout the ancient Middle East. But EL was never a god to demand human sacrifice, indeed, comparing Canaanite EL to Hebrew Yahweh, is comparing a Sage King to a Tyrant King. EL is the true Heavenly Father that Jesus knew and Jesus reestablished the ancient Hebrew worship of their tribal god Yahweh, as Son to EL.

The sacrifice God demanded of Abraham is going to get the moral scrutiny it finally deserves by those not morally blinded by traditional Abrahamic religious propaganda.
 

SB Habakuk

Active Member
arielmessenger said:
HB's right about that one. One can discover this truth that confirms common sense in the "Q" Saying found in Matthew 11:11 (an 11-11 sign)-

"Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."

Jesus has already admitted that he is more than a prophet in verse 11: 8. And in 11:11 he is indirectly telling us he is not a human being born of women.

When one couples this to John's "Word" descriptions for Jesus in the beginning of his Gospel, and when one wonders why Paul, contemporary of Jesus and his supposed trial, crucifixion and resurrection never mentions that story as such, and why historians have been completely unable to produce conclusive evidence for the existence of Jesus, and add to this the Talmud stories of Yeishu ben Pantera living a century before but bearing the elements of the Jesus story found in the Gospels, a conclusion must be reached. Jesus Christ of the Gospels is a spiritual creation, not a human being but a literary Golem composed of words from the Old Testament remade to predict a man instead of referring to the nation of Israel with added Sayings that are the only clue we have to a real human being Jesus, and then given the Name of God placed on him to give him life which indeed the Story of Jesus Christ did.

Jesus Christ of the New Testament is a spiritual being and as such he joins the other biblical spiritual beings of which there are many, e.g. Adam, Noah, Melchizedek, Moses, David, Solomon, and Daniel.
.

As Jesus often did he spoke of the Little ones- In gk it is termed
MIKROTHEOS- The Little Word-
These being are rightly
Cardinals of the creed
The mythical Lamedh Vavh- Those who Turn the Hinge as the latin suggest
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
SB Habakuk said:
.
As Jesus often did he spoke of the Little ones- In gk it is termed
MIKROTHEOS- The Little Word-
Is that a typo, do you mean Mirotheos? I've never heard of Mikrotheos before...
 
Top