February 27, 2015

9 Things You Think You Know About Jesus That Are Probably Wrong

Too many who come to Mami's claim to know the "Truth" about This historical figure.But do they *really*?
Jesus has been described as the best known figure in history, and also the least known. If you mentioned the name “Jesus” and someone asked Jesus who, you might blink. Or laugh. Even people who don’t think Jesus was God mostly believe they know a fair bit about him. You might be surprised that some of your most basic assumptions about Jesus are probably wrong.


rodin said...

One good thing about posting all this anti Christian stuff on Mamis is that the site will not now be so high on the list for shut down...


foon1e said...

Dunno bout that Rodin. We're equally hard on *all* things Abrahamic - Jews and Muslims as well as Xianity come under scrutiny here too. And all are equally as deserving of a good kicking because the Jews gave them to you. 2000 year old controlled opposition that doesn't deserve any credence in the 21st century.

Unknown said...

foon1e, it's you who is hard on Christianity. Don't forget that one of the founding members of Mami's Shit is a Christian.

foon1e said...

Yes PG, it *is* hard to forget that.I'm hard personally on all three sides of the Abrahamic Triangle. If some here can't comprehend the consequences of promoting any part of what the Jews invented to control humanity? That's their lookout.But i have the right to post what I feel is important here-just as every other Admin at mami's does.

Anonymous said...

My comments:

1. Married, not single.

It was out of place for a Jewish rabbi to be unmarried at the age of 30 back then, for sure.

3. Hung on a pole, not a cross. If he was hung, it had to be through the wrists and not the palms, or else they would fall off. And the claim that he was crucified is a definite problem for Jews to accept him as the Messiah, since the Torah says that he who is hung is accursed, and Paul even addresses that point, trying to spin it.

7. Number of apostles (12) from astrology, not history.

They are definitely representative of the 12 tribes of Israel, but could be related to the signs of the Zodiac as well.

8. Prophecies recalled, not foretold.

This is obvious in the case of the Book of Revelation. The description is too accurate of what took place during the Jewish war of 67-70 CE, especially the mention of 1260 days, and the description of the hailstones matches the size of the boulders used in the catapults on the Roman siege of Jerusalem.

9. Some Jesus quotes not from Jesus; others uncertain.

Good point here, about the Golden Rule, which was expressed earlier in a different way by Rabbi Hillel the Elder and Buddha.

Here you can see a summary of a show I guest hosted on Charles' program, summarizing points about things you didn't know, like Jesus not being God, not being born of a virgin, no eternal conscious torment known as hell, the Devil, Satan and the serpent as the same (human) entity, and past fulfillment of most of Revelation, up to Rev. 20.


Unknown said...

Every Christian will tell you, he was born of immaculate conception.

Is it a fact, that the Gospels of Mathew-Mark-Luke-John were not written by them?

If there are zero eye witness accounts, the story would appear to be a little tentative, even far fetched.

People have written, when they rolled away the stone, the Christ had risen.

What's the ELO song, it's got me thinking.
"Don't you roll away the stone" or something like that.

Unknown said...

I'm sure I've heard the lyrics, somewhere, that go.

"Don't you roll away the stone"

Anyway, It doesn't appear to be an ELO song.

Unknown said...


Mott The Hoople

Anonymous said...

Don, most Christian scholars admit that the authors of all four Gospels are unknown.

And regarding the claim of Jesus being born by immaculate conception, that is from the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, and scholars say that they probably didn't know each other, but relied on another Gospel that hasn't surfaced, called the "Q" Gospel.

The problem is that the Matthew author justifies the immaculate conception claim on the basis of a twisted interpretation of an Old Testament verse in Isaiah (7:14) that is said to be prophecy, but you see in later verses that it's referring to Isaiah's son, and there's the more important point that it uses the Hebrew word for a young maiden, and not specifically virgin.

Even Young's "Literal" Translation grossly mistranslates that verse, presumably for theological purposes.


It also says he will be called Immanuel, and nowhere in the NT is he called Immanuel. And finally, if he was born of a virgin, you'd think that Paul, who said he saw Jesus in a vision and became his apostle, would've mentioned this important point, but instead, he wrote how Jesus descended from David "according to the flesh." (Romans 1:3)

While the late John Anderson, former host of The Voice of Reason, who challenged all sorts of Christian doctrines, he never challenged this one, and it's because he couldn't without challenging the authenticity of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, and therefore the entire Bible.

Anonymous said...

Or the son of Ahaz, mentioned there as others have said, with the point being that it's later describing that Immanuel as a living person in that time.

Unknown said...

Hey, all you young dudes, carry the news.

9/11 was an inside job. And the Jews are plotting a global takeover!

Unknown said...

Faux, If Jesus wasn't born by immaculate conception. then he was a regular man of his era.

I have heard talk, that folks who believe the immaculate conception account, also believe he was minus male DNA the stuff he would have received from his earthly father, Joseph. A good lawyer could make the case, that he was a man, but he wasn't human.

The Bible is a little uptight when it comes down to sex. Jesus having to have been born of a virgin.

Anyway, if I'm asking questions of Jesus that should not be asked, I hope almighty God forgives me.

Unknown said...

Faux, Romans 1 King James Version (KJV)

1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)

3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Bible believers would probably answer the question by saying, it was Mary who was of the seed of David.

Anonymous said...

Don, Yes, or they say it was through Joseph, who they say was his adoptive father.

And they get around the conflicting genealogies in Matthew and Luke by saying that one is probably through Mary's side and the other through Joseph's. But both are irrelevant, if Jesus was indeed conceived immaculately.

Unknown said...

Foon1e; you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. A while back you defamed the average Christian as if the whole profession of faith is to be judged by a very biased, limited external view of what a Christian is. Now you've posted the trashy, sloppy rhetorical gymnastics of a misguided misanthrope that is determined to defame the object personifying good in the heart of the Christian.

Faux; it is presumptuous beyond error to state "most scholars" and then make claims and statements contrary to, or spurious to the sanctity of the scriptures. There are "scholars" who are "given" to error as defined by the scriptures themselves (2 Timothy 2:7). Apparently in this particular area, reprobates have had the louder voice in your life-- you're far better than that in your studies.

The oldest, internally dated manuscript, the Codex Washingtonensis, makes hay of your mentors' presumptions regarding the "unknown" authors of the four gospels. Not only does this first century manuscript contain all four gospels but the Aramaic seals of the four gospel writers and, as stated by Dr. Lee W. Woodard, "This codex enables us to know precisely when, where, and by whom each of the Four Gospels were written, as well as where and when some slight changes and additions to original manuscripts were made."*


foon1e said...

@Michzel: If you can't stand your fables being inspected publically,you're visiting the wrong site. No amount of dictionary swallowing will ever convince anyone of the validity of your Religiously inspired dogmatic disapproval. In fact, the only supporters you might attract are the similarly mentally infected "Believers" who are also determined to push this Jew-inspired rubbish for as long as possible.
Thankfully, we also attract some like Faux and others who have the ability to research and discuss such topics in an adult fashion. Long may that continue.

Unknown said...

What, Foon1e? What makes you think that you can define or even comprehend what another has pattered his life after? I've done my homework. I'll bet if you do a little research of your own you'll find most of the antiChrist stuff you post, if not directly, than indirectly is of Talmudic origin and strengthens the Jewish agenda. I suspect that somewhere, somehow, you were injured by religious pretense. Why take it out on people who hold to Christian principles?

My comment to Faux is best answered by him. He's obviously on a path to truth of his own.

foon1e said...

Well..thanks for yet another pompous and condescending response Michzel. Something I've learned over the years to expect from those who follow ANY of the 3 sides of the Abrahamic Triangle.
You're all so frightened of anyone possibly proving your cherished belief systems are in error, you automatically go on the offensive and rubbish anyone who questions them.
It's the response of the Brainwashed Cultist.
If your parents had allowed you to be ignorant of all the competing Belief systems out there until you reached adulthood, then *maybe* you'd be less inclined to believe in the Jewish Control System you were indoctrinated into.
You go ahead and continue to place your "Faith" in a mystical Jew-On-A-Stick. and all the paraphernalia that comes with such ridiculous superstitious guff. In the end, you're just another human being who's too frightened about dying to wish to give up his comfort blanket of religion:Believing that because he subscribes to one set of unprovable legends,he will be "Saved" and allowed to continue to worship something who by all accounts is a Jealous and vengeful spiritual entity. Who knows? Maybe he/she'll get all cranky and send yet another Flood to wipe Humanity off the face of the earth? And just maybe, you and your ilk will be around this time to experience such an event.
I hope i will be too:Just to see it wipe that smug self-righteous grin off your faces before you all drown.
Christians.Jews and Muslims:Self-Righteous Hypocrites the lot of you.

foon1e said...

Oh. and despite your continued many attempts to shit stir around here Mr Faggot(That *IS* how your surname is pronounced,isnt it? You seem to take great delight in posting mine everywhere you can...)
You can return to your disco dancing and Midnight Cowboy activities as quick as you like. You're still permanently banned from Mami's, and you are going to stay that way. Ta Ta!

Anonymous said...


I said most Christian scholars for a very particular reason, as Christian evangelical scholars aren't very scholarly, and also, I was being charitable to the Christian case, since not just most, but pretty much all secular scholars of the Bible say that the authors of the four Gospels are unknown.

The important word is scholar, and not just most Christians. Even Whooli admitted on a previous thread that the authors of the four Gospels are unknown.

The reason why they are unknown is because they aren't identified by name in them. What you are talking about is who they are inferred to be, from the text and external sources.

So please don't make a big issue out of one point of what I said most Christian scholars say.

And regarding Lindsey's comment, even though he is banned from here, he didn't refute anything put forward here, and when you don't do that, then the claim about not wanting to split the movement is just rhetoric if you want to keep an alleged truth movement together that isn't backed up by evidence and discussion, as opposed to belief and dogma.

Anonymous said...

And speaking of 2 Timothy, unlike Romans cited earlier in reference to Paul's statement about Jesus being a descendant of David according to the flesh, the Timothy letters are considered the most inauthentic letters attributed to Paul, by nearly all, if not all, secular scholars, and dare I say by most "liberal" Christian scholars, and not because they hate Christianity, but because of their reasoning, such as the language and teachings deviate from letters that are considered to be authentic Pauline letters (6 of them, of which Galatians is considered the most authentic, with Romans coming a close second).

Anonymous said...

Michzel, if you are so sure that the author identified as having written the Gospel of John is John of Patmos, one of Jesus' 12 apostles, then please consider reading this book by a conservative Christian, called The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved. Free ebook from http://www.thedisciplewhomjesusloved.com/

Because in there, he uses writings from the Gospel attributed to John to argue that it's someone else.

My point being, the authorship can be argued all sorts of ways by well-meaning Christians, let alone others.

Unknown said...

"Pompous and condescending response?" Pardon me, Foon1e, but I answered in the same "flavor" as your disrespectful posts and comments.

Both my parents came from Germany and for my entire childhood we celebrated traditional holidays but were basically a-religious (as apposed to Atheists that try and force their religion on others). By age 20 I was a useless drunk until I discovered that God was love and forgiveness through Christ. Having said, Foon1e, have you noticed that your presumptive conjectures are way off? Is it possible that you're projecting your misanthropy on others? Are you interested in truth or are you a loose canon when questioned? You've implied, and in fact loosely stated that I don't belong among others on this website.

Faux; scriptural law requires two witnesses to establish anything. The scriptures testify of John being author of the gospel, epistles and the book of Revelation and so does the Washingtonian codex noted above; two witnesses.

Perhaps your tacit question is, "is God the Author of the Bible?" This was answered mathematically by Ivan Panin over a century ago. When this knowledge sinks in, one may cease foolish doubt and move forward to greater heights of faith and understanding.

Here's a good introductory to Ivan Panin's proof of scripture divine authorship


foon1e said...

You can disemble all you like Michzel. I know it's futile expecting someone who has fully drunk the Christian Kool-Aid to ever reconsider their -frankly - untenable relationship with a site dedicated to outing all the perfidious plots,scams and schemes of the Jew wherever we spot them.
By fully supporting one of their longest lived Fraudulent subjugation schemes, you prove that you have fully given yourself over to the darkside - that which encompasses the "Church Of Rome,and all it's crimes down through the ages.
How you,or any other Christian or Muslim call themselves "Jew-Wise"? Yet still "Believe" in the Jew God and all the other Mind-control crap they've fed you for 2000 years is beyond my comprehension. And yes, your own pomposity and condescension is typical of all "Believers" it's been my misfortune to encounter across the decades. So, in a way you're correct. My own exposure to all the sides of the Abrahamic triangle has confirmed in my own mind that you're all "In It Together" so to speak. I trust No One who pushes anything the Jews created as a psy-op.

foon1e said...

...and for the record;I have met a lot of atheists,agnostics,Humanists and other people who held differing philosophical positions to any Abrahamic follower. Not one of them ever tried to "Force their religion" upon myself. Something that can't be said about all of the rabidly Christian "Believers" I've met in "Real Life" - and increasingly here online. To a man(or woman),they've felt it their "Christian Duty" to "Save My Soul" in spite of my many and varied reasons as to why i couldn't accept what they were selling.
A lot of them I had to cut contact with down the years - helping me understand probably *why* so many of you lot got fed to lions in the early days.

"Truth" requires solid evidence. The collection of stories,half-truths and outright Jewish propaganda to be found in your collection of fables put together by Constantine and his Roman and Jewish co-conspirators contains nothing except wish fulfilment and morally ambiguous platitudes (Yup - that Bible is full of contradictory stories,statements hearsay,& pseudo-philosophical sayings).
But it contains Nothing in the way of *solid* evidence to prove the veracity of anything within it's bindings.
With every Translation and revision,the content has been edited and tweaked to serve whatever political purpose the governments of the day needed, to keep their populations under control through "Fear" of what would happen to them after death; - and death was pretty much guaranteed at much earlier ages back then. So what you hold as "Truth" within it today has barely any relation to what the earliest Greek Translations of Jewish Tales originally contained.

Suffice to say; Religion is self-delusion by way of subjugation to hierarchies in this world - to those who have wielded it's reigns of Power down through the centuries - making themselves rich and powerful through your humble ceding of yourself and the fruits of your labours to their collective whims.
All because of a Book written to make you believe you have to "Render unto Caesar";"Turn The Other Cheek", and "OBEY" etc...Good little slaves. It's no wonder the Jews profited from your delusions to the extent they have.

Amerikaner said...

"In reality there has only been one Christian; and he died on the cross." --Nietzsche

Unknown said...

3. Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzsche-ism. To us Jews, at any rate, it should be plain to see what a disintegrating importance these directives have had upon the minds of the GOYIM.

--Protocol 3; The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

foon1e said...

Bible,Koran.Torah.Protocols. Whichever book of Jewish Lies you end up quoting doesn't hide the fact they're all Jew Lies.
It does however demonstrate your singular lack of being able to come up with a cogent argument to refute anything I've put out there for people to consider.That says more about your own motives for posting here than anything I ever could.
Cheers Sock-Puppet.

Unknown said...

Reading this post is like listening to the tormented logic of a neocon selling a thinly disguised agenda. It's a repeat of long answered distraction using repetition and deliberate obfuscation of answers given long ago. So...

1. The Bible contributors were not the only contemporaneous writers that noted by omission that Jesus never married. Not one of the church fathers of the first century and beyond did either. If one had, the Jews would have squawked a long time ago. To throw in crap about rabbi marriage, Mary Magdalene and homosexuality demonstrates the writer's attempts to bamboozle the non-critical thinker into believing she's on to something.

2. Hair length is irrelevant.

3. The Greek word "stauros" as found in original manuscripts means cross.<-yes that's a period.

4. Nit picking humbug. Anyone who anchors his faith on an image has yet to hear the gospel.

5. The first century Codex Washingtonensis manuscript containing the four gospels and personal seals of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John contains the manger passages of Luke 2:7, 2:12 and 2:17.

6. The transliteration of the Hebrew (Old Testament) to English is Joshua; the transliteration of the Greek (New Testament) to English is Jesus. Dah.

7. Genesis 1:14 states that the stars are to be for signs. If you google "gospel" and "stars" you will find that the zodiac originated with God's plan, and mythology is the perversion of it; not the other way around. A detailed study of the subject may be found here:

To try and make a case against the number of disciples by dragging in the Zodiac is the argument of a illogical fool.

I'm done. There's no intelligent life in this article.

foon1e said...

Phew. Glad you're "Done" Michzel.
Was beginning to think you'd chosen to write an actual book of fables of your own there. All totally non-proveable of course, and basically just your own Opinion without a jot of actual physical proof to back up everything you typed.
Typical God-Squadder. All Blather and no actual content. But i guess you *love* the look of your own typing up there on the screen.
You continue to worship your Jew God. And the rest of us will carry on exposing the Jew for producing the likes of you on this planet.
I'm Done.

rodin said...

Whoever dumped the Chalie Hebdo-esque image that accompanied this article has my gratitude

wanda said...

Religion is a simulated reality.

Any arguments?

Unknown said...

Wrong Foon1e. You're incitement-to-anger trick worked on me, and I responded with anger and thus haste, reducing the effectiveness of my source material to answer in my stead.

It appears to me that you've adopted the Talmudic-Jewish means of ending an argument; repeat your claim, and treat any revisionist evidence as if it neither merits a hearing or investigation.

You attack the messenger when he questions your argument.

You use clever adjectives like "physical evidence" in an image based cyberspace world. This faulty verbiage creates a blurry non-tenable demand further distancing the reader from evidence at the subconscious level. This is an exclusively Jewish trick, by the way, suggesting that you're allowing yourself behavior belonging to that which you espouse to hate.

I've provided means to examine the evidence that refutes your inquisitional claims against Christ and now repeat, fully understanding that it is all but impossible for you to peruse and process the evidence from your religious perspective--and yes, your behavior is that of a religious zeolot. Again,


And I'll add,

The Inspiration of the Scriptures Scientifically Demonstrated [Proof that the scriptures are reliable as a whole]


foon1e said...

Look Michzel - it's pretty simple. Your source material was handed to you by Jews. Every fable and story you put your stock in was written by Jews. Every character and event related in said material is by jews;about Jews and originally for jews.
Nothing you quote can alter those inalienable facts. Ergo: Your whole Faith system/Belief structure was given to you By The Jew. You choose to believe in it? Then you can't by any stretch of the imagination call yourself "Jew-Wise". Everything you continue to propagate here is therefore tainted,and should be grounds for everyone else to discount your efforts as the obvious disinfo it is.
Simple enough for you?

wanda said...


The Inspiration of the Scriptures Scientifically Demonstrated [Proof that the scriptures are reliable as a whole]


Believers do what believers do... they believe.

But i can refute that so-called proof the scriptures are reliable as a whole. For one, they are caballistic numbers... more evidence the God myth is from your Jewish land Lords... and two... There are no original manuscripts.

Unknown said...

Simple enough for you and perhaps those who agree with you, Foon1e. Notwithstanding there are those who don't agree with your view and can demonstrate proof of authenticity of the Christian view through science and mathematics.

I guess that makes mathematics and science Jewish; or maybe the principles of these disciplines too are fabrications...

I'm not intimidated by appeals to groupthink; I'm humored by your suggestion of isolation; if truth is a mutual goal then you should know that such verbiage betrays the object.

What I have offered is history supported by laws of science and mathematics. If one wants to call it "disinformation" it is properly refuted by the same means (scientifically), or, respectfully dismissed by personal belief systems that relegate contradiction to the title of "opinion."

Your distasteful cover picture alone demanded response; what did you expect?

Kindness goes a long way; every rare once in a while you inadvertently display a hint of this--and fear above fears--almost seem Christian.

wanda said...


BIBLE SAYS: Out of all the inhabitants of the earth, God set one man apart for Himself. From this man He made a new people, "a people who dwells apart, and shall not be reckoned among the Gentiles." (Num. 23:9)

LOGIC ASKS: God comes along and chooses one man who will dwell apart and shall not be considered among the Gentiles. To create a new people, not of all the others already here, to be His own people would necessitate in-breeding. Is the very nature of God anti nature?

Definition of Dwell... Latin Etymology:
dwelling (n.) "place of residence," mid-14c., verbal noun from dwell (v.).

dwell (v.) Old English dwellan "to mislead, deceive," originally "to make a fool of, lead astray," from Proto-Germanic *dwelan "to go or lead astray" (cognates: Old Norse dvöl "delay," dvali "sleep;" Middle Dutch dwellen "to stun, make giddy, perplex;" Old High German twellen "to hinder, delay;" Danish dvale "trance, stupor," dvaelbær "narcotic berry," source of Middle English dwale "nightshade"), from PIE *dhwel-, extended form of root *dheu- (1) "dust, cloud, vapor, smoke" (and related notions of "defective perception or wits").

Related to Old English gedweola "error, heresy, madness." Sense shifted in Middle English through "hinder, delay," to "linger" (c.1200, as still in phrase to dwell upon), to "make a home" (mid-13c.). Related: Dwelled; dwelt; dwells.

LOGIC ADDS: In ancient Hebrew alphabet contained no vowels. Thus the name King David can also mean King Divide. Similarly, there were no Ws. The W is a doube U or UU. The U, as can be seen in ancient Roman script was represented by the letter V as in JVSTICE.

Referencing the Old Norse cognate dvol... do we not also see the word devil? How about devolve, because a W is a double U? The bible is replete with such spellcrafting. One could say that is what the Gospell is all about.

Unknown said...

I don't think mathematics is your forte, Wanda; otherwise you'd not use it contrary to it's necessity in proving and establishing a thing.

Unknown said...

Wanda, calm down. Gematria on LSD!

wanda said...

Okay... math is not my forte, but i don't know why it has to be. All the numbers we are given for the distance to the sun, moon, planets, etc. are kabbalistic numbers. Yes, the math may check out... but it is no proof of anything in and of itself.. it is all just baffling b.s.

All of the A$$troNOTs are Freemasons... just look at NASAs logos. And we didn't go to the moon, we can't get through the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Those nass-holes lied to us and stole our money and broke trust. They kept the lie up for some 60+ years and only now are admitting the VA Belts are un-navigable by man... all the while still not admitting they gave us a side show back in the early 70s.

So... numbers - schmumbers. There are no originals. The entire bible is based off of two tiny snatches of papyrus... of dubious origin.

Language is my forte. And it is simplistic... truth is simple too. It is the lies that require obfuscation.

wanda said...

And logic... nature created a sane and logical world. God is anti-nature. God is the collective will of the Jews.

BIBLE SAYS: To distinguish this new people, God instituted the covenant of circumcision. (Gen. 17:10-11)

LOGIC DICTATES: Did "God" set a covenant or did syphillis have something to do with circumcision? Circumcision may have been brought about, not as an edict from God, but as an attempt to stem the spread of syphilis among the tribe.

Nature does not reward genetic inbreeding. God wouldn't have known that nature has a system in place to destroy genetic mutations? Looking at it holistically, syphilis would likely not have turned up in goyem culture on its own. Inbreeding, combined with unclean sexual habits such as sodomy and the mixing of vaginal fluids with feces, allowed for the incubation of pathogens which take hold on a weakened organism that you would not see in healthier groups.

With Syphillis, a sore or chancre, shows up at the primary point of contact. This lends reason to the whole circumcision idea as a way to cut away, at least, the the visible evidence of the disease. Syphilis, a bacterial parasite, left untreated, can damage the heart, aorta, brain, eyes, and bones. Untreated, Syphillus leads to insanity. There was no known cure for Syphillis until the advent of anti-biotics in WWII.

Imagine a Hebrew man trying to get it on with a Goyem girl... one look at his phallus and she'd run out of the room screaming. Circumcision was a way to normalize the Jews proclivities... once again.

wanda said...

The story of Noah's Arc is simply the imposition of maritime law in the world. It is necessary to flood the land to float their boat.

A parlor trick performed daily in jew-dicial courtrooms around the world today is raising the dead. All rise when the sorcerer in the black robe enters. The judge has just raised the dead... you are the dead. That is exactly how they regard you. There is no life in you because you are not in control of your own thoughts and actions... they are. As such, they are free of guilt for any harm they cause you. You are pawned by your beliefs.

foon1e said...

...and this is why it's practically impossible to get any "Christian" to see that by following the script(s) laid down for you; you are actively doing the Jews Bidding Michzel.
I don't give a monkeys about science and mathematics as it applies (or not) to a Belief system. Especially one that was invented, transcribed and enforced - Mostly by violent means- when it was used by various tyrants to overthrow existing Religions in various countries.

The "Slave Religion" of the Jews was the most useful *Political* tool of both the Heirachical Clergies that sprang up, and the feudal systems it helped enforce. The Notion of according certain Bloodlines "God Given Rights to Rule" would never have existed if it wasn't for the spread of the cancer of Christianity - backed up by the cunning Financial and political machinations of the Jews in the first place.

Hardly *anybody* back then, or even today for the most part, was bothered by the science or Maths behind the monotonous message of supplication and acceptance of your fate that Christianity preached to the masses. They were only concerned with it's effect on their daily existence. And the way they lived their lives in terror of offending "God" and being denied "Salvation" by a spiritual entity who had demonstrated psycho and sociological traits from his initial mentions in the Jew Book.
Woe betide anybody who didn't pander to his ego. or keep the collection tray at their local church supplied with whatever meagre offerings they could spare.

Your constant attempts to muddy the waters of the essential nature of your "Message" betrays your Zealotry in this matter. You don't come here to mami's to help fight the Jew. Like Most cryptos, you come here to spread disaffection and religious belligerence. When confronted with the essential truth stripped down - that Your "Faith" is nothing but a Jewish Con Trick played upon the Guidable and desperate - to steer them in directions that suit those who have Historically Ruled you? You hide behind psycho babble and mystical Numerology?
There's no hope for you,or those like you Michzel. You are too invested in perpetuating your insanity to consider the real effect it has on others;too weak minded to resist it's lure of false promises of their "Reward" in the next life-so long as you bow down and be a good slave in this one.
No wonder we lived in a fucked up world - when so many of you can't grow up and put away the superstitions of the past where they belong.
You can besmirch my motives for being anti-Abrahamic crap all you want to Michzel. At least I'm actively doing *something* to help the fight against Jewish influence. What are you doing to fight the Jew?

wanda said...

Oh yeah... all this salvation nonsense has to do with salvaging of ships lost at sea. Think about that and the elaborate con game they have going where we are berthed into their artificial construct by dock-tors and bla bla bla.

It requires belief... by surrendering your faith to Jesus, you are abandoning your own vessel. All who believe in Jesus will be saved... Jesus is in the salvation business. Faith is a profession.

Unknown said...

Wanda; you wrote, "BIBLE SAYS: Out of all the inhabitants of the earth, God set one man apart for Himself. From this man He made a new people, "a people who dwells apart, and shall not be reckoned among the Gentiles." (Num. 23:9)"

I don't know where you got this from because Num. 23:9 says nothing of the sort. In fact the words look like a jumblia of unrelated scriptures.

Foon1e; Truth is what I seek; being "Jew wise" cannot, doesnot replace this object. I hold to the concept that truth is the key to freedom. Think about it, even a white lie separates it's victim from making a relevant decision.

Billions of the ever growing doctrinal issues are to nebulous to pursue when time and space are limited. Therefore, for me, on behalf of Christians who may be upset by your musings, I provided historical and mathematical evidence that the foundations of the Christian faith--that is the Scriptures--are scientifically secured as authentic, being "God breathed," and therefore the onus for doctrinal understanding by way of study and interpretation is on the individual.

If you investigated Panin's mathematical analysis of the New Testament and know the difference between the Westcott and Hort Greek from which Bibles such as the New American Standard were translated, you may comprehend why King James-only people, whose Bible was translated from the Greek Textus Receptus will also go into cognitive dissidence regarding mathematical proof. I too, was once a King James-only person.

wanda said...

Michzel... isn't that interesting? I got it from the Jews... You might want to take that up with them. I found it while i was searching the term: Are the Hebrews Jews? The last line of the text on that page indicates YES... the Hebrews are the Israelites and the Jews:

["Jew" and "Hebrew" are used as equivalent terms. (cf. Jer. 34:9) If a man or woman is a Hebrew, then he or she is a Jew. A Jew is a Hebrew is an Israelite.]

Here's the link: http://www.elijahnet.net/Jews%20and%20Hebrews.html

Also, i am perplexed about "the jews who say they are jews but who are not." Because they most certainly are and inherited genetic diseases prove that out. It takes a heap of inbreeding to jack your genetics like that.

How much more evil that to invent a religion and write a book proclaiming yourself to be the chosen ones of a God you created. Jews lie... and they are "racially" insane. Inbreeding will do that to you.

The bible also tells you you win in the end... and since that book is written by jews for jews, if you believe that, i got a bridge to sell you. The jews who say they are jews but are not are just doing what they always do... they infiltrate and/or create a new faction to point to and say... see, it's them, not us. They are the same liars today as they were 2000+ years ago.

I think a conversation between you Christians and Jews is in order... because they have every intention of you serving them... there is no mistaking that. From everything i get out of the bible... they are pretty straight up about it. I do not understand how it is as clear as a bell to me, and you can't seem to see it.

wanda said...

Michzel... nature also provides mathematical evidence... everywhere you look. Nature is evident and nature goes out of her way to show you that it doesn't end... wordlessly.

If God is all knowing, why didn't he make "Thou shall not deceive" the first commandment, because that's the evil in the world... it's all deception. The bible is deceptive. This perfect God couldn't give a set of laws that were more clear... that couldn't be misinterpreted... and most of all broken? The Laws of nature don't need to be written down and all of creation are subject, right on down to rock and water. You can't break the laws of nature.

One more time... there are no original manuscripts of the bible. The only way you can say your mathematics work is if the very first manuscript proved out. It has been edited and revised a jillion times, for known and unknown reasons, but all to fit an agenda... your proof is just more apologetics.

Why don't we discuss the fact that religion has been an abject failure? It was washed in on a wave of bloodshed that lasted a few hundred years... in other words, people were smarter back then... evidently just as evil. It was necessary to dumb us down to accept this load of bi-bull. The trouble with religious people is you can barely tell the frauds from the genuinely idiotic. They all sound the same.

wanda said...

Michzel... you said: "I don't know where you got this from because Num. 23:9 says nothing of the sort. In fact the words look like a jumblia of unrelated scriptures."

I looked it up in both the Jewish torah and the King James bibles... they pretty much agree, and it does say exactly that. I will withhold what i think that implies for your reading comprehension skills and instead will post it for people to judge for themselves...


For from their beginning, I see them as mountain peaks, and I behold them as hills; it is a nation that will dwell alone, and will not be reckoned among the nations.


For from the top of the rocks I see him, and from the hills I behold him: lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations.

If you want to argue that nations is not gentiles... then tell me what nation the Jews belong to.

Unknown said...

Wanda, I found the article from which you quoted. Your opening words "The Bible says," precluded by supposition words not found in Num. 23:9 threw me off.

Notwithstanding as I've stated earlier, chasing interpretative comments is to nebulous to pursue in this venue.