- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 26
have an open mind before watching this documentary film.
The Book of Enoch Banned From the Bible
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbtKUb4bul4
Banned from the Bible: Secrets of the Apostles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnO8kR1RZNw
nagtataka ako dun sa humabol kay jesus sa bandang huli.
yung young man na wearing almost nothing but linen garment, ran naked after jesus.
after ng verse na yan wala na.
sabi ko aba putol ang story ah.
the secret gospel of mark completes this narrative.
yung karugtong nung verse na yun makikita sa secret gospel of mark.
in that secret gospel that man is named as lazarus.
siya yung lazarus na binuhay ni jesus.
wherein one of the females said , the man who thou lovest is dead.
sagot ni jesus he's just sleeping. alam ng lahat, kahit tayo na patay na talaga.
jesus just says it that way kasi walang imposible sa kanya na pati patay kaya buhayin. pero for the sake sa human logic na siguro he used the term sleeping.
ganun din naman ginamit niyang term dun sa isa pang babae na binuhay niya eh.
balik sa bakit ginawang secret to, it's because kasama sa text na yan na magkasama AT magkatabi humiga si jesus at yang young man na halos hubo't hubad. nowhere in the approved and apocryphal gospels outright confirms na gay,bakla si hesus because he is not. ginawang secret eto kasi there were many early heretics who were using this para magamit nila to twist the scriptures para maipasok ang homosexuality(which for me is okay) and it's sin(abnormal sex) as okay sa christianity.
“And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God."
yan ang tinitwist nila.
the topic of homesexuality and it's abnormal sex is taboo in early christian times as it is now. pero the jews and those who converted to christianity and the rest like the gentiles,etc were not ignorant to this topic kasi panahon pa sa sodom and gomorrah existent na ang problem na yan at mas malala pa sa present time nila kasi they were under roman rule at napaka bulgar ng mga romans pagdating sa sex. kung nanonood kayo ng spartacus yung sa hbo channel, which by the way malupet na tv show to ; ganun na ganun ka brutal mga romans pagdating sa sex na pasok lahat from homosex,pedophilia,orgies etc etc
the man sitting on jesus tomb on that morning siya rin po yun, si lazarus.
another mystery is yung disciple na laging nirerefer as the "disciple whom jesus loved." tradition lang nagsasabi na the being referred to is john.
pero marami-rami na ring research na nagsasabing it's not john.
it's not peter kasi he asked jesus while the beloved disciple was leaning on jesus' bosom sa last supper.
it's not andrew kasi he was mentioned by name alongwith the beloved disciple later on.
there's one theory na it could even be judas,kasi kilala siya ng priest kaya siya lang pinapasok.they attribute this to him being already known to that the priest and specifically that priest kasi he sold jesus to them eh. pero that's the only thing the judas is the beloved disciple theory has going.
it's not mary magdalene, kasi it would just confuse the readers more on who this mystery person is if the author uses "he,him,his" used for man when he meant a woman. jesus used the word "son" when he said to his mother and the beloved disciple present sa crucifixion. mother behold thy son. son behold thy mother.so obvious na lalake talaga ang "beloved disciple".
wala nang ibang lalake present dun kasi ang nabanggit lang dun is mama mary,mary(mama mary's sister,wife ni clophas na brother ni papa joseph) and mary magdalene(the reformed prostitute). actually mary magdalene held high esteem sa early christians kaysa kay mama mary. na relegate lang siya to almost unimportant status dahil the way the church handled this topic kasi they always emphasized her as a prostitute when in fact pinatawad na siya ni hesus at nag bagong buhay na ang babae.even sa apocryphal books galit ang mga disciples sa kanya, sa inggit at selos dahil tingin nila mas importante kay jesus ang isang babae. these books were banned kasi pati mga jews sa panahon na yun ayaw sa gender equality issues. ibang topic na yan.
the most probable and biblical based not tradition based answer to that question is si lazarus ulit.
he is the only person named as loved by jesus.
after he was raised, last mention of him was he and jesus were both reclining at the table to eat.
after that greatest miracle wala nang mention sa person whom jesus loved at bigla na lang lilitaw ang disciple whom jesus loved.
this one explains in detail as to why it is lazarus whom jesus loved.
http://thedisciplewhomjesuslov…..-ebook.pdf
other things many of us don't know but can be proven by facts found in the bible if only we open our eyes.
1. mary and joseph are cousins. may proof,research niyo lang.
may contradiction sa genealogy kasi one gives the natural descent, the other yung legal descent. it starts from hele.
yung law is if the husband dies, the wife cannot marry another man except the husband's brother. ang purpose ng law was para may continuation sa lineage,sa apelyido kumbaga.
God did not forbid cousin marriages. isaac and rachel were cousins, may blessing from God yan. there are many other cousin marriages mentioned sa bible.
yung basis for those who say bawal ang cousins is yung line na about relatives.
they would have been right because relatives would mean all,lahat.
but then God wouldn't contradict himself by giving that law yet break it by giving His blessing like for example kay isaac and rachel.
and also the law didn't end by saying bawal lahat ng relatives.
if he meant na bawal lahat ng relatives, there is no need to list down ang bawal like:
mother and son, father and daughter
grandfather and grand daughter, grandmother and grand son
etc etc
pero wala ang cousins.
also sa roman catholic church's early times hindi bawal ang cousin marriage, saka lang binawal yan later on.
2. mary was a virgin when he received christ as her son. but then later on may earthly anak na siya from joseph. yun ang minention nung mga tao to jesus how about your brother and sisters, wherein if pilosopo ang nagbabasa they might understand it as jesus rejecting his blood brothers and sisters which in fact he isn't. he merely is saying na his brothers and sisters are those who have faith in him. he didn't deny na may mga kapatid siya.
of course kahit kung kayo si joseph, you would of course consummate your marriage. as if that's not within the possible realms. there is no need for mary to be imagined as forever virgin kasi may obligation din siya sa husband niya.
as if her status is diminished porke't she was not a virgin anymore.
what's important is she was a virgin when she received christ.
kaya there is no need to deny na jesus had earthly blood brothers and sisters.
3. acts of peter
one of the earliest sa mga apocrypha. dito kinuha ang tradition na peter was crucified upside down. his reasoning was he wasn't worthy of being crucified the same way as jesus.
among the apocrypha this one makes a mark sa akin because unlike the rest na parang naging magician si jesus or maraming gnostic "secret teaching" "upper level learning", ito parang pareho lang sa mga officially acknowledged na new testament books.
the most touching episode is again yung tradition kung saan kinuha ang quo vadis?
paalis ng rome si peter kasi alam niyang maiexecute lang siya.
nagpakita sa kanya si jesus and he aske him lord wherefore art thou going?(quo vadis)
jesus said to him to rome.
peter asked him are you going there to be crucified again?
jesus said yes, peter i am.
alam natin lahat na nabahag ang buntot ni peter three times noon, kahit tayo in his shoes that time will do the same and save our own skins.
seeing that jesus will go through all that suffering again and be crucified twice, i know he said to himself i can never allow myself to let the Lord go through all that again.i have failed him before, i will not fail him again.
so ayun, bumalik siya sa rome to receive his fate.
when i read that napa-iyak ako.kasi lahat tayo dumaan na rin sa ganyan na nag give up kay Lord and wants another chance to prove ourselves to Him.
napakagandang gospel nitong acts of peter na to, binanned lang ng early church.
their reason for banning was because unlike sa peter ng canonical gospels na abstaining from sex is a choice, ang peter dito gives importance to chastity.
maraming bagong roman converts nagrereklamo dahil dahil sa teachings na to ni peter ayaw na ng kanilang mga asawa makipagtalik sa kanila.
by the way acts of peter consists mostly of contest ni peter versus simon magus, yung simon na mentioned sa official gospels yung gusto bilhin ang karunungan para makabigay din ng holy spirit by laying hands.
matutuwa kayo sa contest kasi uutusan ni simon ang aso magsalita, si peter naman yung suckling baby pinagsalita.
then final contest was power to take life and power to bring back to life, sa karunungan alam natin kung saan dito ang mas mataas na antas na power.
that confirms who won.
The Book of Enoch Banned From the Bible
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbtKUb4bul4
Banned from the Bible: Secrets of the Apostles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnO8kR1RZNw
nagtataka ako dun sa humabol kay jesus sa bandang huli.
yung young man na wearing almost nothing but linen garment, ran naked after jesus.
after ng verse na yan wala na.
sabi ko aba putol ang story ah.
the secret gospel of mark completes this narrative.
yung karugtong nung verse na yun makikita sa secret gospel of mark.
in that secret gospel that man is named as lazarus.
siya yung lazarus na binuhay ni jesus.
wherein one of the females said , the man who thou lovest is dead.
sagot ni jesus he's just sleeping. alam ng lahat, kahit tayo na patay na talaga.
jesus just says it that way kasi walang imposible sa kanya na pati patay kaya buhayin. pero for the sake sa human logic na siguro he used the term sleeping.
ganun din naman ginamit niyang term dun sa isa pang babae na binuhay niya eh.
balik sa bakit ginawang secret to, it's because kasama sa text na yan na magkasama AT magkatabi humiga si jesus at yang young man na halos hubo't hubad. nowhere in the approved and apocryphal gospels outright confirms na gay,bakla si hesus because he is not. ginawang secret eto kasi there were many early heretics who were using this para magamit nila to twist the scriptures para maipasok ang homosexuality(which for me is okay) and it's sin(abnormal sex) as okay sa christianity.
“And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God."
yan ang tinitwist nila.
the topic of homesexuality and it's abnormal sex is taboo in early christian times as it is now. pero the jews and those who converted to christianity and the rest like the gentiles,etc were not ignorant to this topic kasi panahon pa sa sodom and gomorrah existent na ang problem na yan at mas malala pa sa present time nila kasi they were under roman rule at napaka bulgar ng mga romans pagdating sa sex. kung nanonood kayo ng spartacus yung sa hbo channel, which by the way malupet na tv show to ; ganun na ganun ka brutal mga romans pagdating sa sex na pasok lahat from homosex,pedophilia,orgies etc etc
the man sitting on jesus tomb on that morning siya rin po yun, si lazarus.
another mystery is yung disciple na laging nirerefer as the "disciple whom jesus loved." tradition lang nagsasabi na the being referred to is john.
pero marami-rami na ring research na nagsasabing it's not john.
it's not peter kasi he asked jesus while the beloved disciple was leaning on jesus' bosom sa last supper.
it's not andrew kasi he was mentioned by name alongwith the beloved disciple later on.
there's one theory na it could even be judas,kasi kilala siya ng priest kaya siya lang pinapasok.they attribute this to him being already known to that the priest and specifically that priest kasi he sold jesus to them eh. pero that's the only thing the judas is the beloved disciple theory has going.
it's not mary magdalene, kasi it would just confuse the readers more on who this mystery person is if the author uses "he,him,his" used for man when he meant a woman. jesus used the word "son" when he said to his mother and the beloved disciple present sa crucifixion. mother behold thy son. son behold thy mother.so obvious na lalake talaga ang "beloved disciple".
wala nang ibang lalake present dun kasi ang nabanggit lang dun is mama mary,mary(mama mary's sister,wife ni clophas na brother ni papa joseph) and mary magdalene(the reformed prostitute). actually mary magdalene held high esteem sa early christians kaysa kay mama mary. na relegate lang siya to almost unimportant status dahil the way the church handled this topic kasi they always emphasized her as a prostitute when in fact pinatawad na siya ni hesus at nag bagong buhay na ang babae.even sa apocryphal books galit ang mga disciples sa kanya, sa inggit at selos dahil tingin nila mas importante kay jesus ang isang babae. these books were banned kasi pati mga jews sa panahon na yun ayaw sa gender equality issues. ibang topic na yan.
the most probable and biblical based not tradition based answer to that question is si lazarus ulit.
he is the only person named as loved by jesus.
after he was raised, last mention of him was he and jesus were both reclining at the table to eat.
after that greatest miracle wala nang mention sa person whom jesus loved at bigla na lang lilitaw ang disciple whom jesus loved.
this one explains in detail as to why it is lazarus whom jesus loved.
http://thedisciplewhomjesuslov…..-ebook.pdf
other things many of us don't know but can be proven by facts found in the bible if only we open our eyes.
1. mary and joseph are cousins. may proof,research niyo lang.
may contradiction sa genealogy kasi one gives the natural descent, the other yung legal descent. it starts from hele.
yung law is if the husband dies, the wife cannot marry another man except the husband's brother. ang purpose ng law was para may continuation sa lineage,sa apelyido kumbaga.
God did not forbid cousin marriages. isaac and rachel were cousins, may blessing from God yan. there are many other cousin marriages mentioned sa bible.
yung basis for those who say bawal ang cousins is yung line na about relatives.
they would have been right because relatives would mean all,lahat.
but then God wouldn't contradict himself by giving that law yet break it by giving His blessing like for example kay isaac and rachel.
and also the law didn't end by saying bawal lahat ng relatives.
if he meant na bawal lahat ng relatives, there is no need to list down ang bawal like:
mother and son, father and daughter
grandfather and grand daughter, grandmother and grand son
etc etc
pero wala ang cousins.
also sa roman catholic church's early times hindi bawal ang cousin marriage, saka lang binawal yan later on.
2. mary was a virgin when he received christ as her son. but then later on may earthly anak na siya from joseph. yun ang minention nung mga tao to jesus how about your brother and sisters, wherein if pilosopo ang nagbabasa they might understand it as jesus rejecting his blood brothers and sisters which in fact he isn't. he merely is saying na his brothers and sisters are those who have faith in him. he didn't deny na may mga kapatid siya.
of course kahit kung kayo si joseph, you would of course consummate your marriage. as if that's not within the possible realms. there is no need for mary to be imagined as forever virgin kasi may obligation din siya sa husband niya.
as if her status is diminished porke't she was not a virgin anymore.
what's important is she was a virgin when she received christ.
kaya there is no need to deny na jesus had earthly blood brothers and sisters.
3. acts of peter
one of the earliest sa mga apocrypha. dito kinuha ang tradition na peter was crucified upside down. his reasoning was he wasn't worthy of being crucified the same way as jesus.
among the apocrypha this one makes a mark sa akin because unlike the rest na parang naging magician si jesus or maraming gnostic "secret teaching" "upper level learning", ito parang pareho lang sa mga officially acknowledged na new testament books.
the most touching episode is again yung tradition kung saan kinuha ang quo vadis?
paalis ng rome si peter kasi alam niyang maiexecute lang siya.
nagpakita sa kanya si jesus and he aske him lord wherefore art thou going?(quo vadis)
jesus said to him to rome.
peter asked him are you going there to be crucified again?
jesus said yes, peter i am.
alam natin lahat na nabahag ang buntot ni peter three times noon, kahit tayo in his shoes that time will do the same and save our own skins.
seeing that jesus will go through all that suffering again and be crucified twice, i know he said to himself i can never allow myself to let the Lord go through all that again.i have failed him before, i will not fail him again.
so ayun, bumalik siya sa rome to receive his fate.
when i read that napa-iyak ako.kasi lahat tayo dumaan na rin sa ganyan na nag give up kay Lord and wants another chance to prove ourselves to Him.
napakagandang gospel nitong acts of peter na to, binanned lang ng early church.
their reason for banning was because unlike sa peter ng canonical gospels na abstaining from sex is a choice, ang peter dito gives importance to chastity.
maraming bagong roman converts nagrereklamo dahil dahil sa teachings na to ni peter ayaw na ng kanilang mga asawa makipagtalik sa kanila.
by the way acts of peter consists mostly of contest ni peter versus simon magus, yung simon na mentioned sa official gospels yung gusto bilhin ang karunungan para makabigay din ng holy spirit by laying hands.
matutuwa kayo sa contest kasi uutusan ni simon ang aso magsalita, si peter naman yung suckling baby pinagsalita.
then final contest was power to take life and power to bring back to life, sa karunungan alam natin kung saan dito ang mas mataas na antas na power.
that confirms who won.
