Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Magick & Occult Rituals
The New Pope and Olives
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BubbuClinton" data-source="post: 25492" data-attributes="member: 395"><p><strong>Re: The New Pope and Olives</strong></p><p></p><p>The Bible issue is probably OT a little bit, but I fundamentally agree you about its alteration over time. I like to read the translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other Nostic writings just to compare what different people were thinking at the time. The Bible was compiled of course during the Council of Nicaea and with the input Roman Emperor Constantine who many believe to be the actual first Pope. Before then there were smaller groups of church and no formal control center. The church at that time kinda picked and chose writings that fit their view at the time (340A.D or so) of theology. There were many books, there were quoted by Christ in the Gospel books, not included in the Bible, like the book of Enoch and such. They actually had a council to decide on the very nature of god and came up with the Apostolic creed and stuff. Also the bible the records used at the time were, at best, copies of copies of original documents. Many of them had already been translated into various languages and may have lost some of the subtile meanings from the original. Also many of the older writings like the gospel themselves were actually oral traditions that were finally written down a hundred years or so after the death of Christ. I always wondered how they attributed them to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. They also didn't put the books in chronological order. The book of revelations was actually written well before half o f the New Testament.</p><p> </p><p> Neverthelest there is still good stuff in there. It just takes a little gleaning and research to figure out all of the lost little pieces.</p><p> </p><p>One thing to consider about Malachy is that many believe that his writings may have have a composite of a group of writers, similar to the writers of the book of Isaiah in the Old testament. They weren't being evil, it was a common practice back then to use someone else's name when writing stuff like this. I haven't really looked deep into Malachy. It was just topical with the new Pope and all.</p><p> </p><p>Thanks,</p><p> </p><p>Bubbu</p><p>________________________</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BubbuClinton, post: 25492, member: 395"] [b]Re: The New Pope and Olives[/b] The Bible issue is probably OT a little bit, but I fundamentally agree you about its alteration over time. I like to read the translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other Nostic writings just to compare what different people were thinking at the time. The Bible was compiled of course during the Council of Nicaea and with the input Roman Emperor Constantine who many believe to be the actual first Pope. Before then there were smaller groups of church and no formal control center. The church at that time kinda picked and chose writings that fit their view at the time (340A.D or so) of theology. There were many books, there were quoted by Christ in the Gospel books, not included in the Bible, like the book of Enoch and such. They actually had a council to decide on the very nature of god and came up with the Apostolic creed and stuff. Also the bible the records used at the time were, at best, copies of copies of original documents. Many of them had already been translated into various languages and may have lost some of the subtile meanings from the original. Also many of the older writings like the gospel themselves were actually oral traditions that were finally written down a hundred years or so after the death of Christ. I always wondered how they attributed them to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. They also didn't put the books in chronological order. The book of revelations was actually written well before half o f the New Testament. Neverthelest there is still good stuff in there. It just takes a little gleaning and research to figure out all of the lost little pieces. One thing to consider about Malachy is that many believe that his writings may have have a composite of a group of writers, similar to the writers of the book of Isaiah in the Old testament. They weren't being evil, it was a common practice back then to use someone else's name when writing stuff like this. I haven't really looked deep into Malachy. It was just topical with the new Pope and all. Thanks, Bubbu ________________________ [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Magick & Occult Rituals
The New Pope and Olives
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top