Da Vinci Code – Is Any Of It Fact?

Opal

Premium Member
What an amazing take on Christian charity. I can't believe you are reporting about the charitable character of missionaries, while simultaneously slandering them with judgemental attitude and exploitation.

Why are you here? We are here to discuss what you cannot and will not ever see or understand.

Why are you unable to allow us the freedom of religion, to discuss uninterrupted by the folklore of what you choose to believe.

I have entertained your interruptions for quite a while, and your rudeness towards me incessantly.

Allow us to go where you cannot, uninterrupted by your threats of the coming of your beliefs.

I have asked this before.

You don’t have the right to stop us.

And you will not change us.
 

petosiris

Banned
One more thing, this whole bit about monotheism is nothing but yet another way to assert one's own God, or God's form.

I believe that God the Father doesn't have a form and has never been seen. But I believe that the Word of God has appeared to the patriarchs, the prophets and the nation in a divine form.

And Jesus Christ, though being in the form of a God, did not count equality with the one God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name <the name of the Father>, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
 

petosiris

Banned
Can we get back on track of original title?
The blood line of Jesus may still be possible by his brother Jude, quote:-
""Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of Jude, who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jude,_brother_of_Jesus

Eusebius' Church History 3.20

1. Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of Jude, who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh.

2. Information was given that they belonged to the family of David, and they were brought to the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For Domitian feared the coming of Christ as Herod also had feared it. And he asked them if they were descendants of David, and they confessed that they were. Then he asked them how much property they had, or how much money they owned. And both of them answered that they had only nine thousand denarii, half of which belonged to each of them.

4. And this property did not consist of silver, but of a piece of land which contained only thirty-nine acres, and from which they raised their taxes and supported themselves by their own labor.

5. Then they showed their hands, exhibiting the hardness of their bodies and the callousness produced upon their hands by continuous toil as evidence of their own labor.

6. And when they were asked concerning Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it was and where and when it was to appear, they answered that it was not a temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but a heavenly and angelic one, which would appear at the end of the world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and to give unto every one according to his works.

7. Upon hearing this, Domitian did not pass judgment against them, but, despising them as of no account, he let them go, and by a decree put a stop to the persecution of the Church.

8. But when they were released they ruled the churches because they were witnesses and were also relatives of the Lord. And peace being established, they lived until the time of Trajan. These things are related by Hegesippus.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm
 

petosiris

Banned
Eusebius' Church History 3.32

5. The same historian <Hegesippus the Nazarene> says that there were also others, descended from one of the so-called brothers of the Saviour, whose name was Judas, who, after they had borne testimony before Domitian, as has been already recorded, in behalf of faith in Christ, lived until the same reign.

6. He writes as follows: They came, therefore, and took the lead of every church as witnesses and as relatives of the Lord. And profound peace being established in every church, they remained until the reign of the Emperor Trajan, and until the above-mentioned Symeon, son of Clopas, an uncle of the Lord, was informed against by the heretics, and was himself in like manner accused for the same cause before the governor Atticus. And after being tortured for many days he suffered martyrdom, and all, including even the proconsul, marveled that, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, he could endure so much. And orders were given that he should be crucified.

7. In addition to these things the same man, while recounting the events of that period, records that the Church up to that time had remained a pure and uncorrupted virgin, since, if there were any that attempted to corrupt the sound norm of the preaching of salvation, they lay until then concealed in obscure darkness.

8. But when the sacred college of apostles had suffered death in various forms, and the generation of those that had been deemed worthy to hear the inspired wisdom with their own ears had passed away, then the league of godless error took its rise as a result of the folly of heretical teachers, who, because none of the apostles was still living, attempted henceforth, with a bold face, to proclaim, in opposition to the preaching of the truth, the 'knowledge which is falsely so-called.'
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm
 

petosiris

Banned
I don't use evil beings to explain it. More like a natural calamity that caused us to lose our way.

So you agree with their opponents that the God above whom there is no other God created the universe by his Word and Spirit, and that he gave the freedom of will to angels and humans to choose good or evil?
 

david starling

Well-known member
So you agree with their opponents that the God above whom there is no other God created the universe by his Word and Spirit, and that he gave the freedom of will to angels and humans to choose good or evil?

Does God send calamities, or create conditions under which they can occur?
 

Monk

Premium Member
A half brother.

Do we know where the line goes?
Hi Opal,
I'm unsure if a half brother or full one, indeed there seems a whole bunch of alleged brothers and sisters, in order of age, i have no idea?
So was it an Immaculate Conception for all of them or only Jesus?
Quote below:-
The identity of James, Jude and Simon

James is without doubt the Bishop of Jerusalem (Acts 12:17, 15:13, 21:18; Galatians 1:19; 2:9-12) and the author of the first Catholic Epistle. His identity with James the Less (Mark 15:40) and the Apostle James, the son of Alpheus (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18), although contested by many Protestant critics, may also be considered as certain. There is no reasonable doubt that in Galatians 1:19: "But other of the apostles [besides Cephas] I saw none, saving James the brother of the Lord", St. Paul represents James as a member of the Apostolic college. The purpose for which the statement is made, makes it clear that the "apostles" is to be taken strictly to designate the Twelve, and its truthfulness demands that the clause "saving James" be understood to mean, that in addition to Cephas, St. Paul saw another Apostle, "James the brother of the Lord" (cf. Acts 9:27). Besides, the prominence and authority of James among the Apostles (Acts 15:13; Galatians 2:9; in the latter text he is even named before Cephas) could have belonged only to one of their number. Now there were only two Apostles named James: James the son of Zebedee, and James the son of Alpheus (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13). The former is out of the question, since he was dead at the time of the events to which Acts 15:6 ssq., and Galatians 2:9-12 refer (cf. Acts 12:2). James "the brother of the Lord" is therefore one with James the son of Alpheus, and consequently with James the Less, the identity of these two being generally conceded. Again, on comparing John 19:25 with Matthew 27:56, and Mark 15:40 (cf. Mark 15:47; 16:1), we find that Mary of Cleophas, or more correctly Clopas (Klopas), the sister of Mary the Mother of Christ, is the same as Mary the mother of James the Less and of Joseph, or Joses. As married women are not distinguished by the addition of their father's name, Mary of Clopas must be the wife of Clopas, and not his daughter, as has been maintained. Moreover, the names of her sons and the order in which they are given, no doubt the order of seniority, warrant us in identifying these sons with James and Joseph, or Joses, the "brethren" of the Lord. The existence among the early followers of Christ of two sets of brothers having the same names in the order of age, is not likely, and cannot be assumed without proof. Once this identity is conceded, the conclusion cannot well be avoided that Clopas and Alpheus are one person, even if the two names are quite distinct. It is, however, highly probable, and commonly admitted, that Clopas and Alpheus are merely different transcriptions of the same Aramaic word Halphai. James and Joseph the "brethren" of the Lord are thus the sons of Alpheus.
Of Joseph nothing further is known. Jude is the writer of the last of the Catholic Epistles (Jude 1). He is with good reason identified by Catholic commentators with the "Judas Jacobi" ("Jude the brother of James" in the Douay Version) of Luke 6:16 and Acts 1:13, otherwise known as Thaddeus (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18). It is quite in accordance with Greek custom for a man to be distinguished by the addition of his brother's name instead of his father's, when the brother was better known. That such was the case with Jude is inferred from the title "the brother of James", by which he designates himself in his Epistle. About Simon nothing certain can be stated. He is identified by most commentators with the Symeon, or Simon, who, according to Hegesippus, was a son of Clopas, and succeeded James as Bishop of Jerusalem. Some identify him with the Apostle Simon the Cananean (Matthew 10:4; Mark 3:18) or the Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). The grouping together of James, Jude or Thaddeus, and Simon, after the other Apostles, Judas Iscariot excepted, in the lists of the Apostles, (Matthew 10:4-5; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) lends some probability to this view, as it seems to indicate some sort of connexion between the three. Be this as it may, it is certain that at least two of the "brethren" of Christ were among the Apostles. This is clearly implied in 1 Corinthians 9:5: "Have we not the power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?" The mention of Cephas at the end indicates that St. Paul, after speaking of the Apostles in general, calls special attention to the more prominent ones, the "brethren" of the Lord and Cephas. The objection that no "brethren" of the Lord could have been members of the Apostolic college, because six months before Christ's death they did not believe in Him (John 7:3-5), rests on a misunderstanding of the text. His "brethren" believed in his miraculous power, and urged him to manifest it to the world. Their unbelief was therefore relative. It was not a want of belief in His Messiahship, but a false conception of it. They had not yet rid themselves of the Jewish idea of a Messiah who would be a temporal ruler. We meet with this idea among the Apostles as late as the day of the Ascension (Acts 1:6). In any case the expression "his brethren" does not necessarily include each and every "brother", whenever it occurs. This last remark also sufficiently answers the difficulty in Acts 1:13-14, where, it is said, a clear distinction is made between the Apostles and the "brethren" of the Lord.
The exact nature of the relationship between the Saviour and his "brethren"

The texts cited at the beginning of this article show beyond a doubt that there existed a real and near kinship between Jesus and His "brethren". But as "brethren" (or "brother") is applied to step-brothers as well as to brothers by blood, and in Scriptural, and Semitic use generally, is often loosely extended to all near, or even distant, relatives (Genesis 13:8, 14:14-16; Leviticus 10:4; 1 Chronicles 15:5-10, 23:21-22), the word furnishes no certain indication of the exact nature of the relationship. Some ancient heretics, like Helvidius and the Antidicomarianites, maintained that the "brethren" of Jesus were His uterine brothers the sons of Joseph and Mary. This opinion has been revived in modern times, and is now adopted by most of the Protestant exegetes. On the orthodox side two views have long been current. The majority of the Greek Fathers and Greek writers, influenced, it seems, by the legendary tales of apocryphal gospels, considered the "brethren" of the Lord as sons of St. Joseph by a first marriage. The Latins, on the contrary, with few exceptions (St. Ambrose, St. Hilary, and St. Gregory of Tours among the Fathers), hold that they were the Lord's cousins. That they were not the sons of Joseph and Mary is proved by the following reasons, leaving out of consideration the great antiquity of the belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary. It is highly significant that throughout the New Testament Mary appears as the Mother of Jesus and of Jesus alone. This is the more remarkable as she is repeatedly mentioned in connexion with her supposed sons, and, in some cases at least, it would have been quite natural to call them her sons (cf. Matthew 12:46; Mark 3:31; Luke 8:19; Acts 1:14). Again, Mary's annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem (Luke 2:41) is quite incredible, except on the supposition that she bore no other children besides Jesus. Is it likely that she could have made the journey regularly, at a time when the burden of child-bearing and the care of an increasing number of small children (she would be the mother of at least four other sons and of several daughters, cf Matthew 13:56) would be pressing heavily upon her? A further proof is the fact that at His death Jesus recommended His mother to St. John. Is not His solicitude for her in His dying hour a sign that she would be left with no one whose duty it would be to care for her? And why recommend her to an outsider if she had other sons? Since there was no estrangement between Him and His "brethren", or between them and Mary, no plausible argument is confirmed by the words with which he recommends her: ide ho uios sou, with the article before uios (son); had there been others sons, ide uios sou, without the article, would have been the proper expression.
The decisive proof, however, is that the father and mother of at least two of these "brethren" are known to us. James and Joseph, or Joses, are, as we have seen, the sons of Alpheus, or Clopas, and of Mary, the sister of Mary the Mother of Jesus, and all agree that if these are not brothers of the Saviour, the others are not. This last argument disposes also of the theory that the "brethren" of the Lord were the sons of St. Joseph by a former marriage. They are then neither the brothers nor the step-brothers of the Lord. James, Joseph, and Jude are undoubtedly His cousins. If Simon is the same as the Symeon of Hegesippus, he also is a cousin, since this writer expressly states that he was the son of Clopas the uncle of the Lord, and the latter's cousin. But whether they were cousins on their father's or mother's side, whether cousins by blood or merely by marriage, cannot be determined with certainty. Mary of Clopas is indeed called the "sister" of the Blessed Virgin (John 19:25), but it is uncertain whether "sister" here means a true sister or a sister-in-law. Hegesippus calls Clopas the brother of St. Joseph. This would favour the view that Mary of Clopas was only the sister-in-law of the Blessed Virgin, unless it be true, as stated in the manuscripts of the Peshitta version, that Joseph and Clopas married sisters. The relationship of the other "brethren" may have been more distant than that of the above named four.
The chief objection against the Catholic position is taken from Matt 1:25: "He [Joseph] knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son"; and from Luke 2:7: "And she brought forth her firstborn son". Hence, it is argued, Mary must have born other children. "Firstborn" (prototokos), however, does not necessarily connote that other children were born afterwards. This is evident from Luke 2:23, and Ex 13:2-12 (cf. Greek text) to which Luke refers. "Opening the womb" is there given as the equivalent of "firstborn" (prototokos). An only child was thus no less "firstborn" than the first of many. Neither do the words "he knew her not till she brought forth" imply, as St. Jerome proves conclusively against Helvidius from parallel examples, that he knew her afterwards. The meaning of both expressions becomes clear, if they are considered in connexion with the virginal birth related by the two Evangelists.



???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
 

petosiris

Banned
I'm unsure if a half brother or full one, indeed there seems a whole bunch of alleged brothers and sisters, in order of age, i have no idea?
So was it an Immaculate Conception for all of them or only Jesus?

The Bible suggests that they are later-born brothers according to the law and half-brothers genetically. No one believes they were virginally begotten. It never says that they were cousins, or brothers from a previous marriage. Those are later traditions that contradict the inspired scriptures.
 

petosiris

Banned
Are there people now who are directly of the bloodline of Mary and Joseph? That would be quite the family tree!

What do you think about the following passage from the Gospel?

''Then his mother and his brothers came to him, but they could not reach him because of the crowd. And he was told, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you.” But he answered them, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.”'' - Luke 8
 

Monk

Premium Member
I was trained as an investigator of apparitions that Prophets start a religion from, there are so many explanations, is it just a normal ghost or something else?
If i had been an investigator earlier, there is only one that i would have wanted to investigate, being Our Lady of Zeitoun.
Sadly i was only 12 at the time!
We can see that one, not subject to hearsay, but whatever it was, it would need trained investigators, who wasn't devout Christians!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Zeitoun
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I believe that God the Father doesn't have a form
i.e.
is formless :smile:

He also says that true worshippers worship the only God,

who is incorporeal,


in the Holy Spirit and the Truth,
not with forms and idols.

you also said :smile:
I don't understand.

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob


doesn't have a form.

obviously

The immaterial or formless realm aka arupa loka
includes four planes
into which beings are born

as a result of attaining the Four Formless Jhana arūpadhyānas.:smile:
The inhabitants of these realms are possessed entirely of mind.

Having no physical form or location
they are unable to hear Dhamma teachings.



XBqb242arOPFjWk0quFqxvfZPInloPr4A4zjrKDIJk6HpfDDzdnlBh6B52na_3gfILiq1m9aER3sH8sLn7BQ2JVm_RRd77jrMSxVZjNv9jrIgYrTQt93bCy1



wheel-of-life-5-728.jpg
 

leomoon

Well-known member
I was trained as an investigator of apparitions that Prophets start a religion from, there are so many explanations, is it just a normal ghost or something else?
If i had been an investigator earlier, there is only one that i would have wanted to investigate, being Our Lady of Zeitoun.
Sadly i was only 12 at the time!
We can see that one, not subject to hearsay, but whatever it was, it would need trained investigators, who wasn't devout Christians!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Zeitoun


Interesting! Although I don't have time to participate here, this quote caught my eye today.


Here is a little bit I kept from a book I started but didn't finish:






from Debra's book not just finished: - " In Egypt there were also thousands of eye witnesses to the Lady atop the Coptic Church in Zeitoun near Cairo and which started a year long precession of believers and curiosity seekers to the church in hopes of seeing “the Lady” and the doves. They were always a mixed crowd of Coptic orthodox Christians along with the majority of Muslim citizens including President Nassar who saw the Lady and the doves alit on the church. There is also documentation, beyond the eye witnesses written accounts, such as video in the form of Super 8 movie tape."

Summing Up:

"It is precisely because of this variable, that most of the eye witnesses including the original mechanic across the street from the church who first saw the lady thinking she was suicidal, and yelled, “Lady don’t jump Lady” thinking she was a suicidal nun perhaps; in the main were all Muslims and non-familiar with the intricacies of church doctrine and icons for the most part. I’ve taken note of the horror of warfare and the fact that the Egyptian 6 Day War with Israel had just ended on June 11th, 1967. Somehow to my way of thinking this fact should not be ignored and many others I’m sure have likewise wondered if somehow it’s connected to the Lady’s mission of showing this phenomenon. Or perhaps it’s our own higher spiritual selves which Carl Jung often talked about which exists deep inside all of us, usually not consciously tapped. Could this explain all of these sightings including that of the Dancing Sun in Fatima? That collectively, mankind taps into a higher self which now and then seems to make itself known to us."
 

petosiris

Banned
Or maybe Satan disguises himself as the Lady to lead people astray to idolatry, and God is testing the faithfulness of the Christians?

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. - Deut. 13 ESV
 
Top