bloodline 2008 film

[h.uriahr]

Oh yeah and remember that ultra cool and so super true documentary on the blair witch?

 

yeah, making your own documentary about a subject that is more likely to get you laughed at than applauded is the epitome of success. how do you propose i get parchment (and write on it without it falling apart) from the dates shown in the video?

 

berenger sauniere died in 1917 and assuming he placed the bottles near the end of his life, the paper is 91 years old; is that long enough for it to deteriorate? i'm not sure. the documentary itself said the same thing you would "it's unprofessional" when honestly who cares? this guy was searching for this stuff on his own, out of a van parked in the middle of nowhere.

 

If I'm not mistaken, the website that you referenced charged a fee for the video. Obviously if 300 million people laugh at you all you need is 1 million people to applaud you and buy your bullshit off the internet to become a wealthy and fat indiana jones.

 

yeah, making your own documentary about a subject that is more likely to get you laughed at than applauded is the epitome of success. how do you propose i get parchment (and write on it without it falling apart) from the dates shown in the video?

 

berenger sauniere died in 1917 and assuming he placed the bottles near the end of his life, the paper is 91 years old; is that long enough for it to deteriorate? i'm not sure. the documentary itself said the same thing you would "it's unprofessional" when honestly who cares? this guy was searching for this stuff on his own, out of a van parked in the middle of nowhere.

 

FYI, I was demolitioning the back half of a house, for a remodel and I found a newspaper from 1953. Now I know it wasnt 100 yrs old but guess what, it was in shitty shape.

[h.uriahr]

There is absolutely no way whatsoever to prove or disprove that Jesus A) died on the cross didnt die on the cross C) married D) had kids E) didnt get married F) didnt have kids G) and for that matter you cannot prove nor disprove Jesus' existence.

 

You can completely debunk and tear apart christianity but then you have to do the same for Islam aswell. I think he is even mentioned in some scroll concerning his journey to India.

[mantis]

Oh yeah and remember that ultra cool and so super true documentary on the blair witch?

If I'm not mistaken, the website that you referenced charged a fee for the video. Obviously if 300 million people laugh at you all you need is 1 million people to applaud you and buy your bullshit off the internet to become a wealthy and fat indiana jones.

FYI, I was demolitioning the back half of a house, for a remodel and I found a newspaper from 1953. Now I know it wasnt 100 yrs old but guess what, it was in shitty shape.

 

the artifacts where from the time of jesus christ, good luck finding those.

[h.uriahr]

the artifacts where from the time of jesus christ, good luck finding those.

You are absolutely 100% correct. I stand in belief now. This documentary is IRREFUTABLE evidence that Jesus was married. Touche Mantis, you have won this battle. Obviously this fatass Indiana Jones has infact brought the ENTIRE Christian community to it's knees. Wowsers. You know let's just throw out the fact that the tomb hasnt been excavated....or the fact that they DONT test the ink....Look up the Hitler's Diary Hoax for that one...so with that said obviously you can tell that this is a real documentary and the evidence is irrefutable.

[Taoist81]

What makes you think he learned anything from the greeks, pagans and talmudic rabbis? It's rather obvious that he was learning about Judaism in his early years however there is alot of eastern philosophy in his teachings which makes me believe that he traveled around. There are alot of odd things in the bible especially when you look at some of the actual manuscripts. I think it was more of a reference, like an example, I dont think he was actually saying that the Samaritans were dogs. That, if memory serves is in one gospel, not the other three, which clearly shows conflict.

 

The fact that they were already teaching most of the things that Jesus taught before he came along suggests (admittedly, like everything to do with Jesus, without absolute proof) that he picked his teaching up from them. He likely got his fame from trying to lead a revolution against the Romans. But his teachings were already prevalent before he taught them.

The Samaritan comment was just a racist comment he supposedly made to a Samaritan woman. He simply (according to the text) shared the disdain for them that his Jewish brothers held. You may be right about it only being in Matthew. Anyway, he did seem to believe and teach some okay stuff. There is just nothing inherently special about what he taught according to the gospels unless you buy the sacrifice stuff.

[h.uriahr]

The fact that they were already teaching most of the things that Jesus taught before he came along suggests (admittedly, like everything to do with Jesus, without absolute proof) that he picked his teaching up from them. He likely got his fame from trying to lead a revolution against the Romans. But his teachings were already prevalent before he taught them.

The Samaritan comment was just a racist comment he supposedly made to a Samaritan woman. He simply (according to the text) shared the disdain for them that his Jewish brothers held. You may be right about it only being in Matthew. Anyway, he did seem to believe and teach some okay stuff. There is just nothing inherently special about what he taught according to the gospels unless you buy the sacrifice stuff.

Do you have any references for all that?

[h.uriahr]

The fact that they were already teaching most of the things that Jesus taught before he came along suggests (admittedly, like everything to do with Jesus, without absolute proof) that he picked his teaching up from them. He likely got his fame from trying to lead a revolution against the Romans. But his teachings were already prevalent before he taught them.

The Samaritan comment was just a racist comment he supposedly made to a Samaritan woman. He simply (according to the text) shared the disdain for them that his Jewish brothers held. You may be right about it only being in Matthew. Anyway, he did seem to believe and teach some okay stuff. There is just nothing inherently special about what he taught according to the gospels unless you buy the sacrifice stuff.

 

Why does it seem as though you are assaulting a belief in Jesus? I mean youre trying to pick him apart and make him into nothing and say he's racist? I'm not a christian so dont think I'm asking because of that but I never really understood why anybody even makes an attempt at converting someone else into their own religion and it looks as though that's where youre going

[Taoist81]

Do you have any references for all that?

 

A few examples:

Jesus is famous for his "love thy neighbor as thyself" But he was just quoting:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(Jewis...eviticus#19:18: "thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself:"

 

As for the Golden Rule (even ignoring the fact that most cultures had some form of it):

Among the Greeks:

"Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him." (Pittacus)

"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." (Thales)

"What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them." (Sextus the Pythagorean)

"Do not do to others what would anger you if done to you by others." (Isocrates)

"What thou avoidest suffering thyself seek not to impose on others." (Epictetus)

Some of these guys lived long before Jesus supposedly lived, some were contemporaries.

 

The reference to the dog comment was in Matthew, a reference to "his Jewish brothers" feelings can be seen both in his parable of the Good Samaritan (elucidating the fact that someone they thought of as "lesser" could be more loving than themselves) and by the reaction of the disciples in, for example, John chpt 4 when he is speaking in public to a Samaritan woman.

[Taoist81]

Why does it seem as though you are assaulting a belief in Jesus? I mean youre trying to pick him apart and make him into nothing and say he's racist? I'm not a christian so dont think I'm asking because of that but I never really understood why anybody even makes an attempt at converting someone else into their own religion and it looks as though that's where youre going

 

The "racist" stuff is not really intended to say he "was racist", after all he did have less racism than say the Pharisees of his day. And none of this is intended as an "assault". It is just that people seem to lift Jesus up on a pedestal as if he were somehow the supreme teacher, when very little if anything he taught was unique or original. Don't take this the wrong way, Jesus like all teacher/prophets was important in context and in the place and time that he (supposedly) existed (not to mention the special place he has in modern western mystic/magick practice), he just doesn't seem to have been any more important that any other teacher/prophet throughout history. If the Romans had adopted the Pythagorean religion of Apollonius of Tyana then we would be talking about what was so special about Apollonius. It is just a question, not an attack. The same can be said about most teachers (some more so) through history.

[h.uriahr]

A few examples:

Jesus is famous for his "love thy neighbor as thyself" But he was just quoting:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(Jewis...eviticus#19:18: "thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself:"

 

As for the Golden Rule (even ignoring the fact that most cultures had some form of it):

Among the Greeks:

"Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him." (Pittacus)

"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." (Thales)

"What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them." (Sextus the Pythagorean)

"Do not do to others what would anger you if done to you by others." (Isocrates)

"What thou avoidest suffering thyself seek not to impose on others." (Epictetus)

Some of these guys lived long before Jesus supposedly lived, some were contemporaries.

 

The reference to the dog comment was in Matthew, a reference to "his Jewish brothers" feelings can be seen both in his parable of the Good Samaritan (elucidating the fact that someone they thought of as "lesser" could be more loving than themselves) and by the reaction of the disciples in, for example, John chpt 4 when he is speaking in public to a Samaritan woman.

 

The problem isnt really with the english as it is with the thousands and thousands of scrolls or manuscripts that were found and strategically put together to form the bible. For example, the earliest manuscript of Revelations says that the number of the beast is 665. There's also a difference as to whether or not God begot Jesus literally or by way of " Today I have begotten thee". So was Jesus just a man and God found him good for a sacrifice or did the story go as it is mentioned in what we now know as the bible.

 

Also, all of your quotes up there differ completely from "Love one another as I have loved you". How so? Well seeing as how he loved man so much to go up on the cross I'd say that pretty much beats the hell out of all those teachings. Even if you dont believe that he was crucified, even if you only take one teaching from the bible, that one teaching can change lives drastically.

 

Treating your neighbor like you want to be treated is common sense. Loving everyone can be difficult. Especially in the world we live today.

 

 

The "racist" stuff is not really intended to say he "was racist", after all he did have less racism than say the Pharisees of his day. And none of this is intended as an "assault". It is just that people seem to lift Jesus up on a pedestal as if he were somehow the supreme teacher, when very little if anything he taught was unique or original. Don't take this the wrong way, Jesus like all teacher/prophets was important in context and in the place and time that he (supposedly) existed (not to mention the special place he has in modern western mystic/magick practice), he just doesn't seem to have been any more important that any other teacher/prophet throughout history. If the Romans had adopted the Pythagorean religion of Apollonius of Tyana then we would be talking about what was so special about Apollonius. It is just a question, not an attack. The same can be said about most teachers (some more so) through history.

 

I forgot about all the religouns that were formed because of all those teachers you mentioned. Good question. You dont get religion because of some philosophy or teaching, it takes more than that. If that were the case all it would take is a degree in philosophy and some teaching credentials and bam youre in bud.

 

Jesus, of course, learned the OT text and by his teaching you can see too that he studied books that mainstream christianity and judaism dont consider to be credible, like the book of enoch. His teachings also carry some eastern philosophy aswell.

[Taoist81]

The problem isnt really with the english as it is with the thousands and thousands of scrolls or manuscripts that were found and strategically put together to form the bible. For example, the earliest manuscript of Revelations says that the number of the beast is 665. There's also a difference as to whether or not God begot Jesus literally or by way of " Today I have begotten thee". So was Jesus just a man and God found him good for a sacrifice or did the story go as it is mentioned in what we now know as the bible.

True, it is hard to tell what was what since the Bible was just a hodgepodge of manuscripts written by who knows who. Two things though:

1st the oldest manuscripts found say 616, not 665. 2nd, does a God of love who makes all the rules really need his creation to beat and crucify someone (whether "good enough for a sacrifice" or "suicidal godman") in order to forgive? Do you require people to beat someone before you forgive them?

 

Also, all of your quotes up there differ completely from "Love one another as I have loved you". How so? Well seeing as how he loved man so much to go up on the cross I'd say that pretty much beats the hell out of all those teachings. Even if you dont believe that he was crucified, even if you only take one teaching from the bible, that one teaching can change lives drastically.

 

Again, this interpretation is dependant on the belief that he needed to die as a sacrifice. If he didn't, then the teaching "Love one another as I have loved you", which was given just after he "the Master" had served them by washing their feet, would just be a teaching of "Be humble", "serve one another" etc. which was not original and was consistent with his other teachings.

 

Treating your neighbor like you want to be treated is common sense. Loving everyone can be difficult. Especially in the world we live today.

I forgot about all the religouns that were formed because of all those teachers you mentioned. Good question. You dont get religion because of some philosophy or teaching, it takes more than that. If that were the case all it would take is a degree in philosophy and some teaching credentials and bam youre in bud.

 

The golden rule was only part of his teaching. "Love others as yourself" was the root. Jesus didn't seem to care one iota about "works", he wanted people to Love. One can see how this would have been easy to morph into a sacrificial mystery religion, after all, other dying gods had sacrificed themselves for Love before (in myths). If Love is there you don't need to teach ethics, if you are always serving others, you don't need hell fire to scare people into behaving, hence Jesus' lack of significant hell fire theology. The world apparently needed Paul for that.

And you are righy, you don't get a powerful religion from philosophy, you need an endorsement from an Empire for that (or at least endorsement from celebrities in the case of Scientology). All of the major western world religions (and most eastern onese) have been spread by being endorsed by Empires or kingdoms. Before that, they were sects revolving around philosophy and some myths. However, Humanism is growing, so maybe one "religion" will eventually grow up from philosophy and basic ethics.

 

Jesus, of course, learned the OT text and by his teaching you can see too that he studied books that mainstream christianity and judaism dont consider to be credible, like the book of enoch. His teachings also carry some eastern philosophy aswell.

 

This is true, and odd, since the Book of Enoch is referenced as even in Jude but modern Christianity rejects it (except the Ethiopian Church).

[h.uriahr]

True, it is hard to tell what was what since the Bible was just a hodgepodge of manuscripts written by who knows who. Two things though:

1st the oldest manuscripts found say 616, not 665. 2nd, does a God of love who makes all the rules really need his creation to beat and crucify someone (whether "good enough for a sacrifice" or "suicidal godman") in order to forgive? Do you require people to beat someone before you forgive them?

Again, this interpretation is dependant on the belief that he needed to die as a sacrifice. If he didn't, then the teaching "Love one another as I have loved you", which was given just after he "the Master" had served them by washing their feet, would just be a teaching of "Be humble", "serve one another" etc. which was not original and was consistent with his other teachings.

The golden rule was only part of his teaching. "Love others as yourself" was the root. Jesus didn't seem to care one iota about "works", he wanted people to Love. One can see how this would have been easy to morph into a sacrificial mystery religion, after all, other dying gods had sacrificed themselves for Love before (in myths). If Love is there you don't need to teach ethics, if you are always serving others, you don't need hell fire to scare people into behaving, hence Jesus' lack of significant hell fire theology. The world apparently needed Paul for that.

And you are righy, you don't get a powerful religion from philosophy, you need an endorsement from an Empire for that (or at least endorsement from celebrities in the case of Scientology). All of the major western world religions (and most eastern onese) have been spread by being endorsed by Empires or kingdoms. Before that, they were sects revolving around philosophy and some myths. However, Humanism is growing, so maybe one "religion" will eventually grow up from philosophy and basic ethics.

This is true, and odd, since the Book of Enoch is referenced as even in Jude but modern Christianity rejects it (except the Ethiopian Church).

 

I dont personally get all caught up on whether or not he was in fact crucified. For that matter, if it came out that the entire bible was made up and that Jesus turned out to be a completely fictionanl character, I wouldnt care either because some of his teachings are far greater than that of any philosopher.

 

We can sit here and go back forth like about how the crucifiction would have to happen because in OT law you had to sacrifice for your wrong doings so therefore Jesus had to be sacrificied for humanities wrong doing. As far as hell goes, it's a completely logical belief. Let me explain that hell isnt what most people believe it to be, like hellfire and brimstone and demons and blah blah blah, however, hell is a place of suffering, loss, misery and is used to burn up any bad karma so that you may successfully transition to the next existance, or get reincarnated again, whatever.

 

Also, hell was never what is today back in the day. I have a greek new testament bible and there is no word at all for "never ending" punishment. The punishment goes on for an age of the ages. Temporary.

 

Christianity is something that I dont talk about or Jesus for that matter because everyone likes to beat him up. I'm done, topic is dropped.

[h.uriahr]

I dont personally get all caught up on whether or not he was in fact crucified. For that matter, if it came out that the entire bible was made up and that Jesus turned out to be a completely fictionanl character, I wouldnt care either because some of his teachings are far greater than that of any philosopher.

 

We can sit here and go back forth like about how the crucifiction would have to happen because in OT law you had to sacrifice for your wrong doings so therefore Jesus had to be sacrificied for humanities wrong doing. As far as hell goes, it's a completely logical belief. Let me explain that hell isnt what most people believe it to be, like hellfire and brimstone and demons and blah blah blah, however, hell is a place of suffering, loss, misery and is used to burn up any bad karma so that you may successfully transition to the next existance, or get reincarnated again, whatever.

 

Also, hell was never what is today back in the day. I have a greek new testament bible and there is no word at all for "never ending" punishment. The punishment goes on for an age of the ages. Temporary.

 

Christianity is something that I dont talk about or Jesus for that matter because everyone likes to beat him up. I'm done, topic is dropped.

Yeah...what he said. I'd like to add though that uh...WHO CARES. I mean honestly. Does it bug you that people believe in Jesus? Do you have somesort of short coming because of christianity? I'm serious. This isnt a personal attack but arguing over Jesus gets old. Usually people want what a christian has in terms of the faith they have, some not all, is that your problem? I said earlier that I only enjoy some of his teachings, I dont get caught up in all the other stuff, like Buddha, I love some of his stuff too but I am in no way shape or form a buddhist or christian. I respect them both as very great teachers.

[Taoist81]

None of this was meant as any kind of attack. As noted above:

 

And none of this is intended as an "assault". It is just that people seem to lift Jesus up on a pedestal as if he were somehow the supreme teacher, when very little if anything he taught was unique or original. Don't take this the wrong way, Jesus like all teacher/prophets was important in context and in the place and time that he (supposedly) existed (not to mention the special place he has in modern western mystic/magick practice), he just doesn't seem to have been any more important that any other teacher/prophet throughout history.

 

The whole question was "what was so great about Jesus" if you don't believe in the necessity of the crucifixion. Without the miracles Jesus was just another teacher, a good on sure, but not inherently special. The only way to make him special is to make him a sacrifice or to apply mystic understanding to the whole story (not a bad thing, actually quite useful). It is interesting that any questioning of Jesus whatsoever is taken as "beating him up". Or if they question any of it they have "a problem".

 

I dont personally get all caught up on whether or not he was in fact crucified. For that matter, if it came out that the entire bible was made up and that Jesus turned out to be a completely fictionanl character, I wouldnt care either because some of his teachings are far greater than that of any philosopher.

 

We can sit here and go back forth like about how the crucifiction would have to happen because in OT law you had to sacrifice for your wrong doings so therefore Jesus had to be sacrificied for humanities wrong doing. As far as hell goes, it's a completely logical belief. Let me explain that hell isnt what most people believe it to be, like hellfire and brimstone and demons and blah blah blah, however, hell is a place of suffering, loss, misery and is used to burn up any bad karma so that you may successfully transition to the next existance, or get reincarnated again, whatever.

 

Also, hell was never what is today back in the day. I have a greek new testament bible and there is no word at all for "never ending" punishment. The punishment goes on for an age of the ages. Temporary.

 

Christianity is something that I dont talk about or Jesus for that matter because everyone likes to beat him up. I'm done, topic is dropped.

 

This whole conversation has been: "okay, since we aren't christians debating theology, lets say the miracle stuff was just fluff. What else was 'great' about Jesus." Great as in more significant than any of the other people who taught the same things that he did. Jesus didn't teach much about hell, his followers did. So that wasn't really meant to apply to Jesus, it is actually a good thing about what he taught, i.e. just love each other and you won't need any fear or commandments to make you behave. The discussion of karma and the finite or infinite nature of "eternal punishment" also doesn't factor in, because we are talking about Jesus' teachings minus the miracles, resurrection etc.

 

Yeah...what he said. I'd like to add though that uh...WHO CARES. I mean honestly. Does it bug you that people believe in Jesus? Do you have somesort of short coming because of christianity? I'm serious. This isnt a personal attack but arguing over Jesus gets old. Usually people want what a christian has in terms of the faith they have, some not all, is that your problem? I said earlier that I only enjoy some of his teachings, I dont get caught up in all the other stuff, like Buddha, I love some of his stuff too but I am in no way shape or form a buddhist or christian. I respect them both as very great teachers.

 

Who cares...Yes, it seems that is where it should be left. This whole thing was meant to be a pretty simple question, but people do seem to get offended when Jesus is questioned. Jesus, Buddha and all the rest...Good teachers, repeating the same thing that good teachers always have...

 

Peace and Love ,Brothers.

[h.uriahr]

Pops smoke bomb Out like NINJA

 

 

so easy a caveninja can do it

[SiliconValley]

Pops smoke bomb Out like NINJA

so easy a caveninja can do it

 

 

[h.uriahr]

Mocking a ninja is bad for your health

[Mal]

Pops smoke bomb Out like NINJA

so easy a caveninja can do it

 

You don't learn do you

[Spirit Ape]

I liked the movie and i think there could be alot of truth there!

[h.uriahr]

You don't learn do you

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

I liked the movie and i think there could be alot of truth there!

You're perfectly right, there COULD be alot of truth but there COULD be a whole lot of bullshit too. All this documentary is doing is making him look stupid, completely ignorant, why? The sight hasnt been excavated. It's like me putting rolly eyes and fake lips on a piece of shit and dropping a camera by it so that you can kind of make out what it is and then I could play some spooky voice recording and swear up and down the shit was talking. This doesnt supply anything because IT HASNT BEEN EXCAVATED. You know the moon was made of cheese until we walked on it???

 

Christianity could be a completely made up story but this little documentary is like the blair witch.

Edited October 31, 2008 by MPWay

[Spirit Ape]

MPWAY

 

HAHAHAHA that is the best line ever..... It's like me putting rolly eyes and fake lips on a piece of shit and dropping a camera by it so that you can kind of make out what it is and then I could play some spooky voice recording and swear up and down the shit was talking.

 

PURE POETRY MY BROTHER!!!

 

APESHIT

[h.uriahr]

MPWAY

 

HAHAHAHA that is the best line ever..... It's like me putting rolly eyes and fake lips on a piece of shit and dropping a camera by it so that you can kind of make out what it is and then I could play some spooky voice recording and swear up and down the shit was talking.

 

PURE POETRY MY BROTHER!!!

 

APESHIT

 

Good enough to publish???

[Spirit Ape]

I may use this as my signature!!

[h.uriahr]

I may use this as my signature!!

LOL HELL YEAH

[Spirit Ape]

So the big question is if jesus was mortal and married, why did they make a religion out of him?

 

What did he teach for people to make him into a god like figure?

 

What happened back then to make the religion, money, power, spiritualism?

 

What was jesus's orginal teachings?

 

Spirit Ape