Illuminati Religion

Post Reply New Topic

16th century England? The most proceeding of the Privy Council of the Tudor-Period are preserved - they would notice such an incident. One of the great reforms of Henry VII was the creation of a centralized civil service which controlled everything of any importance within the realm. We have also from this period the reports of diplomats to other courts and states (most notable those to the Venice, which was in this time famous for its diplomatic service and was very well informed).

There no such reports.

Also: "Old newspapers" of this period in England just don't exist. The Tudor administration was very keen in controlling the public option. To own a printing press without permission of the Privy Council was forbidden and subject to serious punishment. You may recall especially the ordinance of the Star Chamber of 1586, which reinforced older decrees (G. R. Elton, The Tudor Constitution, Cambridge, 1960, reprint 1978, pp. 179 ff.).

Well I read such papers and very interesting reading they made as well.
Reported in such was the case of the woman who tried to claim she was giving birth to rabits, she even had doctors fooled to the extent it reached Royalty and she was tried in Westminster Hall when it was found to be a hoax.

Stop right there! Anything based on that is Dead on Arrival. There is no just collective blame. Individuals do evil for which they should be blamed and held to account.

ruveyn

Quite unlikely: If it would reach the court, it would most likely not tried in Westminster Hall, but within the Court of the Star Chamber. The only court of the Tudor Period, which was closely connected to the King and resided in Westminster Hall was the King's Bench, but the King's Bench did only hear criminal cases and cases in which the King was involved. If it would be a case of "witchcraft" the local courts would deal with this matter and it would not reach the King's courts in Westminster easily.

Also: Which "Newspapers"?

"the Jews"???? Which Jews? Perhaps the corrupt priesthood who were puppets of the Romans. They would make some sense. Perhaps the members of the mob stirred up by agents of the Temple crew or the Romans. That might make some sense. "the Jews" is a collective term and taken literally makes no sense.

ruveyn

Or, evolution tells us a lightening bolt or somesuch struck a few amino acids and gave birth to the first single cell life form.

Maybe sounds feasible when a single cell was thought to be a somewhat simple organism.

But science has progressed somewhat.
Have a look at animations of what one of these "simple" cells are really like then expect me to belive such a complicated thing could just happen by chance!

http://video.google.co.uk/videosearch?q ... 0&start=30

The origin of living stuff on this planet is still an open question waiting for answer. How long shall we have to wait? It is hard to say.

ruveyn

do you even know what the term "evolution" means?

and BTW isn't this argument taken from the Peanut Butter thread?

Oh - yes!



Not by mere change - I am currently playing around a bit with evolutionary algorithms.

It is just simple mathematics: If you have information (DNA) which reproduces and modifies and is in a struggle to survive and survival depends on the structure of the information, you must have evolution. There no way around.

So, even if we would not have the fossils, not had radioactive decay, no DNA-tree, no ... evolution must still taken as a fact, because of the mathematics behind it. The other evidence is just the "small print" how it exactly happened.

Last edited by Dussel on 26 Jan 2009, 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I believe in evolution but math and science are flawed. They break down eventually.

Exactly, the corrupt priesthood, Jesus was the King of the Jews and the Jews where to rule all mankind, (benevolently).
The corrupt Priesthood however, didnt want to lose thier position of power over the people, so they killed thier king and so many of the Jews continued to follow them.

The same thing is happening today, Jesus is the king of the Jews, but most Jews still chose to follow a corrupt priesthood.

Iam sure you are familiar with the history of the Kings of Israel and Judea from the Old Testament, when God punished them, which he often did, for instance when he gave them captivity to Babylon for 70 years, it wasnt just the corrupt Priesthood who where punished, it was the whole nation collectively, even God fearing ones such as Daniel.

Iam not saying its my view of collective guilt, but a Biblical warning to Gods people at the end, whichever "Messiah" or King you chose to be subject too, you will share in his fate.

Apparently you missed the news. The Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed nearly 2000 years ago. Sacrifices have stopped in Jerusalem and were never practiced in the Diaspora. Jews have followed the teachings of the Rabbis and Sages until relatively recent times. Judaism ceased being a priestly religion and in Orthodox circles is a Pharasaic (rabbinical) religion based on the Talmud. In the last two hundred years non-orthodox modes of Judaism have arisen not fully based on the Talmud or Torah but having some rational or rationalistic elements incorporated.

Jews don't follow a corrupt anything. Where ever three Jews gather to converse at least four opinions emerge. Jews are not particularly good followers. They are also not particularly good leaders either.

Has it occurred to you that the Pauline doctrine you follow was created by a sly fellow who was all things to all people. In short a con-man. Paul convinced some of the early followers of the deluded Jesus, that he was a genuine apostle. And so it went. Paul was a dishonest man. He even changed his name so it didn't sound too Jewish. He was born Saul (Sha'ul in Hebrew).

Has it also occurred to you that your religion is, by and large, a vile superstition that has caused misery, strife and bloodshed in the past and may yet cause the same in the future. By their fruit ye shall know them. Applied to Christianity one gets a pretty rotten taste from that fruit.

I suggest you listen to what cousin Jesus had to say (some good old Jewish horse sense): don't tell your fellow to remove the crumbs from his eye until you get rid of the schmutz from your eye. Don't be so quick to condemn. You are in no position to condemn.

ruveyn

It is not an urban myth that well-preserved mammoth carcasses have been discovered; it is an urban myth that these carcasses were edible. Whether or not the Bible supports the claim that each of God's days were 7,000 years is irrelevant, the story still bears no resemblance to the real world. As to the examples you have cited as 'evidence' that dinosaurs co-existed with man, these are only myths & superstitions & there is no reason to think they have any basis in any real creatures - humans can & will make up stuff you know: 'the terminator' movies for example are not evidence that 1980s man had access to time travel. As to your distrust of scientists, that is of people who have devoted their lives to empirically testing their beliefs about the world in order to disprove them; coming so closely after several egregious displays of credulity about the Bible's claims, it suggests to me that you practice a bizarrely eclectic form of skepticism.

I call them Corrupt Priesthood purely because that is the term you originally used.
It allies to whatever said leaders are called today.

As for Christianity, I do not attend any Christian Church untill I find one that follows the Bible rather than worshipping a pagan Trinity Sun god, Nimrod, or Tammuz, whatever he is known as, Iam looking for the God of Abraham to which I belive the Devil has mislead all religions away from.

I think you better go back to the doctor and have your meds checked. You sound like a gnostic lunatic. Maybe I am wrong, but that is what you sound like.

I should also caution you not to hold your breath until you find what you are looking for. If you do, you will turn blue and faint.

ruveyn

Who sentenced Jesus to death?