9/11 money folding( you'll want to see this)

[jaybird88]

Molech was the name of a fictional ancient Ammonite deity which had no association whatsoever to the owl in antiquity. Any association would be a modern fabrication that never existed in antiquity.

so when our heavenly Father says not to sacrifice kids to molech He is refering to someone of fiction, why would our Lord have any concern over a fictional character?

 

[jaybird88]

the 'grove play' also doesn't represent a child sacrifice... the 'care' character that is 'cremated' is a villain with a speaking part...it has a booming and sinister sounding voice...not the voice of a child... and the programs given to attendees refer to the ceremony as an 'exorcism'...not a sacrifice...

so to sum up what has been established so far...there is no child...no sacrifice...and no molech...

everything i have read says its a child sacrifice. makes no sense to have an alter for an exorcism. the bible speaks of doing exorcisms but it never speaks of building giant stone owls to do it.
the bible also says that the left over decedents of canaan are still here today. i wonder where they are? do you really ythink they are just off somewhere minding their own biz not involved in the affairs of today's world. just a thought

 

[jaybird88]

probably from scamming all of the unthinking people that believe in conspiracy theories...

or all the absent minded people that think our world leaders are only looking out for the common peoples best interest

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Your statement is logically fallacious. You're asserting that if people sacrifice their children to something, and God tells them not to, then that something must really exist as a living being. That's a false assertion. Molech was a fabricated concoction that deceived people engaged in wicked behavior with respect too.

God, the one true living God, was of course fully aware of this and commanded His people not to participate in Moloch worship (Leviticus 18:21) and repeatedly told them to destroy those cultures that worshiped the false deity named Moloch. The Old Testament is full of passages in which God refers to concoctions of deceived pagan peoples as false gods.

Now what I said exactly in post #35 was:

"Molech was the name of a fictional ancient Ammonite deity which had no association whatsoever to the owl in antiquity. Any association would be a modern fabrication that never existed in antiquity."

Unlike your statement, mine is accurate and conforms to the rules of logic.

so when our heavenly Father says not to sacrifice kids to molech He is refering to someone of fiction, why would our Lord have any concern over a fictional character?

 

[jaybird88]

Your statement is logically fallacious. You're asserting that if people sacrifice their children to something, and God tells them not to, then that something must really exist as a living being. That's a false assertion. Molech was a fabricated concoction that deceived people engaged in wicked behavior with respect too.

God, the one true living God, was of course fully aware of this and commanded His people not to participate in Moloch worship (Leviticus 18:21) and repeatedly told them to destroy those cultures that worshiped the false deity named Moloch. The Old Testament is full of passages in which God refers to concoctions of deceived pagan peoples as false gods.

Now what I said exactly in post #35 was:

"Molech was the name of a fictional ancient Ammonite deity which had no association whatsoever to the owl in antiquity. Any association would be a modern fabrication that never existed in antiquity."

Unlike your statement, mine is accurate and conforms to the rules of logic.

so all those cultures in those days made these sacrifices to something that was fiction? and i ask, why would they do that?
i believe molech was very real, the people making sacrifices is one thing but also the Lord confirms he was real by saying dont sacrifice to him. and lets not forget the 2nd commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" you ever stop and think who are the other gods? maybe we should ignore that one? and i wonder who those fallen ones were from Gen 6?
I dont think its very logical to think our Lord would be provoked by something of fiction but that me.

you sure your statement is logical? it doesnt hold water from what i see.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Yes, unlike the devil, Molech is not a living being. Molech was invented, a fictional character in antiquity. Of course, people can and are often deceived about a great many things and for many reasons.

For example, you are deceived about Molech. You wrongly believe that Molech is a living being much like the ancient pagan Ammonites once did.

But the bible is clear that every "false god" is a useless invention that "profits nothing" as Habakkuk said:

"Woe to him who says to wood, 'Come to life!' Or to lifeless stone, 'Wake up!' Can it give guidance? It is covered with gold and silver; there is no breath in it."

Jeremiah put it like this:

"But where are your gods which you made for yourself? [e.g. invented and formed] Let them arise, if they can save you in the time of your trouble..."

Sure, I stopped to think about the 2nd commandment while earning an M.Div.. Unlike you; however, I examined the 2nd commandment in context without assigning it meaning that it doesn't actually have as my bible professors directed me to do.

Furthermore, in systematic theology, we looked at the 2nd commandment in context with the rest of scripture. For example, consider the following passage in Isaiah 43 "Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me... I am the LORD and besides me there is no savior" (also see 40:28–31 and 44:6).

Isaiah, speaking for God, is referring to the origin of false gods themselves here and not the formation of their images. As the pulpit commentary states, God is revealing through His prophet Isaiah that all other gods beside Himself are invented, fashioned, and made by men.

You may borrow my bucket jaybird88, it holds water just fine.

so all those cultures in those days made these sacrifices to something that was fiction? and i ask, why would they do that?
i believe molech was very real, the people making sacrifices is one thing but also the Lord confirms he was real by saying dont sacrifice to him. and lets not forget the 2nd commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" you ever stop and think who are the other gods? maybe we should ignore that one? and i wonder who those fallen ones were from Gen 6?
I dont think its very logical to think our Lord would be provoked by something of fiction but that me.

you sure your statement is logical? it doesnt hold water from what i see.

 

[Tintin]

so when our heavenly Father says not to sacrifice kids to molech He is refering to someone of fiction, why would our Lord have any concern over a fictional character?

Fictional as in not real as in pagan.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

For the sake of brevity, before Constantine, paganus was used in the meaning of ‘‘rural’’ to describe the inhabitant of a pagus (e.g. country district) and secondly in the sense of ‘‘civil’’ or ‘‘civilian,’’ in contrast to the ‘‘military.’’

Christians did not adopt the term paganus in the meaning of non-Christian before the age of Constantine. However when, in the course of the 4th century, Christians became more numerous and increasingly conscious of their own solidarity and social and religious prestige, the analogy of the contrast between paganus and militaris came into common usage and non-Christians began to be referred to as paganus (e.g. pagans)... outsiders who were not presently members of the Christian
community.

Fictional as in not real as in pagan.

 

[Tintin]

For the sake of brevity, before Constantine, paganus was used in the meaning of ‘‘rural’’ to describe the inhabitant of a pagus (e.g. country district) and secondly in the sense of ‘‘civil’’ or ‘‘civilian,’’ in contrast to the ‘‘military.’’

Christians did not adopt the term paganus in the meaning of non-Christian before the age of Constantine. However when, in the course of the 4th century, Christians became more numerous and increasingly conscious of their own solidarity and social and religious prestige, the analogy of the contrast between paganus and militaris came into common usage and non-Christians began to be referred to as paganus (e.g. pagans)... outsiders who were not presently members of the Christian
community.

Ah, I didn't know that one. Thanks, Aok.

 

[Stravinsk]

Regarding the video in the OP - I've seen stuff like this before and it's interesting but I don't take it as some sort of serious foreknowledge by the people who came up with the designs.

What is somewhat telling though, in my opinion, is the date it happened on. Here in Australia the Emergency number is 0-0-0. No chance of any psychological games with that number connected to some event date.

911, just another coincidence that the number all Americans are taught to dial when they have or witness a personal emergency just happens to be the date some Middle Eastern people choose to knock down some buildings to "take American's freedoms"?

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Of course, the devil and demons (which are fallen angels) exploited ancient people's false religious systems and false gods to their own ends. That; however, should not be confused with the false gods themselves actually existing as living beings.

In ancient Judaism, before Christ and long before the rise of the word pagan by Christians after the fourth century, the oldest term to differentiate people who are not God's would be the Hebrew gôyîm itself a plural noun that once meant “nations” in general but came to mean specifically “nations other than Israel” and subsequent translations such as heathen, for example.

Note that gôyîm is normally translated into the Greek ethnosāethnē in the New Testament and where mention is made of more than one (non-Israelite) people, the plural ammı̂m is also translated ethnē. There is also a contrast between Israel as the chosen people (*˒am or laos) and the Gentiles (*gôyı̂m or ethnē).

Ah, I didn't know that one. Thanks, Aok.

 

[KennethC]

so when our heavenly Father says not to sacrifice kids to molech He is refering to someone of fiction, why would our Lord have any concern over a fictional character?

everything i have read says its a child sacrifice. makes no sense to have an alter for an exorcism. the bible speaks of doing exorcisms but it never speaks of building giant stone owls to do it.
the bible also says that the left over decedents of canaan are still here today. i wonder where they are? do you really ythink they are just off somewhere minding their own biz not involved in the affairs of today's world. just a thought

or all the absent minded people that think our world leaders are only looking out for the common peoples best interest

It doesn't matter if the character/idol is fictional or not because most false gods are not real entities in the first place.

The fact still remains it is idol worship being done there and it is a sacrifice and not a exorcism.
You do not throw a persons body into a fire to be completely burned up in a exorcism, and that excuse makes absolutely no sense. Especially since as I have repeated before a few employees have come out and disclosed the truth of what goes on there.

The articles others are referring to was their way of trying to hide the truth and discredit those that brought the truth to the light.

I for one do not believe in everything Alex Jones says, but he was one of the first one's to sneak a hidden camera in the Bohemian grove by putting it on a employee. There is a good length video on this exposing of the grove that can easily be watched by anybody.

 

[KennethC]

Of course, the devil and demons (which are fallen angels) exploited ancient people's false religious systems and false gods to their own ends. That; however, should not be confused with the false gods themselves actually existing as living beings.

In ancient Judaism, before Christ and long before the rise of the word pagan by Christians after the fourth century, the oldest term to differentiate people who are not God's would be the Hebrew gôyîm itself a plural noun that once meant “nations” in general but came to mean specifically “nations other than Israel” and subsequent translations such as heathen, for example.

Note that gôyîm is normally translated into the Greek ethnosāethnē in the New Testament and where mention is made of more than one (non-Israelite) people, the plural ammı̂m is also translated ethnē. There is also a contrast between Israel as the chosen people (*˒am or laos) and the Gentiles (*gôyı̂m or ethnē).

We should also note that these symbols can be traced back in false deities all the way back to the tower of Babel:

Now look at what nations or countries still carry this symbolism ???

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

everything i have read says its a child sacrifice. makes no sense to have an alter for an exorcism. the bible speaks of doing exorcisms but it never speaks of building giant stone owls to do it.
the bible also says that the left over decedents of canaan are still here today. i wonder where they are? do you really ythink they are just off somewhere minding their own biz not involved in the affairs of today's world. just a thought

the prop in question isn't an 'altar'...it is a pyre for cremation...as in the title of the grove play 'cremation of care'...

and actually i -do- think the descendants of the ancient canaanites -are- mostly minding their own business today...they are not eternal enemies of God simply because they are canaanites... the gospel has been going out to every nation for centuries and the canaanites are one of those nations...see for example the syro phoenician woman in the gospels and also the history of a major center of ancient christianity in carthage...

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

or all the absent minded people that think our world leaders are only looking out for the common peoples best interest

i don't doubt that many world leaders are looking out for their -own- best interests first...however as i keep saying facts like this alone do not imply that there is a massive satanic conspiracy ruling the world...

 

[jaybird88]

the prop in question isn't an 'altar'...it is a pyre for cremation...as in the title of the grove play 'cremation of care'...

and actually i -do- think the descendants of the ancient canaanites -are- mostly minding their own business today...they are not eternal enemies of God simply because they are canaanites... the gospel has been going out to every nation for centuries and the canaanites are one of those nations...see for example the syro phoenician woman in the gospels and also the history of a major center of ancient christianity in carthage...

so the pyre just happens to be in front of a giant stone owl disguised to look as if they are making an offering in front of the owl or to the owl. doesnt make sense to me.

so when the bible says the descendants of canaan are still here to this day, a curse on canaan, tells us the canaanits kings names which translate to titles such as rebeller of the Most High" or "in the evil" , they are one of the few, maybe only cultures the Almighty Himself ordered to be exterminated, your thoughts are these things have no significance whats so ever and should just be ignored because any Canaanites that are around today are just minding their own business.
i personally think these lessons given to us by our Lord should be studied and not ignored.

 

[jaybird88]

Yes, unlike the devil, Molech is not a living being. Molech was invented, a fictional character in antiquity. Of course, people can and are often deceived about a great many things and for many reasons.

For example, you are deceived about Molech. You wrongly believe that Molech is a living being much like the ancient pagan Ammonites once did.

But the bible is clear that every "false god" is a useless invention that "profits nothing" as Habakkuk said:

"Woe to him who says to wood, 'Come to life!' Or to lifeless stone, 'Wake up!' Can it give guidance? It is covered with gold and silver; there is no breath in it."

Jeremiah put it like this:

"But where are your gods which you made for yourself? [e.g. invented and formed] Let them arise, if they can save you in the time of your trouble..."

Sure, I stopped to think about the 2nd commandment while earning an M.Div.. Unlike you; however, I examined the 2nd commandment in context without assigning it meaning that it doesn't actually have as my bible professors directed me to do.

Furthermore, in systematic theology, we looked at the 2nd commandment in context with the rest of scripture. For example, consider the following passage in Isaiah 43 "Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me... I am the LORD and besides me there is no savior" (also see 40:28–31 and 44:6).

Isaiah, speaking for God, is referring to the origin of false gods themselves here and not the formation of their images. As the pulpit commentary states, God is revealing through His prophet Isaiah that all other gods beside Himself are invented, fashioned, and made by men.

You may borrow my bucket jaybird88, it holds water just fine.

so how much of our bible is fiction? so far we have concluded the 2nd commandment, and according to you molech, yet our Lord acknowledged him. if i said there was a tree in the yard that didnt exist hat would make me a lair, so what does that say about your statement about our Lord?
if the 2nd commandment has no meaning, then why is it even there?
i dont think in the days the 10 commandments were given to Moses, the people were a bunch of simple minded fools that would run to a funny colored rock thinking it was a divine creature from the heavens, never mind they had just come out of egypt, a culture that just built the pyramids.

im happy you have a Master of Divinity, not sure how thats related, but i personally put my faith in the Lords word above man. if a bible professor told you to worship a frog would you do it? dont let a piece of paper define your knowledge let you words define it.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

jaybird88, your understanding of both the bible and history is flawed to the point that you're making patently false assertions. If you want to continue deliberately engaging in fallacious statements, after being corrected, and engaging in infantile behavior then I'm probably going to put you on ignore as a troll.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

The cremation of care play is a symbolic cremation symbolizing Bohemian Club members (and note that they publish a list of members and guests for attendees of their annual event each year at the Grove) as banishing the "dull cares" of conscience.

You know Professor Anthony C. Sutton did some interesting scholarly research on the grove after his research fellow position at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. He was the author of 'America's Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones.'

After careful research into the goings on at the Grove, he concluded "We dismissed the behavior as immature, even pitiful by emotionally disturbed juveniles and not worth attention. This is where Kissinger, Ford, Nixon, Bechtel, Bush, Cheney, Hoover and their friends (2600 members) hang out and 'relax.' And if they want to behave as little boys that is their privilege."

the prop in question isn't an 'altar'...it is a pyre for cremation...as in the title of the grove play 'cremation of care'...

and actually i -do- think the descendants of the ancient canaanites -are- mostly minding their own business today...they are not eternal enemies of God simply because they are canaanites... the gospel has been going out to every nation for centuries and the canaanites are one of those nations...see for example the syro phoenician woman in the gospels and also the history of a major center of ancient christianity in carthage...

 

[jaybird88]

jaybird88, your understanding of both the bible and history is flawed to the point that you're making patently false assertions. If you want to continue deliberately engaging in fallacious statements, after being corrected, and engaging in infantile behavior then I'm probably going to put you on ignore as a troll.

please give me an example of where i am wrong? so far you havent. my "false assertions" are based on your own words. its the only conclusion i could put together with your logic.
you had no response to my last post so im assuming you dont know. its ok. there are many things i dont know and i have no shame in saying that.
i think Christianity today is far from what it was in the day of Jesus and the 12. i wonder why? should we base our beliefs in the word of our Lord or man?