Just the thread to vent about something that's been bugging me for awhile. The knights templar, supposed forerunner of the freemasons. First - scripture says Jesus said there would not be one stone left standing of the 2nd Temple's destruction. Scripture also said the Roman command quarters were up above the temple. It is said that the templars, while in Jerusalem were stationed in the old stables when they found some hidden treasure...ie the grail. 1100 +years after Jesus and the 70AD temple destruction. Even if the temple mount is where the dome of the rock now stands....why would Christ's grail be in the sanhedrin's temple??? Since when does the temple have a stable???? The Davinci Code says they found some manuscripts that said Jesus was married to Magdalene. Jesus is said to have 4 brothers...and at least one had descendants that were questioned by Domitian.....If you don't believe scripture, then those brothers and sisters could have carried the bloodline. I don't think we know where the 2nd temple really was and I think the muslims built on the old Roman command center. I think the templars got rich because they invented the 1st international bank system and I think they were slaughtered out of greed. Everything I have read about the templars doesn't show any of the same ideology unless you consider that all conspiracies against God come from the same place.
New World Order, Environmentalism, Conspiracy theory etc.
- Thread starter Francis Drake
- Start date
Silk wrote:
consider that all conspiracies against God come from the same place.
From Satan! He is the father of lies!!
Silk, I respect you and your knowledge. I have a question about the location of the Temple that Isaiah describes. Was it high enough to see over the walls of the city and beyond? Wouldn't the second Temple be built identically?
I'm not clear on your question. Recently, but yet to be published, Bob Cornuke came back from Israel with (apparently) some real evidence that where the Dome of the Rock, etal, is built is NOT the original temple mount. Both Solomon and the 2nd Temple were built in the same spot - in the city of David (old Jerusalem) or Zion. The real temple location would not have had stables or latrines. David bought a "threshing floor" (land) on which the temple was built. There is evidence in scripture that the Temple was "down" from the Roman garrison that held 10,000 people. Coins found under the wailing wall are from Roman days showing that this was not built by Herod but by the Romans. Josephus also writes of the temple which indicate the gate and temple were down from the garrison. The Templar legend that they found something at the old temple seems to be made of stories not truth. The Temple would have been in both cases built under the ordination of God. Or the same.
My understanding is that the 'Wailing Wall' my even be part of the old Roman fort that was built after the temple was destroyed. That the original temple site may not even be overlaid with any existing structures.
It's hard to tell because there have been some many changes made over many thousand years in that area.
Some swear that the 'Wall' is part of the old temple: but when you consider mankind's need to worship something, it's easy to see why the Jewish people hold onto the tradition and create an idol out of it....
Yeah - traditions make it all difficult and complex. But I like the idea that no islam temple is on top of the real temple mount. No need for WW III and you can still have God's temple. So much for islamic saying that they built on a holy spot - they built on Roman ruins. The offering of Issac by Abraham didn't occur there. And who cares if mohammad ascended there.....just sayin'.
Taking care of the Earth is a Christian tenet. God gave us earth and we need to care for it by not polluting and contributing to global warming. We have created climate change and continue to make it worse. It's our actions and has nothing to do with being willfully ignorant of science. I'm a Christian and an environmentalist because the two go easily hand in hand.
Hey girl! Long time no see. How ya been????
I agree that Christian's are to be stewards of the earth and we should do our very best take care of it.
Where I disagree is that "climate change" as we are told to believe is mainly caused by humans. Especially with all the recent whistle-blowers coming out about the falsified data all over the planet.
There is plenty of real/ good science that points to the cycles of the sun as the main contributing factor (98+%) of all "climate change". So I am not a 'climate change denier' ; I just don't agree that human beings are the main cause. Could we do a better job at planet stewardship; ABSOLUTELY! Why do we even make plastic bags and Styrofoam anyway? There other biodegradable options out there. Our government is more concerned with controlling people than actually solving any issues.
We have proof from 9/11 that there are other energy sources available to use (see: Dr. Judy Woods "Where did the Towers Go?); but they use the technology for death instead of life. This is the way of the world.
Brother_Mike_V,
How right you are! I have seen scholarly research that points to cycles of the sun as the cause of global warming. Humans are not involved.
Thanks for pointing this out.
Penion