Does The Idea Of God Play A Pivotable Role In The Conspiracy?

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Very simple, people don't read and understand for themselves, they place trust in a pastor they think is good (ie., has a good personality and speaks with authority) and allows him to tell them what to think, who reads stand-alone verses to them and tells them what God meant when he spoke those few words (taken out of context and used to mena what he wants them to think).

You are correct. And this extends to the political realm as well. People willing hand over power to individuals, forgetting that We the People have the power. And every person that gives away their power makes it harder for the rest of us.

Yes, I see a couple

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

The King James Version, 1611 is a very accurate translation, very accurate to the original manuscripts and can be compared to them to show their accuracy compared to any other translation.

I think I have proven this statement wrong. Yes, I admit that I have only given 2 references, but Yes, I admit, that they happen to be a couple of VERY foundational points that KJV went WAY off course on.

agree
agree
agree

I can't believe you said the T word to me... you are ABSOLUTELY correct in your analysis of how these a$$holes do what they do...p.s. throw in Benny Hinn

agree.

okay...I think we're pretty much in line!

My point was Valhall the problem is pervasive so much so we can see how its possible for anyone to look at religion [as a whole] and say "yuck." And neither is it impossible for such a person to present that argument as valid (and some even blame God).

Lao Tsu is accepted as a prophet 2nd to none by a considerable amount of people, still things do not make sense.

Good and evil are terms which are used to define acts often in respect to social requirements and expectations.

A lot of that has to do with opinion, judgment and experience.

History is replete with those from the context of what they believe, have tried to establish such a balance.

Perhaps the problem can be related to what issues exist outside our perception but still a part of our reality.

In respect to what we can understand greed is perhaps the greatest problem in man. Which is interesting because in nature greed is does not seem to be an issue.

Especially when one looks at how a particular species gets along. Its even more apparent in the more advanced life forms, excluding man of course,

Again a point that brings up questions....

Any thoughts?




[Edited on 25-6-2003 by Toltec]

Originally posted by Toltec
A lot of that has to do with opinion, judgment and experience.

History is replete with those from the context of what they believe, have tried to establish such a balance.
[Edited on 25-6-2003 by Toltec]

Toltec,

I believe you hit on the "problem" right here. I believe history is indeed replete with those who allowed their ego to so overtake them (and I do not agree that "greed" - as it relates to material wealth is the greatest problem, I believe vanity - as it relates to position and power is) that they thought their list of "required pious acts" should become some doctrine. I don't believe these religious movements have come through innocent attempts to bring balance.

(Furthermore, I don't see the value of attempting balance, but that's a whole different thread. Suffice it to say here I am absolutely NOT a believer is dualism.)

My reasoning behind the feeling that they were not motivated to bring balance is that if you study the various major religions of the world (with the exception of Islam - and I consider Islam a movement; a REALLY BIG movement. Just ask and we'll get off on that if you are interested), you find that the fundamental tenents are very much alike. The Golden Rule. The respect for the Creator/Higher Power/Universal Consciousness (it just really depends on what the given religion has placed here, but ultimately it is some higher power).

So any given religion there are is the basic doctrine, then MEN start tacking on acts of piety which serve 2 purposes. To control the masses in some regard. To discern who is in and who is out. This doesn't establish any type of balance - it establishes "in and out". And historically, this process tends to minimize the outties and maximize the innies through ACTIVE processes (not just "witnessing" or proselytizing, but through "weeding"). So, you have the through the course of man's history these "in-power" religions wondering around saying "death or cake???" And some people just didn't have a sweet tooth...so the religions obliged (hence, minimization of outties, maximization of innies).

You can't read any of the principal truths of any major religion and come up with the motivation to murder some one for not accepting your beliefs...it aint there. So we have to necessarily decide that for any religion that this decision WAS made, it was not acting as some great commitment to God's word, because their actions are in direct violation to the fundamental tenents.

Originally posted by Toltec
Is the idea of God something, which is to blame for all our problems?

Or is he something, which we should praise as the cure to what is wrong?

For thousands of years mankind has lived believing that something exists outside the realm of this awareness.

And the question placed today is does it serve a purpose or is it the result of a fantasy?

Are we created to guarantee each of us serve a system whose function is intent upon making sure we think God is real?

Is the Holy Bible our master (or for that matter is the Tao te ching its equivalent) ?

Is what we are taught about life and reality with respect to a conservative interpretation valid?

In respect to the issue of conspiracies how does what we today accept as real, differ from what is wrong (in the real world)?

Is creation a mistake, one whose function is to make mankind as a whole feel trepidation over evolution as a valid construct?


Does the very fact we are alive act a proof that God is real, or is it evidence that life is part of a process of which God is a conclusion?

I am open to all ideas and feel that the worst thing to do is to treat something as invalid just because some ideology feels it is wrong.

Has religion acted as an excuse for what is wrong?

If there is a conspiracy (which I feel there is) race and color are not the answers but creed may be another story. What are your thoughts?

I think greed is the cause of most of our problems. Should God be praised, what God? I have seen at least some evidence that a spiritual realm exsists. I believe its mostly a fantasy promoted by the kings of the mountains. I do believe they want us to think God is real. The teo te ching might very well be its equal, I haven't read it. I don't think what we are taught is valid. I believe the best has been conserved for someone else. I believe there are many fronts being put forth by the conspiratist like a maze if you will. It seems obvious to me that someone or something has created us. I don't believe the government would continue its quest for one world government if they thaught for one minute that Jesus was going to come back and screw it all up seven years after its establishment.

My issue with greed is that it is not readily observable in nature, I agree Vahall that vanity is an issue and an important one.

What I am alluding to is the issue of Man created by God with a quality that is not inherent in nature.

Religions very often refer to the soul as what separates us from the beast but in an apparent contrast, while greed has been suggested as a sin. Very little effort has been presented in history to bring to light the idea that greed as well is not inherent in nature.

Dualism stems from very ancient beliefs an example of which is Shinto in that faith, greed is not seen as a sin but as evil personified.


Advocates of ancient forms of dualism are not actually the same as the modern genre. American Indians for instance, are well known for interacting with animal spirits. A very relevant function to this technique is in respect to becoming oriented to the hunt (the animal usually a predator killing its prey).

The emphasis here is in presenting the balance bet- ween good and evil as inherent in nature. With the individual soul being not only inherent in man but in
all life. From there it goes into issues that parallel the philosophies of Gia and heaven which is similar to that of modern Christian faith (There is more but perhaps better discussed another day).


This is not however a retraction, I am simply explaining how dualism works from the perspective of what I know to be its foundation.

When assessing most religions, a fundamental conclusion is that it is wrong to covet what belongs to another. To take action as a result of ones desires a grievous error in respect what will happen to one after life, the consequences are dependent upon the decision one makes as a means to accomplish the coveting).

As a result my impression is we have found ourselves the next quandary.

When looking at the above carefully, one sees how it is a very positive statement, which can have very negative connotations with respect to many concerns.

Greed is the result of a desire to have more than one actually needs to survive. Even if a person is given exactly what they need to survive, to desire more is often the case.

My impression is that the real purpose of greed has in fact been misdirected, that its function is to generate a desire for spiritualism (in all of us). The leaders of most cultures treated spiritualism in the past as an aspect of coveting (to the masses) something that was not there�s.

Any thoughts?

I may never truly understand the problems of the world at my level. I could be greedy if I had what I want in life. And I'm smart enough to know that there is not room on the planet for everyone to have a big ole slice of the pie. Everyone simply can't be the President or a King or Queen or the owner of a major industry. I guess in that light the world is overpopulated. So maybe the real problem is people love sex and women get pregnant to easy. You mentioned coveting, I guess that plays a big factor also. Some people really do hate you if your doing well and have no idea how hard you have worked to get there. Most folk would like to be a big wheel making the big deals and on purpose will never get the chance. Maybe you have to join the right cult or something to make it. Maybe you have to sell your soul to gain the world. Few will ever rise above, I know that much.

My point is that an innate desire for spiritualism in respect to goals attained by the privileged few are a direct interference with respect to human nature.

This has resulted in that desire being redirected to alternatives which are socially undesirable (with respect to society as a whole).

To put it in other words the proverbial "secret of secrets" was never meant to be defined in that prose.

It was meant to be shared with respect to all the masses and that it was not is an issue which has negatively interfered with mans development.

Any thoughts?

I was born perhaps evil. Many years of peaceful religion has beat it out of me. Are you saying the true spiritualism has been hidden from the masses because the majority of people can't deal or cope with it?

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

The King James Version, 1611 is a very accurate translation, very accurate to the original manuscripts and can be compared to them to show their accuracy compared to any other translation.

Do you find an error in my thought?

i've read that there is about a 2% deviation in this translation. that amounts to some 14, 000 words. ouch.
francis bacon(a.k.a. shakespeare), 33rd degree mason, was the chief editor of the KJV. it is rife with masonic code. webster's dictionary works in tandem with it to reveal some of these codes. len horowitz's "healing codes for the biological apocalypse" goes into great detail about this.
is that a bad thing?
i don't think so. there is good and evil in each and every one of us, masonic reptillian illuminati nephilim annunaki sang grael included. king james was having a power struggle with rome and won.
the truth is the truth. the way is the way. the light is the light. these things are beyond duality. it is how they are used that causes the pendulum to swing.
god is the conspiracy as god is all.

TgSoe I feel that there are cultures which place a lot of emphasis on Religion and other's which place more emphasis on Spiritualism.

With respect to your being born evil, I take the position of one when born being an open tablet it is your upbringing which makes the difference.

A review of History TgSoe presents that there were American Indian Cultures which worked with those that came from the old world, amongst them are the Taino (American Indians are more spiritual than they are religious).

No, what I am saying is the masses can handle it,
the reason true spiritualism has remained hidden is because is has been viewed as a source of power
and control.

Looking forward to you next response.

God is the conspiracy as God is all.

Billybob what exactly do you mean by this?

Toltec, I did a brief study of the Taino and it seems they were somewhat of a nature worshiping folk like the Druids. Is that a correct assumption?

I can live with that interpretation but as well there is the other side of my family
which is related to Shinto and Buddhism.



[Edited on 28-6-2003 by Toltec]

what i mean by god is the conspiracy, is that everything was made by god, everything that exists, exists by the grace(which i call "physics") and love(which i call "gravity", the force that holds everything together) of god.
therefore, if there is a conspiracy(which, we here all know, there is), then god allows it to happen. if god is everywhere(which, of course, it is), then god is both the good guys AND the bad guys. it is only the point of view of the individual fragments of consciousness that accept the illusion of seperation.
most people who glom onto this conspiracy business never get past the top down conspiracy, and don't realise, there is a bottom up conspiracy as well. we live in a vast pool of energy which is subject to mathematical rules. there is a pool of thought energy, a pool of kinetic energy, pools of electrical, light, magnetic, temporal energies all mingling and interacting in mathematical fractal geometric patterns. when the top(of that zany illuminati pyramid) "pushes" or "squeezes", the bottom pushes back. everything must remain in balance. the shapes can change but the volume remains constant.
i believe all there is is lessons. i believe we are polarizing as individuals into two more distinct groups, the service to self, and the service to others. the world's about to split. into.....?

Correct me if I am wrong Billybob but what you are saying is that there is no Devil but rather God is defined in respect to being all encompassing with respect to such matters?

I would like to make a comment but before that would like to hear what others have to say.

Any thoughts?

Toltec I read the tao te ching. Man that is pretty deep, I can see where some of its phylosophy lines up with the bible. Its definitely packed with wisdom. I was a bit surprized that it stated that: the knowledge of the occult is the beggining of all foolishness. I would have thought that the most brilliant people on the face of the earth arise from the occult.

True virtue is not virtuous
Therefore it has virtue.
Superficial virtue never fails to be virtuous
Therefore it has no virtue.

True virtue does not "act"
And has no intentions.
Superficial virtue "acts"
And always has intentions.
True jen"acts"
But has no intentions.
True righteousness "acts"
But has intentions.
True propriety "acts" and if you don't respond

They will roll up their sleeves and threaten you.

Thus, when the Tao is lost there is virtue
When virtue is lost there is jen
When jenis lost there is Justice
And when Justice is lost there is propriety.

Now "propriety" is the external appearance of loyalty and sincerity
And the beginning of disorder.

Occult abilities are just flowers of the Tao
And the beginning of foolishness.

Therefore the Master dwells in the substantial
And not in the superficial.
Rests in the fruit and not in the flower.

So let go of that and grasp this.

If anything what is being implied here is to never treat the occult as the answer as it is not. The symbolism parallels a fruit bearing tree in which first is the flower and from that flower comes the fruit.

Does that help?

One other point......

If you can move a mountain you have proven beyond any shadow of doubt that you have the faith of a mustard seed.

Which is really great if in fact you really are a mustard seed. That not being the case you have much more the learn.

[Edited on 13-7-2003 by Toltec]

Originally posted by Toltec
Correct me if I am wrong Billybob but what you are saying is that there is no Devil but rather God is defined in respect to being all encompassing with respect to such matters?

I would like to make a comment but before that would like to hear what others have to say.

Any thoughts?

yeah. all encompassing. i hope nobody starts quoting the bible. i've read most of it. this is my theory. i believe there is a devil for those who believe there is a devil for them. i believe we judge ourselves after death. how would you stand up to yourself? if you had to experience all the emotions you caused in others at death, would it be a good or bad experience?
i think all states are temporary. (i hope you all get the witty oxymoron).
we'll all get the opportunity to find out, YAY!
the veiws expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views if this station or it's sponsors.

Toltec, I think I follow. I read it in a hurry. The master dwells in the fruit and not the flower. In other words there is nothing life sustaining in the flower but only the fruit. The flower is just for the moment a nice fragrance.