It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was "Christ" a Conciousness?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Why does everyone call Jesus, Jesus Christ? ... as if that was his last name....
What if its like a name, like the Mad Hatter? ... denoting a conciousness...




posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Christ = Anointed or The Anointed One

The term Christ appears over 1,500 times in the New Testament.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:35 PM
link   
If anything was a "consciousness," it was the "Holy Spirit," which admittedly doesn't get a lot of press these days and is definitely the red-headed stepchild of the Holy Trinity. I remember as a kid seeing these illustrations of the Apostles with little "tongues of flame" (a Jewish "yod" symbol) above their heads to symbolize the Holy Spirit. It's also represented as a bird, a dove.

But I always understood that it was a particular kind of feeling or sense of enlightenment that came as a result of understanding what Christ-ness was all about, particularly the concept of resurrection, since the Holy Spirit didn't really show up until the Ascension.

If I was looking for a Christian version of Buddha-like enlightened consciousness, I'd focus on the Holy Spirit, not Christ. Just an opinion.

P.S. -- Jesus's last name was "ben Yusef." Or, if you prefer, "Josephson."

[edit on 4-5-2006 by Enkidu]



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:52 PM
link   
The 'Christ' term had to do with the state of consciousness jesus was able to achieve. Much like the "Sri" before a person's name or 'Ji" at the end of a Guru's name. Each of those supposedly denotes a Master able to impart or teach a state of higher consciousness.


Sorry for the O/T
((That reminds me, what ever happened to that "Little Maharajaji" that went around dispensing darshans like candy during his conventions?))



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 07:00 PM
link   
I've heard this 'christ conciousness' idea bandied about before, I have no idea what its even supposed to mean.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Jesus is the God-man, 100% God and 100% man at the same time. The name Jesus links Him with humanity. The name Christ links Him with deity. Together the tells us who He is.



posted on May, 5 2006 @ 01:35 AM
link   

External source: KJV, Public Domain
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
(~Luke 4:18-19)

How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
(~Acts 10:38)

Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
(~2 Corinthians 1:21-22)

But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
(~1 John 2:27)


Christ was anointed (and thus was indeed the LORD's Christ). The anointing comes directly and only through the Holy Spirit. This is made possible by Christ but by no means is it something restricted to His experience alone.

What is 'consciousness?' Awareness. Total sane sobriety of mentation that wipes away the fog of mortal confusion. A naked eye for the whole reality (which is basically synonymous with God--who is both whole and real beyond our means to comprehend).

In the end, it's all a bunch of words, anyway.


[color=#993399]Words: Leaves on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: temporary, recurring, yet transiently meaningless; and without power to truly change the intention behind them, while being most effective at hiding many things from those who are afraid, somehow, to look too closely at the tree, itself...



posted on May, 6 2006 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by dbrandt
The name Christ links Him with deity. Together the tells us who He is.


A mashiach/christos ("anointed one") from the OT is either a king, a prophet, or a High Priest. The one true Mashiach combines all three offices in one person, and while the Mashiach is indeed YHWH incarnate, He has other names/titles which more directly indicate His deity.



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul of Nisbis
and while the Mashiach is indeed YHWH incarnate,


Revealed truth, brother.


He has other names/titles which more directly indicate His deity.


Yehoshua = 'YHVH saves'



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 09:57 AM
link   

posted by Enkidu

P.S. -- Jesus's last name was "ben Yusef." Or, if you prefer, Josephson. [Edited by Don W]



I have also been told that “Jesus” is an anglicized version of the Greek version of the Aramaic Joshua.

Gee! How’s that for reliabile translatablity?

Makes me wonder if ‘Jesus’ was a real person or more representational? Like Sir Lancelot? Or Robin Hood? Or my favorite, Zorro. Other do-good-ers.




[edit on 5/7/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 11:20 AM
link   
For reasons known only to competent analysts there are intelligent people who are religious. Some of them have tried, mostly unsuccessfully, to insert a modicum of reason into Christian teachings. I remember a visiting scholar (Christian) on loan to the school I attended who came to us from Union Seminary, the Princeton Institute of Advanced Studies, of seminaries who painted a very liberal and reasoned portrait of the composite Jesus. The good Doctor’s picture was devoid of condemnation, thumperism and wild unsubstantiated claims of miracles. He painted a good Jesus, as it were. This scholar is the exception to the rule for those who make their living in religion.

Rather then discuss whether Jesus had a consciousness why not discuss other man made concepts in total. If there actually were a Jesus he (or she if you can believe the man made idea of a “virgin birth”), he/she most likely had a consciousness; why wouldn’t he/she.

As for the trinity the concept has confused Christians for centuries and for good reason. Like most man made ideas it is illogical and fraught with contradiction. The final agreement after more than a century of arguing and political in-fighting is self contradictory and prima facie absurd.
That's my story and I'm stickin to it.

sayswho (skep by any other name)



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 11:24 AM
link   
I didn't realize that this posted twice! Sorry!
sayswho

[edit on 7-5-2006 by sayswho]



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 02:51 PM
link   

posted by sayswho

For reasons unknown there are intelligent people who are religious. Some of them tried to insert a modicum of reason into Christian teachings. A visiting Christian scholar - oxymoron? - on loan from Union Seminary, the Princeton Institute of Advanced Studies of seminaries, painted a very liberal portrait of the composite Jesus. The good doctor’s picture was devoid of condemnation, thumperism and wild unsubstantiated claims of miracles. He painted a good Jesus, as it were.


Now why, S/W, would anybody want to kill a “good” Jesus?



Rather then discuss whether Jesus had a consciousness why not discuss other man made concepts in total. If there actually were a Jesus he or she if you can believe the man made idea of a “virgin birth,” - say Athena out of Zeus’ forehead - he/she/it most likely had a consciousness. As for the trinity the 4th century concept has confused Christians for good reason. Like most man made ideas it is illogical and fraught with contradiction. The final agreement after more than a century of arguing and political in-fighting is self contradictory and prima facie absurd. That's my story and I'm stickin to it. [Edited by Don W]


It is my observation that Emperor Constantine is the founder of contemporary Christianity, especially that based in Rome but necessarily including Rome's offshoots. That St. Paul is the primary theologian. That St. Augustine updating Aristotle is the primary philosopher. The Bishop of Rome did not consolidate his power until the Vatican Council that first assembled in Rome in 1869. It was suspended when the Franco-Prussian War began and the French captured Rome. 1870. It never resumed. This Council - on a disputed vote - many called to the Council left early due to the war - consented to the doctrine of papal infallibility. "I can do it by myself” said the Pope! END


See “Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon” by Daniel Dennett.
Description: Daniel Dennett analyzes the purpose of religion in his new book. The author describes religion as a cultural phenomenon that was developed by natural, evolutionary processes. During his presentation, Mr. Dennett challenges the idea that belief in religion is an outgrowth of supernatural forces. From CSpan2.




[edit on 5/7/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   
donwhite,
Remember that St Augustine was a very flawed individual with enough issues to qualify for internment. He is responsible for mixing his psychosis with his first religion, that of Mani, and mixing that with Catholic teachings to arrive at a classic example of the musings of the psychotic mind. He is responsible for the deeply flawed idea of original sin an idea that is responsible for centuries of unnecessary, gratuitous guilt for the innocent and intellectually lazy faithful..
Each time I see old Tom quoted in a positive manner I wonder if the writer has looked into the history of the person.

I believe you are correct in your opinion that the version of Christianity we know today is not ancient at all but fairly recent and very political. I also agree that Paul or Saul was the original builder of the 'new and improved Judaism' later to metamorph into what we know as Christianity.
Regarding the development of modern ChristianityI am not referring to the beliefs of the faithful but the machinations of the movers and shakers, the “officials” of the organized church.
sayswho



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sayswho

DonWhite: I believe you are correct in your opinion that the version of Christianity we know today is not ancient at all but fairly recent and very political. I also agree that Paul or Saul was the original builder of the 'new and improved Judaism' later to metamorph into what we know as Christianity.

Regarding the development of modern ChristianityI am not referring to the beliefs of the faithful but the machinations of the movers and shakers, the “officials” of the organized church.
sayswho


Yes, and Yes.



[edit on 5/7/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 7 2006 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by dnero6911
Why does everyone call Jesus, Jesus Christ? ... as if that was his last name....



probably because christian followers have been taught that is how he is addressed

Christ is a title like the others have said, meaning 'annointed'

back then the multitudes didn't call him (Jesus, or whatever) the Christ, they refered to him as Jesus, (or whatever) the carpenters son, or Jesus (or whatever) the Nazorean, or other IDs found in the scriptures and other commentary [ben Yusef as mentioned by Enkidu]..




the apostles/inner circle familiars addressed him as Teacher, Rabbi, etc

imo, the Christ Consciousness, is the characterization of his moral attitudes and behavior, which the church powers/leaders desired the faithful to emulate.

also, imo, the JesusChrist person, was a composite of several different people which the church fashioned into the 'Christ' identity...building from the 'mystery' of the Trinity Godhead.

thereby manipulating the masses with the philosophical & mysterious 'Christ-Consciousness' Ideal



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Everyone has the ability of being Christ... a Christ of their own.. it is a place within oneself



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 05:15 PM
link   
There is the possibility that the Christ is all minds and bodies simeaultaneously in a single 'avatar' so to speak.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by sayswho
donwhite,
Remember that St Augustine was a very flawed individual


As we all are.


He is responsible for mixing his psychosis with his first religion, that of Mani, and mixing that with Catholic teachings to arrive at a classic example of the musings of the psychotic mind. He is responsible for the deeply flawed idea of original sin an idea that is responsible for centuries of unnecessary, gratuitous guilt for the innocent and intellectually lazy faithful..


Imagine if all the tumult of the body were to quiet down, along with all our busy thoughts about earth, sea, and air; if the very world should stop, and the mind cease thinking about itself, go beyond itself, and be quite still; if all the fantasies that appear in dreams and imagination should cease, and there be no speech, no sign:

Imagine if all things that are perishable grew still - for if we listen they are saying, "We did not make ourselves; he made us who abides forever" - imagine, then, that they should say this and fall silent, listening to the very voice of him who made them and not to that of his creation; so that we should hear not his word through the tongues of men, nor the voice of angels, nor the clouds' thunder, nor any symbol, but the very Self which in these things we love, and go beyond ourselves to attain a flash of that eternal wisdom that abides above all things:

And imagine if that moment were to go on and on, leaving behind all other sights and sounds but this one vision that ravishes and absorbs and fixes the beholder in joy; so that the rest of eternal life were like that moment of illumination that leaves us breathless:

Would this not be what is bidden in scripture, Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord? - St. Augustine

[edit on 20/5/2006 by AkashicWanderer]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join