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.

 

What is with all the "Christianity-Debunking" attempt threads?

page: 33
34
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
The reason 99% of it is aimed at christiantity is because 99% of the people posting on here are white western world citizens...

Most other religions simply do not concern us as they don't inerfere with our lives.




posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gregor100
The reason 99% of it is aimed at christiantity is because 99% of the people posting on here are white western world citizens...

Most other religions simply do not concern us as they don't inerfere with our lives.


I'm as WASP as you can get. Paternal line Pennsylvania Dutch (German) from the 1700's Palentine Migration - - - Maternal side 3rd generation off the boat Irish.

There are many religions in America - including - Wiccan - Positive Thought - Metaphysics - Buddhist - Islam - Jewish (or is it Hebrew - can never get that one right) - and many more.

They rarely push their belief in subject matters not pertaining to the discussion of religion. Christians however do.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
I think a lot of us are just tired of the hell damming, holier than thou, back in the 18th century hypocrites.
The Christians who are faithful and follow the tenants, who do good works and lead by example rather than trying to build an empire, they are fine.

And its to that respect that we shouldn't be attacking Christianity per se.

There's unfortunately a lot of dangerous christian elements and to this effect i think we can all agree, being a Christian does not mean you cannot also be evil.

It's from this angle that we seek protection and it's this aspect of Christianity that is being questioned, so rather than politicize and protect Christianity, it would be good to see some Christians making strong stands against these right wing factions, even to the effect of siding with atheists etc... when their common sense shines through.






[edit on 20-2-2009 by spacial]



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacial
So all the sins in the whole bible before jesus came also got it wrong? But John is supposedly right? (Also can you give reference to the chapter?)


If you want to be free of sin, you must understand the truth.
Jesus understood the truth.
Before Jesus, few to none understood the truth.
Before Jesus, sin is defined as disobeying rules.
After Jesus, sin is defined as unbelief in Christ.
See John chapter 16.
Jesus taught what ears had not heard before, and what eyes had not seen.
So,
Jesus was original.
Therefore,
There is no sense in presupposing that anyone before him understood what sin and salvation were.
This includes Hebrew prophets.
You will never be saved if you say sin is disobeying rules.
You may be saved only if you believe in Christ.
To believe in Christ, you must be open minded about who or what Christ is.
If you try to judge Christ according to your beliefs, then you sin and make the same mistake everyone makes from the beginning of time.
And since the beginning of time, all of your judgements about Christ have not saved you.
Clearly, you are still enmeshed with time.
You are in time because you do not believe in eternity.
Eternity is an attribute of Christ, while time is its opposite.

I'm not saying John is right.
I'm saying that John passed on what he learned from Jesus as best he could or understood, given his unbelief in Christ prior to meeting Jesus.
I'm saying that in regards to the definition of sin, John is right because Jesus was right about that.

You assume James, John and Jesus all believed the same thing.
But Jesus lived, and John and James died.
So I have a right to question what they think they knew.
If to live were a commandment of Jesus, then James and John broke it.
It was not a commandment.
Life is a condition of belief in Christ.
James and John did not live.
So I have the right to question what they think they understood.

I am convinced that Jesus understood the truth.
Understanding the truth, Jesus knew himself as the truth.
As the truth, Jesus lived.
James and John did not know themselves as the truth.
So, I have a right to question whether they actually followed Jesus, or,
whether they tagged along and held onto his coattails.
Those who just hold onto Jesus coattails and don't follow are those who say, "Lord, Lord..." but have no intention of truly following him.
If you truly want to follow Jesus, then you would identify with Christ.

Christ is before and after "the world".
The world denies Christ.
The world is built on a foundation of lies about Christ.
The world is built on sand.
The world "cannot stand" and will "fall".
The world will "pass away".

Christ!


[edit on 20-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacial
So now the whole old testament, James, brother of Jesus and Jesus himself who is quite clear, so its not like you can reinterpret him, is wrong and John is right?


Jesus was right.
Even though Jesus was right, they shoved nails into his hands.
Even though Jesue was right, they shoved words into his mouth.

"They" are those who did not understand him, who thought they did.
"They" are those who did not really believe in Christ.
"They" are those who wanted a "messiah" and not Christ.
Those who wanted a messiah rejected Christ.
Many wanted Jesus to be "the messiah".
Jesus was not "the messiah".
Jesus knew himself as Christ.
Jesus did not know himself as Jesus.
Jesus called no man father.
So,
Jesus did not know himself as a son of man.
Everyone who does not believe in Christ believes he is a son of man.
All who believe in Christ are certain they are the Son of God.
If you are the Son of God, there is nothing you can "do" to become what you already are.
Likewise, Jesus did not have to "do" anything to be Christ.
Likewise, I do not have to "do" anything to be Christ.
There are no good deeds I can do to be Christ.
There are no bad deeds I can do forfeit Christhood.
Nothing can separate us from the love of Christ...NOTHING!
Christ is love.
Nothing can separate us from Christ.
Nothing can change the fact that I am Christ.
So,
Christ is "the end of the law to them that believe unto righteousness."
There are no laws that you can obey or disobey enough that would change the fact that you are Christ.
However, if you want to know yourself as you are, you must understand the laws of GoD, and love them.
The laws of GoD are not the same as the laws of the prodigal son.
The laws of the prodigal son are twisted expressions of the Law of God.
The twisted expressions include the laws of "nature" [ie. gravity], as well as the law of separation [everybody is different, apart, special]. The prodigal son also includes the law of guilt, making everyone guilty...making guilt "the truth".

Those who wanted Jesus to be a messiah wanted him to support the laws of separation and guilt.
These are not the laws Jesus obeyed.
Jesus was under no laws but the law of God, which he loved.
Christ is the law of God.
Christ is the law of love and the law of oneness.
The law of love and oneness are the same.
Christ is the end of the law of separation which adulterates the law of love.
The law of separation rules the "old testament".
The law of love rules the "new testatment".
The law of love cancels out the law of separation and its sub-laws.


Christ!


[edit on 20-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Deleted


[edit on 20-2-2009 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Christ!
 


And you get this authority from whom?

Do you have a church or did Jesus tell you all this himself?

What is the name of the Church?

How come you have more authority than the actual people that Jesus entrusted?

Sorry but anyone can say anything with definition and it usually works on children, but we are not children.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 04:17 AM
link   
CHRIST!

I think you are correct. Maybe people got Jesus wrong. I mean look at John and the other gospels. Almost worlds apart. The interpretations are too distinct. Mathew , Mark and Luke are pretty well aligned but John. John is on another plane entirely.

JOHN:

It seems to me John is very different in speech, attitude and also how he 'heard' from Jesus compared to the other gospels.

It was something i never gave great thought to other than it just didn't feel right. I didn't have authority but because i am a non Christian I can easily follow what's right and true to my heart rather than being tied to some dogma that a preacher tells me. The Jesus in John was just too different from the Jesus in the other gospels. I'm not talking about small differences, I'm talking about very large differences in the way Jesus speaks. The language is different and the things that are said are different. Our discussions have touched upon some of those differences.

In any case, I came across this passage in John (revelations) one day, below:

16"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."




and i thought where have i heard that before?

...the morning star...??

So i did awww.biblegateway.com... bible search.

and did a search on Morning Star and came up with this and another reference in John (see below) as the only other refference to a person or entity:

saiah 14:12 (New International Version)

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!


.
Now considering as you say, some people got jesus wrong, like his disciples who he relayed the info to, I think it is also worth considering the people who put the canons together. Could they make mistakes? They didn't know Jesus at all and made the canons well after a hundred years after his death.

So i did some historical research on John and found out he was not considered to be an important book by early Christians.

The other interesting fact is that no early examples of this book have been found as opposed to the other gospels (mark being the earliest)

Researches and linguists have indeed traced the use of language at least 60 years after the earlier books and when you read John it does sound very different the way he speaks. It was written in a different point in time?

So let me put forward another proposition to you.

After Jesus came and went, the devil made it important to infiltrate this church and sent an author to disguise himself as John and wrote his chapters.

If i was the devil this is exactly what i would do.

So, if that is the case then that would explain the discrepancies both in the bible, with what Jesus said and also why John is just so so different from all the rest.

Why would Jesus say so many things to Mathew Mark and Luke only to be refuted by John?

Isaiah goes on to say:
13 You said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c]

14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."

15 But you are brought down to the grave,
to the depths of the pit.


John goes onto say:
27'He will rule them with an iron scepter;
he will dash them to pieces like pottery'— just as I have received authority from my Father. 28I will also give him the morning star. 29He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches


It would explain all the evil that is in the church.

It would explain why you do not desire peace, rather you look for war. (correct me if i am wrong)

It explains a lot and all the truth is there, whereas your proposition has conflicts.



[edit on 21-2-2009 by spacial]



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacial
And you get this authority from whom?

Do you have a church or did Jesus tell you all this himself?

What is the name of the Church?

How come you have more authority than the actual people that Jesus entrusted?

Sorry but anyone can say anything with definition and it usually works on children, but we are not children.


I am Self appointed.
Who else could appoint me?
The truth is written on our hearts.
Always has been.
I am priveledged and grateful to "hear" the truth at this time.
That is,
I have source material that comes from "Jesus" as prime author.
It is largely unedited. The filters are minimal.
I also have source material authored of the Holy Spirit, Jesus' Teacher.
Also unedited. Minimal filters.
I "hear" the truth and *recognize* it because I welcome it.
I do not need a council of Nicea or Trent to tell me what is the authentic *Voice* of the *Good Shepherd*.
Admittedly, however, before I heard it, I thought i was hearing an authentic voice which i now disregard.
People followed Jesus because they heard the Voice of Truth coming from him.
They heard what was already "written on their hearts" so-to-speak.
They heard it because they were "weary" and therefore, *ready*.
Likewise, I allow my source material to teach me, as if i were sitting round a campfire with Jesus as he teaches what the Teacher taught him.
I also sit with the Teacher daily, and devote most of my time to understanding.
I am free of the prime superstitions that bogged down most Jews in those days.
Plus, i have no fear of being stoned for "blasphemy".
And, I have disinvested a ton of previous beliefs and deceptive valuations.
And I've been sharing via teaching for about three years.
The result is that my understanding is further along than any of the apostles at that time.
I am a few steps behind Jesus, and miles beyond James, Peter, Paul and John.
Of the apostles who understood Jesus most were Thomas and Mary [Magdelene]. Stephen is not mentioned as an apostle, but was among Thomas and Mary as the three preeminent teachers of the authentic legacy of Jesus.
I am grateful and priveleged to "hear" the apostle Thomas and have been guided by his efforts in conjuction with the Holy Spirit.
His efforts have been updated and are now distributed largely unedited as well.
Thomas is the premier apostle today, at this point in time.
So I have a lot of "inside information".
I have been "called".
I am rising to the call...simply fulfilling my role as it unfolds.

My "church" is inclusive, not exclusive.
My church is universal.
99.9999% of those in my church are "unbelievers".
That's ok. They will change their mind given time.
A small percentage agree that I am the Son of God.
These are "out there", in principle.
These comprise the "official" church, which sees all as One, that One being "Christ".
They are everywhere where minds are becoming One.
The *many* will not "prevail", over time, against the One.
Agreeing that we are One, and seeing that we are One are a bit different.
As the path steps toward "the Father", we must "see" that we are the One Son of God.
We must see and experience "the Truth".
I'm not aware that the "official" church has a name.
But you can always tell "who" by the name they go by.
I do not call myself a "christian".
I call myself Christ.
There is a big difference.
It is the difference between night and day, life and death.
I am Christ.
No one I "know" believes it...yet.

In terms of progress, I am a few steps behind Jesus, where his understanding was back then.
Jesus understood the meaning of "Christ", calling himself "the Truth, the Life".
And in his teaching, he merged with his Teacher...the Truth...the Life.
Jesus Teacher was "the Lord"..."the Holy Spirit"..."Christ".
Jesus Teacher is "the Kingdom of God"..."Knowledge"..."Savior".
In accepting oneness with his Teacher, Jesus accepted "the atonement".
Accepting the oneness, Jesus awakened [resurrected].
Thereafter, he spoke in first person as "the Lord", and "the Master", and performed miracles.
This is the direction I am moving, along the same path set forth.

I have more authority because I have more authenticity in my choice of Voice.
Jesus built his church on anyone who would stop and listen.
Just because they stopped and listened to his Voice does not mean they stopped listening to the voices in their heads.
The voices in peoples heads are their own thoughts...the thoughts of man...since before time.
These voices are subversive to the truth.
When authentic Voice and subversive voice are mixed together toward a compromise, the meaning of salvation is confused.
When salvation is compromised, it is subverted.
Confusion follows as minds follow confusion and not truth.
This is what it means that "the evil one" comes in at night to sow bad seed among the good seed, making a crop of "wheat and tares" together.
The bible is basically a crop of wheat and tares, indistinquishable to those who prefer tares to wheat.
We can only be fooled by our desires.
If we desire the things of this world, we will be confused by the confusion of the NT scribes.

I speak with authority because I have understanding backed by a Source of certainty.
I have understanding because i am willing to know, without prejudice.
I have an open mind...opening more and more.
What I say makes sense.
Believe it or not.
Its for me to believe, and you to find out.
In this way, its for me to find out.
What we sow we will reap.
Give, and it will be given.
The measure we give will be given back.
I give Christ to everyone.

Christ!



[edit on 21-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacial
CHRIST!

I think you are correct. Maybe people got Jesus wrong. I mean look at John and the other gospels. Almost worlds apart. The interpretations are too distinct. Mathew , Mark and Luke are pretty well aligned but John. John is on another plane entirely.

So let me put forward another proposition to you.

After Jesus came and went, the devil made it important to infiltrate this church and sent an author to disguise himself as John and wrote his chapters.

If i was the devil this is exactly what i would do.

So, if that is the case then that would explain the discrepancies both in the bible, with what Jesus said and also why John is just so so different from all the rest.


Good detective work.
Mark, Luke and Matthew are called the "synoptic" gospels because they are alike.
John is different.
One could narrow the four pop gospels down to two.
If the "John" gospel was anymore enlightening, it may have gone the way of the gospel of Thomas, which was too light for the darkness that had set in by the time of Nicea.

I have priviledged information suggesting that indeed, the apostle John is not the author of the gospel attributed to his name, and so comprised an understanding at that time...some sixty years later. That understanding is not so blatently messio-centric as Matthew, who never met Jesus either, who shoves a lot of Jewish expectations in Jesus mouth...giving rise to "judeo-christianity".

The rift between the apostles can be seen better if you read the gospel of Thomas, 30% of which is not authentic. But he was indeed taken aside, and told things that the other were not prepared to accept. And he was indeed told not to repeat such things in front of the others, lest they take up stones to stone him.

They all saw Jesus after he rose from the dead, so-to-speak.
They did not all agree on what the appearance of a super-body meant.
To Thomas, resurrection had more to do with mind.
To the others, resurrection meant that they might hope for a glorified body like Jesus.

This is the basic rift that defines "the gospel" as it has come to be understood.
They say, the "victors write the history".
Well, the sects of Peter, James, John, and Paul wrote the history for the most part.
And Thomas was censured, disenfranchised, and his sayings gospels were rounded up and destroyed...except the copy at Nag-hamadi.
Likewise, the sayings gospel of Stephen was destroyed.

So let us be vigilant to discern wheat from tares that we may have "daily bread", not daily blood.

Christ!

[edit on 21-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Christ!
 
Goodness. You are just asking for it from both sides, Christian and Atheist alike. I'm sure you mean well, and you are certainly well spoken, but I would ease up on the:

Asserting that you are an Authority on anything.
Claiming you are "miles ahead" of respected Biblical figures.
Claiming that that you have priveledged information.
Calling yourself Christ.

Not trying to bash you here, and I'm sure you don't care if other people do(it's probably something like a badge of honor for you), but if you want to be taken seriously, ease up on the hearing voices platform and provide something in the way of references. I don't say proof because there's none to be had on either side of the fence.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by spacial
The Christians who are faithful and follow the tenants, who do good works and lead by example rather than trying to build an empire, they are fine.

And its to that respect that we shouldn't be attacking Christianity per se.

it would be good to see some Christians making strong stands against these right wing factions, even to the effect of siding with atheists etc... when their common sense shines through.
[edit on 20-2-2009 by spacial]
Excellent thoughts Spacial. This is exactly the kind of thinking we need around here and in the world. There are greater threats than people who peacefully disagree with each other.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Christ!
 


I agree Thomas and Magdalene are nice Gospels.

I really didn't think you had it in you to be open minded, but i was wrong...

I think you have a lot of potential and are going in a good direction.

Let yourself have peace from the mind.

Forcing opinions on others, although very well meaning, shows you need some more understanding. Sometimes you have to let go in order to receive.

A rare gem.



[edit on 22-2-2009 by spacial]

[edit on 22-2-2009 by spacial]



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix
reply to post by Christ!
 
Goodness. You are just asking for it from both sides, Christian and Atheist alike.


Indeed, I am not well recieved by atheists or judeo-christians.

As a rule of thumb, a judeo-christian leader will look at two or three statements from me or my source and throw down a gavel of judgement, condemning my Source as "of the devil", or what-have-you. Scarcely will any such open their minds enough to read an entire body of statements, to see how they are supported. A judeo-christian leader is more likely to click the *ignore* button than an atheist.

Between atheists and judeo-christians, the atheists have a better chance of comprehending what i have to say...sooner than later. For that matter, prostitutes have a better chance of accepting what I have to say than anyone sitting in the front pew of Paulitical polemics.

The atheists have a head start because they agree with me, that there is no gOd of this world, and so, nothing to fear in that regard. But atheists are reactionaries who are responding to fear at a much deeper level of subconscious mind. And for this reason they deny the truth as they assert the "reality" of this world. And "here" is where judeo-christians and atheists meet on common ground. Both assert that this world is "real". The atheists state that the world is real without purpose. The theists state that the world is real with purpose. And according to that purpose, the theists meet the atheists six feet under the ground. They are both blinded to the fact that the purpose of this world is to deny Reality with its own version of "reality". And in this version, death is "the truth", and not Life.

Christ!




[edit on 22-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by SumnerKagan
 


Because the religion of Atheism wishes to usurp the religion of Christianity in the US. And really any religion because alot of them believe it causes all the nastiness to be found in human nature.

[edit on 22-2-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix
I'm sure you mean well, and you are certainly well spoken, but I would ease up on the:

Claiming that that you have priveledged information.



Ok, i'll ease up on the "priveledged information".
All of my priveledged information is available at *www.amazon.com*.

You may even find some of it at Barnes and Nobles bookstore.
I am priveledged to have found it, and recognize it for what it is, and the authors for who they are.
I am priveledged to have an open mind enough to begin accepting it.
I am grateful to have the information.
I am grateful that we have more information today than the apostles had back then.
Everybody has the same information i do, technically speaking.
Not everybody recognizes it, opens up to it, and/or let's it transform their minds.
It's no use referencing any of my sources.
If you do not have an open mind about anything i say, my sources will not help.
I never appeal to my sources as if they have more authority than I.
So long as i am interpreting them according to the intent of their authors, the authority is the same.
If I am not interpreting them according to the intent of their authors, then it would be a diservice to reference them as if i were some kind of apostle-like representative.
All in all, understood correctly, the authority of their authors and my authority are the same.
Referencing my sources would be counterproductive.
My goal is not primarily to change anyone's mind.
My goal is to change *my* mind.
I change my mind a little bit more each time i articulate accurately truthful authority.
The goal is the be the authority that I am.
This is a mind-changing path.
Upon this path i am setting an example...showing "the way".
The way is about accepting Self.
The goal of the way is to "know thy Self".
It would be counterproductive to deny the Self I intend to know.
So I do not deny that I am Christ.
Is that not a reasonable approach?
How can you be Christ while denying Christ?
How can you be yourSelf while denying yourSelf?
How can anyone even begin on such a path if he begins with denial?

Christ!



[edit on 22-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix
I'm sure you mean well, and you are certainly well spoken, but I would ease up on the:
Claiming you are "miles ahead" of respected Biblical figures.
Calling yourself Christ.


The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Those who deny they are Christ have good intentions.
They think they are being humble.
And they think that this kind of humility is somehow honored by their heirachal gOd.
But GoD is no respecter of heirarchy.
Neither am i, nor do i put my faith in men, except that they seem to echo the Voice of truth.
I am miles ahead of "respected" biblical figures because I "confess" that i am Christ.
Except for Jesus, none of the "respected" biblical figures confessed theselves to be Christ.
So none really followed Jesus.
I do.
I am just a few steps behind.
And soon, I will be on equal footing as i emulate his ways.

One of the most respected biblical figures once denied he was associated with anyone who confessed Christ in any way whatsoever.
Twenty years later, that same respected biblical figure was secretly eating with "gentiles" whenever his judeo-christian associates were not around.
And when his judeo-christian associates came around, that respected biblical figure would eat openly and exclusively with his judeo-christian associates, and ostricize the gentiles from their table.
Twenty years later!
Clearly, he had not learned much in twenty years.
But in less than three years, I would not only eat with anyone, but i would include them in Christ, whether they believed it or not!
Indeed, i am miles ahead, walking with my brothers farther than they ask.
Verily, verlily, i am miles ahead upon a path that leads all to the same place.
Follow me or not.
I prefer that you walk with me, side by side.
That way, we need not appear to be unequal in any way.
For if the destination is equality, how can we go there but as equals?
Therefore, I call you "brother".
If you will not walk with me, then I must walk with the Teacher, seemingly alone.
I walk toward equality with my Teacher.
I walk as an equal.
So, i am 'the lord' who chooses carefully his Guidance.

I have walked and talked with Peter, Paul and if you are willing to believe it, Isaiah.
I have eaten with Peter and Paul and drank coffee with Isaiah.
I'm speaking in terms of their current personas within the ever-changing drama called "the world".
The world is a stage beset with props and scenes in which characters come and go, and come again in other costume, wearing another mask.
And this "play" continues until each decides to exist stage right [righteous] instead of stage left.
Stage left leads back onstage.
Stage right leads back to *Our Father*.
I call it "stage right" because to return to the Father is what defines "righteousness".
There is no other kind of righteousness.
Only the truth leads stage right.
Still onstage, Peter, Paul and Isaiah do not follow the truth.
They will, but not at this time.
Each still dreams of a glorified state of existence within the macro-dream.
They each settle for less than the totality of everything.
So, they are settling for less than what the true God would give them.
The are settling for less than what the true God has *already* given them.
So, they continue to deny themselves, and manifest the effects of "hell".

Centuries ago, Paul burned with a desire to have a glorified body and sold this idea to the rest of the world. Peter shared this desire, which is fundamentally an expression of Pharisee eschatology. As a result, Peter and Paul are still within time, often associating together, seeking "ascended master" status.
And in so seeking, they seek less than what the true God offers, and what Jesus accepted for himself.
They do not seek equality.
And where there is a heirarchy, there is hell, and hell to pay.
Peter and Paul pay for their dream periodically with death.
On average, all the apostles paid death twenty times before they accepted what Jesus offered.
Bound, twenty incarnational incarcerations before they allowed the truth to release them and set them free!
This is "priveleged", "inside" information.

As for Isaiah, Peter and Paul are miles ahead.
I could sit down and eat with Peter or Paul.
I once invited Paul to stay at my place.
He travels the world preaching with his fingers.
He is a consumate pianist, composing the most beautiful music "of the spheres" spontaneously.
Peter has a school...a "mystery school".
He is well respected, as is Paul.

Isaiah has given his mind to be posessed by the gOd of this world, which is the idol gOd of Israel.
And given to idolatry, Isaiah is blind.
Isaiah has a mouth and no ears.
Isaiah speaks with an air of authority, as we would expect of a prophet.
Isaiah has been taken to sit at gOd's right hand, so-to-speak, and shown many things which cannot be contained within even all the books in the world.
Isaiah is "priveleged" in this regard.
I used to speak with Isaiah.
Now I shun Isaiah, whose mind is utterly possesed of ego...the gOd of this world.
My mind is open to the Holy Sprit.
There is no communication between the Holy Spirit and the ego-gOd-of-this-world.
Isaiah's mind is utterly closed to the truth.
His mind would sooner crucify the truth than accept it.
In fact, by the utter confusion Isaiah spreads in the name of Jesus, he does crucify the truth daily.
When Isaiah is done with it, the truth is so mangled beyond recognition that he must trap himself within illusions seemingly forever.
Possessed of a mind that makes threats of hell in the name of love, Isaiah is a dirty, homeless, street figure, lurking in the dark, whispering lies to anyone who would listen to him between puffs of cigarettes, cups of coffee, and drinks at the bar.

If I let these respected biblical figures and their sources be an authority to me, I would be lost like them, led by the blind into a "ditch" that traps us in time, never to escape the "life-cycle" of self-deception and self-denial.

Word: We can only be fooled by our desires.
Merely understand what respected biblical figures desired, and you will understand how it is that they have been, can be, and are fooled.
Hint: Glorified bodies.
That's all you need to know to know how it is we are decieved.
****SPecIal StaTus****
Christ!


[edit on 22-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix
I'm sure you mean well, and you are certainly well spoken, but I would ease up on the:

Asserting that you are an Authority on anything.
Calling yourself Christ.

Not trying to bash you here, and I'm sure you don't care if other people do(it's probably something like a badge of honor for you), but if you want to be taken seriously, ease up on the hearing voices platform and provide something in the way of references. I don't say proof because there's none to be had on either side of the fence.


If I don't call myself Christ, how would I be an authority on anything?
What kind of authority denies the truth?
Many will, with their mouths, allow Jesus to be Christ.
But they will exclude themselves and others from Christ.
They do this by isolating Jesus as the Christ, to the exclusion of themselves and all others.
In this way, they damn themselves and others in the name of Christ Jesus.

To damn oneself is to maintain the status quo.
The status quo is that we are *already* damned.
That is, if we appear to be "people", "men" or "women"...we are already condemned.
Condemnation, then, precedes "the world".
And,
The world is Christ...condemned.
The damned do not know what Christ is because...they have damned Christ.
Having damned Christ, they have damned themSelves.
And denying Christhood to others, they condemn others, and are condemned just as they condemn.
As they measure, it is measured back to them.
One will never see themselves as Christ so long as they condemn others to non-Christhood.
"Judge not, lest ye be judged"...so-to-speak.

If what I just said is true, then its clear that respected biblical scribes condemn their respectful readers in the name of Christ Jesus.
Likewise, those who love the legacy of condemnation continue to damn themselves and others in the name of Christ Jesus.
The legacy of condemnation is tricky.
You can...
...be *like* Jesus.
...be "Christ like"
...be a "christian"
...be a "believer"
But if one is "not" Christ, s/he condemns himself and any who would listen to lies.
The legacy of condemnation is very tricky.
You can be "Christ".
But if one excludes anyone else from Christ, one condemns others, and himself along with them.
Christ is a fact [truth] whether it is believed or not.
Christ is the truth about anyone and everyone...believe it or not.
When truth is denied, one experiences a life of lies.
A life of lies is a rollercoaster of emotions.
A rollercoaster of emotions is hell.
Hell is "life" for those who love rollercoasters.
But "liFe" is lies-for-feelings, regardless.

The reason is very simple.
The world arises from the denial of Christ.
The world is a "place" where we can "go" to deny Christ.
The world is a "time" when we can deny Eternity.
The world is a safehaven behind which we can hide from Self.
The world is many places where we can be many.
The world "saves" the many for manyhood.
Manhood is a manifestation of manyhood.
The world denies oneness by making many the truth, and the truth many.
The world is many truths to many minds.

Whatever the world is, it is a place where none identify with Christ...nor allow anyone else to have that identity.
In fact, the biblical scribes attempt to rob Jesus of Christ as well.
Instead, they make him into a hero of Jewish folklore.
The hero of Jewish folklore is called "the Messiah".
This so-called messiah is not Christ!
This so-called messiah is a savior of insanity.
Christ is a Savior from insanity.

Insanity begins with a desire to be special.
The desire to be special gives rise to the world.
The world gives everyone 15 minutes of fame.
After each one's 15 minutes of fame, the world gives them hell.
The desire to be special betrays Christ, and condemns Christ to hell.

Christ is not special.
The only way to be the same is to be Christ.
The only way to be equal is to be Christ.
The only way to not be special is to be Christ.
The only way to escape specialhood is to be Christ.
The only way to escape hell is to be Christ.
To be Christ is to be who we are...already.

Christ!





[edit on 22-2-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


I am horrified that you appear to have a dead Indian Chief as your avatar.

Why is that? This is disrespectful.



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Christ!
 


So it all just comes down to linguistics...?

Christ is the English term for the Greek Χριστός (Khristós) meaning "the anointed"

So are you talking when one of the Mary's anointed his feet or ...?

I'd say you mean by god.




top topics



 
34
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join