It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Christ the eternal Tao..........

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 9 2003 @ 09:09 PM
just a few thoughts ....also links for anyone to read..................also books in interest..........

From Part I: The Gospel according to Lao Tzu:

"There are those," said the Ancient Sage,

"Who would conquer the world and make of it what they desire.

I see they will not succeed.

The world is like a hollow utensil

And cannot be manipulated.

That which is not the Way soon fades away.

Hence the sage assists the natural development of all things,

Even though he does not venture to interfere."

When something accords with the Way,

All creation aids it.

But when the Way rejects something,

Creation too opposes it.

The stream flows gently

But its course is inexorable.

There are many directions,

But there is only one Way by which the stream flows.

The Way has given to the soul freedom of movement

And power over herself.

Exercising this freedom and this power,

She may think she is fulfilling her true nature,

Not knowing that her nature was made, not merely to move,

But to move in the right direction.

As free of the Way, one can go in many directions,

But then one becomes a slave of those directions.

As a slave of the Way, one can follow naught but one Course,

But then one is free.

Universal freedom is a lie

Because there is only One Course in the universe, not many.

Yet universal freedom is true

Because, in following the One Universal Course,

One encompasses the cosmos.

Having the freedom of choice,

One chooses freedom from choice.

From Part III: Uniting Oneself to the Incarnate Tao through Watchfulness and Prayer: We take refuge in our thoughts, fantasies and emotions because they give us a deceptive sense of security. But Christ tells us to abandon that security and make ourselves vulnerable, relying wholly on our Creator. Both Christ and Lao Tzu likened this state of self-abandonment to the mind of a little child who has not yet developed a mature ego.... "Become as little children," they said. A child, although also touched by the primordial fall, is closer to the true Source of knowing than an adult. Simple and spontaneous, he knows without knowing how he knows. He can be happy without knowing he is happy. What adults often consider happiness is in reality the emotional excitement of the ego; while a little child's happiness consists in the simple, selfless joy of being alive.

When Christ told each person to "deny himself" and "lose his life," he was not saying to obliterate the conscious mind. Rather, he was saying to purify it by casting off the ego that has grown on it like a parasite. Thinking, imagining, dreaming and emotion are not destroyed in the follower of the Way; rather they are wholly submitted to a higher Source.

posted on Mar, 9 2003 @ 10:17 PM
I agree. I believe Christ was part Taoist. I heard a sermon this weekend that even used a line found in the Tao Te Ching, but was spoken by either Jesus or one of the disciples. Christ may have used a sightly different perspective than Lao Tzu, but they both seemed to find great truth in a wisdom that is far from normal human perception. If I get a chance, I will try to pick up that book.

posted on Mar, 9 2003 @ 10:21 PM

posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 02:59 AM
Well, from a less tollerant point of view.

I believe Christ was a nut, just as everyone here believes "Brian" is a nut.

How can you call a guy today who calls himself Jesus a nut...and not call a man who called himself the Son of God a nut?

Hypocritical if you ask me.

posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 06:00 AM
...Lots of scripture was written about Christ, his life & ministry. Much of the writings about Christ were never authored until a couple of centuries after his crucifiction. There's no denying the power & influence that Christ introduced into the world.
On the other hand, Brian...Comes across like a conman & even uses profanity against people who ask him too many logical questions. Not very Christ-like, huh?

Comparing Christ as described in the scriptures to Brian is like comparing apples to the worms that eat out the cores...

[Edited on 10-3-2003 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 09:38 PM
Hi Helen that was fascinating and well prepared. Saved the link to my favorites it is definitely worth looking into very carefully

Hello Hammerite from what I understand the Israelis are not the only culture to acknowledge the existence, of a person who lived about 2000 years ago. This person is the man Christians today calls Jesus Christ.

They all confirm the abilities presented in relation to this man as described in the Holy Bible.

With regards to Brain, MD seems to have offered a rather unique and in all probability, a very accurate depiction.

posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 09:47 PM
I'm not saying the man Jesus didn't live. I'm just attacking several points the fact Jesus is made out to be the "Son of God" and two the fact that people here criticize Ycon and Brian for both believing Brian is Jesus reborn.

My point has no "deeper meaning" other than the hypocrisy of the two statements.

If I say I am the Son of God, who is to doubt me, 2000 years from now if everyone 2000 years from now believe it.

I like all other religions BUT christians, doubt Jesus was the "son of god".

And I don't remember now this did have a point to do with this thread, but I haven't looked at it for a bit.

One thing, is Taoism has nothing to do with Jesus, other than both offered a "path". Jesus's path was "through him" to get to heaven.

Taoism taught that everything was just one thing, one existance, and so on and so forth. Totally unrelated.

posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 11:21 PM
To be honest if you can raise the dead, walk on water, heal the sick and move mountains. And then succeed in presenting your ability to perform these acts, in the presence of scholars and those who's responsibility it is to discern such issues a valid or invalid. You would probably be afforded some type of title, which made clear. That these capacities were valid from the perspective of culture drawing the conclusion.

Buddha' are accepted as Hands of God, the interpretation of which can be taken as literal.

An interesting sideline here is that in Exodus Death in relation to the Story of Moses, is also called a Hand of God. The Black Buddha is known as death.

The Tao is so vast that when you use it, something is always left.
How deep it is!
It seems to be the ancestor of the myriad things.
It blunts sharpness
Untangles knots
Softens the glare
Unifies with the mundane.
It is so full!
It seems to have remainder.

It is the child of I-don't-know-who.
And prior to the primeval Lord-on-high.

How would you interpret this?

What you are contending in relation to an interpretation of the Tao is related to a conclusion that there is nothing else but one being. This meaning no real individuality or existence outside the one, implying that reality, as we understand it is an illusion (correct me if I am wrong of course. Keep this in mind Hammerite "Is it not through her selflessness that she is able to perfect herself."

What are your thoughts?

[Edited on 11-3-2003 by Toltec]

posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 11:49 PM
Well my thoughts about taoism is that it was a philosophy constructed from a mixture of more ancient eastern beliefs and modernization of China, which at the time was in fact pretty knowledgeable about the universe.

Taoism at its root seems to try and answer the question, if there is infinity, then why is our universe so finite?

No scientist even today can figure that out. Is our Universe even expanding? Or is it just a change in our mathematical sequence.

As for Jesus, who says he really did all that they say he did? I love Braveheart. "You're William Wallace?" "Well yeah, would you prefer I shoot lightning bolts out of my eyes and fireballs from my arse?"

Moral, people in passed down knowledge become "larger than life".

posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 12:52 AM
The term finite by its very definition presents the conclusion that something exists outside of it.

In respect to how this plays out, if what exist outside
our finite Universe is itself finite then what exist
beyond that?

One gets to the point that the term ad infinitum

I am of both American Indian and Oriental decent and my upbringing includes a thorough understanding of legends from both societies as well as others. Several cultures present information in respect to the Man the Jews called Jesus Christ. As having existed, as well as having the capacities which were presented by the Holy Bible.

In that sense they act as confirmation independent of the culture Jesus Christ was born in. This because they contend that Jesus was present in these cultures at some point in time before or after the events which led to his reported demise and resurrection

There are alternatives theories in respect to why Jesus was suppose to be able to do what is claimed. Yours is one and the idea that he preformed miracles is another. A third is that Jesus was trained in a capacity akin to what today is often referred to as remote influencing, similar to hypnosis (mass hypnosis). But pertaining to alternatives with respect to methodologies, in relation to how a suggestion or command is delivered.

There are many issues, which offer alternatives to what can be accepted as larger than life. An example being breaking 10 cinder blocks with your forehead and saying alive. Which for the record in respect to any current definition physics would imply, would include issues in respect to variances structural density controlled by the mind.

From a certain context the idea that a member of the masses (commoners), would draw a false conclusion on the capacity of a person is understandable.

But when one gets into the issues of interpreting the conclusions of elders, scholars and people who were for other functions, educated to the same degree. It important to acknowledge that with respects to a then prophet whose teachings and capacities are parts of our culture.

That there is no way they (prophets) would have become such an integral part of history if it were not for the fact to some extent the contentions presented were in fact valid. Hence the term Legends which define by there very nature an inherent validity to the storys.

What are your thoughts?

[Edited on 11-3-2003 by Toltec]

posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 08:31 PM
I like the idea that the "expanding universe" might only be a variance of mathematical equations. If that is so, then reality is either an illusion or a puzzle (perhaps both). Even if the universe is expanding, both possibilities are still... well... possible.

The only explanation we have as a society is "anti-proof." This is my way of saying that we have no proof, or none that we believe, that supports the claims of superpowered prophets/saviors or any paranormal activity. This however does not prove either case, but only raises more questions.

Keep searching and you may find more answers.

new topics

top topics


log in