Wikipedia's Incitement to Genocide

You overanalyze things to the point where it becomes useless. I just read your blog, and OMFG you read WAY WAY WAY too much into Riverdance, the Matrix, and 2001: A space odyssey.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
You overanalyze things to the point where it becomes useless. I just read your blog, and OMFG you read WAY WAY WAY too much into Riverdance, the Matrix, and 2001: A space odyssey.

Wrong.

Analysis is a function of the 'thinker' and the thoughts of the 'thinker'. (See the writings of J. Krishnamurti.)

What I have written was not any thoughts of a 'thinker'.

It comes from a dimension of consciousness prior to the existence of the 'thinker' as well as the "self"; that is, the "observing consciousness".

Michael Cecil

reply to post by Michael Cecil

Originally posted by Michael Cecil

The Doctrine of "resurrection" taught by Jesus is a Doctrine of 'Rebirth'.

The Pharisaical interpretation--Paul's interpretation'--is the Satanic doctrine of the physical raising of a dead body from the grave.

That is the conflict which threatens the existence of this civilization.

It has been going on for more than 2500 years.

Michael Cecil

So are you saying that the doctrine of rebirth is spiritual or are you more along the lines of reincarnation?

I get that you are saying that the doctrine of resurrection is the raising of the actual dead body which by the way is not what Paul taught. Paul taught that we would all get immortal bodies.

Originally posted by darkelf
reply to post by Michael Cecil

 

Originally posted by Michael Cecil

The Doctrine of "resurrection" taught by Jesus is a Doctrine of 'Rebirth'.

The Pharisaical interpretation--Paul's interpretation'--is the Satanic doctrine of the physical raising of a dead body from the grave.

That is the conflict which threatens the existence of this civilization.

It has been going on for more than 2500 years.

Michael Cecil

So are you saying that the doctrine of rebirth is spiritual or are you more along the lines of reincarnation?

I get that you are saying that the doctrine of resurrection is the raising of the actual dead body which by the way is not what Paul taught. Paul taught that we would all get immortal bodies.

According to the Treatise On Resurrection (which was written to a follower of Jesus by a teacher who followed Jesus), there are three resurrections: 1) the physical; 2) the psychic; and, 3) the spiritual.

The "physical" refers to physical 'rebirth'; the "psychic" refers to the revelation of the memories of previous lives; the "spiritual" refers to the Revelation of the consciousness of man at the Moment of Creation, which is conveyed through the Revelation of the Memory of Creation (Genesis 2:7)

The doctrine of an "immortal body" is pagan metaphysical--that is, Satanic--nonsense. There is no evidence of any such doctrine in either the Torah or the Prophets. But as I have said, Paul specifically repudiated all the Revelations in the Torah and the Prophets by his idolatrous and pagan metaphysical doctrines.

Michael Cecil

reply to post by Michael Cecil


So then you are a follower of Gnosticism? Ok, I think I understand what you are saying now. Thanks for the clarification.

Originally posted by darkelf
reply to post by Michael Cecil

 

So then you are a follower of Gnosticism? Ok, I think I understand what you are saying now. Thanks for the clarification.

No I am not a "follower of Gnosticism".

"Gnosticism" is thought.

Anyone who receives the Revelation of the Memory of Creation and the revelation of the memories of previous lives has no reason to follow thoughts. Revelation conveys Knowledge rather than the thoughts of a 'thinker'.

This is not merely a technical issue.

Michael Cecil

In the end it's just another sect without any tangible proof. There's a whole section on Wikipedia that explains how those people in South Western France were hunted down by the church...just like many other people in the world were prosecuted because of their believes.

I really don't see how Wikipedia incites anyone to commit genocide. If you wanna believe in that stuff, and rationalize it by analyzing Riverdance, the Matrix, and 2001, you are free to do so. Obviously you have just as much (or little) proof than any other religion, but if it makes you happy, that doesn't matter.

In the end, it's just another way for people to find "meaning" in their lives because reality isn't good enough for them.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
In the end it's just another sect without any tangible proof. There's a whole section on Wikipedia that explains how those people in South Western France were hunted down by the church...just like many other people in the world were prosecuted because of their believes.

I really don't see how Wikipedia incites anyone to commit genocide. If you wanna believe in that stuff, and rationalize it by analyzing Riverdance, the Matrix, and 2001, you are free to do so. Obviously you have just as much (or little) proof than any other religion, but if it makes you happy, that doesn't matter.

In the end, it's just another way for people to find "meaning" in their lives because reality isn't good enough for them.

Just a few points:

1) "Tangible proof" is a criterion for the consciousness of the 'thinker'. Those who receive the Revelation of the Memory of Creation cannot prove that they have received such a Memory; neither can those who have received memories of previous lives prove that to anyone else. Who cares? Those are genuine memories to those who receive them. And, although not provable, the Doctrine of 'Rebirth' and the knowledge Revealed through the Revelation of the "resurrection" can be demonstrated by the Knowledge that those have who have received those Revelations.

2) Say you have discovered a cure for cancer that, if given to everyone with cancer, would cure them in two weeks. A media official who chooses to censor and suppress that discovery would be ethically responsible for the lives that are lost by that censorship. The conflicts in the Middle East originate in theological error. Period.Those who are responsible for censoring and suppressing the Truth are ethically responsible for the lives that are lost as as a result of the censorship of Truth.

3) Naziism, no doubt, helped the Nazis "find meaning" to their lives. It's perfectly alright if you want to "find meaning" in your life, just so long as your "meaning to life" does not involve slaughtering people on the basis of a demonic theology.

The doctrine of 'vicarious atonement' and the companion 'doctrine' of the demonization of "the Jews" as "Christ-killers" no doubt provided "meaning" to the lives of millions of Christians over the past 1500 years. But, ultimately, it became the 'justification' for genocide.

That, apparently, does not particularly concern you.

Maybe in your next life you will be more cognizant of reality.

Michael Cecil

Oh, by the way, after engaging in an "edit war" with some of the other editors on Wikipedia--at least one of them can be found in the "discussion" or "talk" page on the "resurrection"--I contacted the managers or whoever they were and explained to them the importance of preventing my commentary on the Doctrine of "resurrection" as a Doctrine of 'Rebirth' being removed by the Pharisee-Christian editors, even as a "minority point of view". I explained, to the best of my recollection, that it was this Doctrine for which the Albigensians were exterminated by the tens of thousands--thus, the reason why such a "minority position" is still widely unknown--and that the lies about this Doctrine are precisely the theological foundation of the conflicts between Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Middle East which are threatening the very survival of human civilization.

The reply I received was completely non-commital.

As if they could not care less about the consequences of these theological errors on the conflicts in the Middle East.

My suspicion is that they will rue their indifference when the war is initiated with Iran.

In any case, if such a Doctrine is so ridiculous that it does not present any kind of a serious threat to the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic religious establishment, why is it that such a non-threatening Doctrine must be removed from Wikipedia, must be censored and suppressed by both the religious and the secular media? And, if it is so un-threatening, why is there no religious 'authority' willing to take the risk of making me look like a fool by engaging me in a public debate? To listen to them tell the story, they could very easily make me look like an idiot [Insert Neo's 'Matrix hand sign' to Agent Smith here.]

It is because they fear that they would lose such a debate; just as the Dominican friars regularly lost their debates with the Albigensians.

Michael Cecil

I have read through your replies and find them interesting. I have also read through your website. Unfortunately, your ideas still appear convoluted to me and I was hoping I could seek further clarification from you in this forum. You are obviously learned about Religious scripture, eschatology and stuff of that nature. I hope you can show patience towards people like me who are not as knowledgeable, but still intrigued by your views.

Just some quesitons I have which I hope you can give relatively clear and easy-to-understand answers:

1) In simple terms, what is the truth that has been actively suppressed over the last 2500 years?

2) Which Modern religion do you consider is most reflective of the truth; which one does not seek to steer us away from the truth? (Or do you consider them all to be as deceptive as each other?)

3) How do you explain the existence of Satanism, demons and evil? (To be more specific: why does God permit their existence if all they do is corrupt, deceive, harm etc. ?)

4) You've mentioned that profit has been a large motivator for religious officials suppressing the truth about religion and the meaning of life. Don't profit and material possessions mean little when one is not only aware of, but actively participating, in the systematic annihilation of Earth?

I look forward to your reply.

[edit on 16/7/2010 by Dark Ghost]

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
I have read through your replies and find them interesting. I have also read through your website. Unfortunately, your ideas still appear convoluted to me and I was hoping I could seek further clarification from you in this forum. You are obviously learned about Religious scripture, eschatology and stuff of that nature. I hope you can show patience towards people like me who are not as knowledgeable, but still intrigued by your views.

Just some quesitons I have which I hope you can give relatively clear and easy-to-understand answers:

1) In simple terms, what is the truth that has been actively suppressed over the last 2500 years?

That the "resurrection" was taught by Isaiah, Daniel, Jesus and Mohammed as a Doctrine of 'Rebirth'.

2) Which Modern religion do you consider is most reflective of the truth; which one does not seek to steer us away from the truth? (Or do you consider them all to be as deceptive as each other?)

There is at least one mystical sect of Sufis that understands that Mohammed was Elijah and John the Baptist 'raised from the dead'. I was told this several years ago by someone who said that the sect exists in Spain.

3) How do you explain the existence of Satanism, demons and evil? (To be more specific: why does God permit their existence if all they do is corrupt, deceive, harm etc. ?)

To my understanding, Christianity is, for all practical purposes Satanism. Jesus said that "Satan is the father of lies". And Christian theology is based upon Satanic lies about Jesus being God and denying the Doctrine of 'Rebirth'. The Albigensian Crusade and the Holocaust are quite obvious expressions of the Satanism of Christian theology.

4) You've mentioned that profit has been a large motivator for religious officials suppressing the truth about religion and the meaning of life. Don't profit and material possessions mean little when one is not only aware of, but actively participating, in the systematic annihilation of Earth?

Sure. That is why I started the thread about 'Rebirth' Vs. the dualistic consciousness. It is not merely profit. It is the preservation of the 'fallen' consciousness at all costs which is their most fundamental motivation.

Michael Cecil

reply to post by Michael Cecil


Thank you. That is FAR more clear and I think I better understand your views and what message you are sending to others.

-------

I have seen you refer a few times to Matrix series in your replies.

Do you believe that movie franchise was a message from those controlling and manipulating society? Perhaps a "we have lied and control you but you cannot change this" message, or was it more along the lines of "we are purposely putting the secrets of the universe right in front of your noses, but you do not even know it!"?

In terms of the "Matrix story" who do you believe represents the greater evil? Is this clear to those who look, or presented in a deceptive manner?

[edit on 16/7/2010 by Dark Ghost]

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
reply to post by Michael Cecil

 

Thank you. That is FAR more clear and I think I better understand your views and what message you are sending to others.
-------

I have seen you refer a few times to Matrix series in your replies.

Check my website. It is in the message on my profile.

I explain in some detail the significance of the Matrix series by commentary on two videos.

I could add more; just don't have time right now.

Michael Cecil