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.
They Stole His Body - The Hijacking of Jesus
page: 6share:
reply to post by pthena
Kind of hard to avoid.
That would be the science of the sect, how not to feed the evil spirit and to let it wander in the desert without a home.
We need to definitely not do that.
. . .bolstered by and fed by religion or ritual.
Kind of hard to avoid.
That would be the science of the sect, how not to feed the evil spirit and to let it wander in the desert without a home.
reply to post by jmdewey60
No, that would be the science of a splinter group, splintered off from the PThena sect of the cult of Neo Marcionism. See how fun it is to create a new sect?
I've lived in the desert. I enjoyed those years. Should I now say to avoid the desert? Nah. Evil spirits are impotent. As one person ignores the influence of an annoying person, so also can a person more easily ignore the annoying impotent spirit. Arguing with it is not ignoring. Cooking up exorcism ritual is not ignoring.
Edit to add:
Kings, generals, others with followers, if they are possessed with evil; the damage they can cause is limited by the amount of support they have from other people.
Have you read The Neverending Story by Michael Ende?
The movie they made was only half of the book, the sequel was not the second half of the book.
After the boy from outside the story changed the story and entered the story, he considered himself the king of the story. He ended up in the asylum for "kings of the story". For him it became a solipsist nightmare. I can't remember now how he eventually got out. The reason I mention it, is that others in the story knew the rules enough to not give too much credence to the boy's claim of being king, but took him out of the way and put him in with all the other previous kings.
Without a following, even a king is nothing, and completely impotent.
That would be the science of the sect, how not to feed the evil spirit and to let it wander in the desert without a home.
No, that would be the science of a splinter group, splintered off from the PThena sect of the cult of Neo Marcionism. See how fun it is to create a new sect?
I've lived in the desert. I enjoyed those years. Should I now say to avoid the desert? Nah. Evil spirits are impotent. As one person ignores the influence of an annoying person, so also can a person more easily ignore the annoying impotent spirit. Arguing with it is not ignoring. Cooking up exorcism ritual is not ignoring.
Edit to add:
Kings, generals, others with followers, if they are possessed with evil; the damage they can cause is limited by the amount of support they have from other people.
JDG 9:7 When Jotham was told about this, he climbed up on the top of Mount Gerizim and shouted to them, "Listen to me, citizens of Shechem, so that God may listen to you. 8 One day the trees went out to anoint a king for themselves. They said to the olive tree, `Be our king.'
JDG 9:9 "But the olive tree answered, `Should I give up my oil, by which both gods and men are honored, to hold sway over the trees?'
JDG 9:10 "Next, the trees said to the fig tree, `Come and be our king.'
JDG 9:11 "But the fig tree replied, `Should I give up my fruit, so good and sweet, to hold sway over the trees?'
JDG 9:12 "Then the trees said to the vine, `Come and be our king.'
JDG 9:13 "But the vine answered, `Should I give up my wine, which cheers both gods and men, to hold sway over the trees?'
JDG 9:14 "Finally all the trees said to the thornbush, `Come and be our king.'
JDG 9:15 "The thornbush said to the trees, `If you really want to anoint me king over you, come and take refuge in my shade; but if not, then let fire come out of the thornbush and consume the cedars of Lebanon!'
Have you read The Neverending Story by Michael Ende?
The movie they made was only half of the book, the sequel was not the second half of the book.
After the boy from outside the story changed the story and entered the story, he considered himself the king of the story. He ended up in the asylum for "kings of the story". For him it became a solipsist nightmare. I can't remember now how he eventually got out. The reason I mention it, is that others in the story knew the rules enough to not give too much credence to the boy's claim of being king, but took him out of the way and put him in with all the other previous kings.
Without a following, even a king is nothing, and completely impotent.
edit on 14-9-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)
reply to post by pthena
Christ did not ignore satan or devils. As well neither did the apostles. As far as being impotent, tell that to Michael. Just saying.
Christ did not ignore satan or devils. As well neither did the apostles. As far as being impotent, tell that to Michael. Just saying.
reply to post by Logarock
Hello Logarock, I'm glad to see you still with us here.
I know that Jesus and the apostles are said to have cast out unclean spirits. People can do that. It is up to the weak minded people who allowed the intrusion to grow the hair to keep them away. The exorcist cannot do this for the afflicted. I find this story instructive:
As for Michael, he seems to have wrestled other "princes", of comparable power to himself.
Hello Logarock, I'm glad to see you still with us here.
Christ did not ignore satan or devils. As well neither did the apostles. As far as being impotent, tell that to Michael.
I know that Jesus and the apostles are said to have cast out unclean spirits. People can do that. It is up to the weak minded people who allowed the intrusion to grow the hair to keep them away. The exorcist cannot do this for the afflicted. I find this story instructive:
AC 19:13 Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, "In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out." 14 Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15 One day the evil spirit answered them, "Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you?" 16 Then the man who had the evil spirit jumped on them and overpowered them all. He gave them such a beating that they ran out of the house naked and bleeding.
As for Michael, he seems to have wrestled other "princes", of comparable power to himself.
edit on 14-9-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)
reply to post by pthena
As for "cooking up", I was thinking more along the lines of having a theology which did not build up the evil spirit.
My theology has been very dependent on that built up spirit, as an explanation for why the world is bad.
I guess your current view is that the world is not so bad.
I was reading Paul last night and it says nothing of a "new creation". Which I thought a bit odd, having been so indoctrinated in Revelation. And there was no mention in that section of a Satan being done away with, another divergence from Revelation. What I did find was people coming to be doers of good rather than evil.
No, saw the TV airing of the movie a few times. I was looking on Amazon and Barns and Nobles but since you gave the ending, I guess I don't have to buy the book now.
Have you read The Neverending Story by Michael Ende?
As for "cooking up", I was thinking more along the lines of having a theology which did not build up the evil spirit.
My theology has been very dependent on that built up spirit, as an explanation for why the world is bad.
I guess your current view is that the world is not so bad.
I was reading Paul last night and it says nothing of a "new creation". Which I thought a bit odd, having been so indoctrinated in Revelation. And there was no mention in that section of a Satan being done away with, another divergence from Revelation. What I did find was people coming to be doers of good rather than evil.
edit on 14-9-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)
reply to post by jmdewey60
The world is the world. Some things can't be changed and some can.
I guess your current view is that the world is not so bad.
I was reading Paul last night and it says nothing of a "new creation". Which I thought a bit odd, having been so indoctrinated in Revelation. And there was no mention in that section of a Satan being done away with, another divergence from Revelation. What I did find was people coming to be doers of good rather than evil.
The world is the world. Some things can't be changed and some can.
Desiderata (Latin: "desired things"...) is a 1927 prose poem by American writer Max Ehrmann (1872–1945).
Go placidly amid the noise and haste,
and remember what peace there may be in silence.
As far as possible without surrender
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;
and listen to others,
even the dull and the ignorant;
they too have their story.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons,
they are vexations to the spirit.
If you compare yourself with others,
you may become vain or bitter;
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.
Keep interested in your own career, however humble;
it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.
Exercise caution in your business affairs;
for the world is full of trickery.
But let this not blind you to what virtue there is;
many persons strive for high ideals;
and everywhere life is full of heroism.
Be yourself.
Especially, do not feign affection.
Neither be cynical about love;
for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment
it is as perennial as the grass.
Take kindly the counsel of the years,
gracefully surrendering the things of youth.
Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune.
But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings.
Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.
Beyond a wholesome discipline,
be gentle with yourself.
You are a child of the universe,
no less than the trees and the stars;
you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.
Therefore be at peace with God,
whatever you conceive Him to be,
and whatever your labors and aspirations,
in the noisy confusion of life keep peace with your soul.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams,
it is still a beautiful world.
Be cheerful.
Strive to be happy.
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 14-9-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)
reply to post by pthena
Interesting speculation, pthena.
Was the body of Jesus hijacked? Who are the suspects and what was the motive?
So far, no one has really looked into investigating the "knowns".
Let's look at Nicodemus. First of all, my research shows that "Nicodemus" was an "acquired" name. His real name was "Bunni" which means "bound". Is this all a metaphorical story? Why do we have a character with a name etymology indicating that he may have been "bound" by a pledge or oath? Were the secret societies active and involved in this plot? After all, Jesus did upset their applecart by turning over the tables and exposing the fraud and sham of people paying the merchants to play the game of blood sacrifice. Jesus spoke out against this. He advised wrongdoers to "go to your brother and make amends" and "go and sin no more". Never did he promote the blasphemy of blood sacrifice for any "atonement".
But, back to Nicodemus. He was head of the Sanhedrin and a very powerful man. He was NOT a secret friend of Jesus. This is a twisted story taught by the churches. In older manuscripts, Nicodemus is spelled Naqdimon. The etymology of this word means "hand or arm of the demon".
Perhaps the immediate need was to silence the Truth about the religious scams and how the beast was riding the backs of the people even then. Of course, "the church" had several hundred years to develop the story to cover the murder and to make it acceptable and palatable to the common masses.
For centuries the common man could only rely on what he was told by those in power as religious authorities. These religious authorities ruled the governments and used the governments to enforce religious dictates and policies. (Things really haven't changed much in that aspect!)
Could it be that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were the chief organizers of this plot?
Interesting speculation, pthena.
Was the body of Jesus hijacked? Who are the suspects and what was the motive?
So far, no one has really looked into investigating the "knowns".
Let's look at Nicodemus. First of all, my research shows that "Nicodemus" was an "acquired" name. His real name was "Bunni" which means "bound". Is this all a metaphorical story? Why do we have a character with a name etymology indicating that he may have been "bound" by a pledge or oath? Were the secret societies active and involved in this plot? After all, Jesus did upset their applecart by turning over the tables and exposing the fraud and sham of people paying the merchants to play the game of blood sacrifice. Jesus spoke out against this. He advised wrongdoers to "go to your brother and make amends" and "go and sin no more". Never did he promote the blasphemy of blood sacrifice for any "atonement".
But, back to Nicodemus. He was head of the Sanhedrin and a very powerful man. He was NOT a secret friend of Jesus. This is a twisted story taught by the churches. In older manuscripts, Nicodemus is spelled Naqdimon. The etymology of this word means "hand or arm of the demon".
Perhaps the immediate need was to silence the Truth about the religious scams and how the beast was riding the backs of the people even then. Of course, "the church" had several hundred years to develop the story to cover the murder and to make it acceptable and palatable to the common masses.
For centuries the common man could only rely on what he was told by those in power as religious authorities. These religious authorities ruled the governments and used the governments to enforce religious dictates and policies. (Things really haven't changed much in that aspect!)
Could it be that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were the chief organizers of this plot?
There are other hints to be found that the story most of us have been told are "not quite right". Perhaps we should look to some of the Renaissance
artists who painted stories from that time frame that were in the employ of the Vatican. Were they privy to secrets? Did they drop hints to us through
visuals?
Take a look at this painting rendered by Benozzo Gozzoli (mid 1400's) of the Three Women at the Tomb. Look closely at the expressions on their faces. What emotion do you experience through the face of the forward-most figure?
farm5.static.flickr.com...
To me, it reminds me of this character....
yubacityoffice.files.wordpress.com...
Is it possible that all these questionable stories came about as "damage control", perpetually embroidered as the centuries passed?
because: (no reason given)
Take a look at this painting rendered by Benozzo Gozzoli (mid 1400's) of the Three Women at the Tomb. Look closely at the expressions on their faces. What emotion do you experience through the face of the forward-most figure?
farm5.static.flickr.com...
To me, it reminds me of this character....
yubacityoffice.files.wordpress.com...
Is it possible that all these questionable stories came about as "damage control", perpetually embroidered as the centuries passed?
because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-9-2011 by Alethea because: add dates
edit on 15-9-2011 by Alethea because: (no
reason given)
reply to post by Alethea
That was early in his apprenticeship, before going to Rome, design by Fra Angelico.
That expression is like "What you talking about?"
The "angels standing by to explain" seems definitely to be insertions. But that probably would have been 10 - 20 years after the gospels were written. Once the gospels were put together in the same book, the addition to Mark was probably added Mark 16:9-20, as the official harmony. As some one has suggested, the church leaders gave more thought to developing creeds rather than textual matters of having the story straight.
Take a look at this painting rendered by Benozzo Gozzoli of the Three Women at the Tomb. Look closely at the expressions on their faces. What emotion do you experience through the face of the forward-most figure?
He was born Benozzo di Lese[1] in the village of Sant'Ilario a Colombano around 1421, and moved with his family to Florence in 1427. According to Giorgio Vasari, in the early part of his career he was a pupil and assistant of Fra Angelico: some of the works in the convent of San Marco of Florence were executed by Gozzoli from Angelico's design
. . .
Women at the Tomb (1440-1441) - Fresco, San Marco, Florence
That was early in his apprenticeship, before going to Rome, design by Fra Angelico.
That expression is like "What you talking about?"
Is it possible that all these questionable stories came about as "damage control", perpetually embroidered as the centuries passed?
The "angels standing by to explain" seems definitely to be insertions. But that probably would have been 10 - 20 years after the gospels were written. Once the gospels were put together in the same book, the addition to Mark was probably added Mark 16:9-20, as the official harmony. As some one has suggested, the church leaders gave more thought to developing creeds rather than textual matters of having the story straight.
edit on 15-9-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)
I think that if Jesus were here today he would be horrified and sorrowed that he has been deified. Through all I have read pertaining to this man, I
do not see deification as his motive or his agenda. He claimed to be a servant to his fellow man and his behavior and words were humble yet firm. The
christian religion has grossly twisted many stories by being influenced by the controlling agenda of deification of a human being. Jesus was always
clear to refer to himself as a "son of man" not son of god. In scripture, son of god is never in his words, but rather from someone else.
As to the reason for making this distinction, there are at least three theories as to the identity of the sons of god. Some scholars say that the "sons of god" was a metaphor for the offspring of tyrannical rulers. They took "the daughters of men" (referring to commoners) and established pologamy as a right of status of the ruling elite. Other theories of the identity of "sons of god" include angelic beings or aliens, off world entities.
The deification of Jesus hinges on resurrection. Without this aspect, he is just another Buddha.
And yet, I see another paradox within this concept of Christianity as it creates a "new god" or idol in stark contrast to the commandments of having no other gods but the one Creator (not speaking of the bible conglomerate Yhwh here) and the command not to make any images, idols, of effigies. Not only is christianity in direct conflict to those edicts, but the superflous images everywhere in advertising this religion is blatant idolatry.
If the body of Jesus was actually stolen at that period in time, then was the excuse of a resurrection already concocted as part of the cover-up? Or did the actual story of resurrection come about many years later as a result of damage control, religious reformation, and new agenda for dominance of the masses?
Here is a painting entitled "Body of Dead Christ in Tomb" by Hans Holbein, the Younger. He was not a Vatican painter, but was known as the King's painter for Henry VIII. Perhaps Jesus is giving a Masonic hand signal to express something to those in power who still continue to twist his words and motives.
upload.wikimedia.org...
As to the reason for making this distinction, there are at least three theories as to the identity of the sons of god. Some scholars say that the "sons of god" was a metaphor for the offspring of tyrannical rulers. They took "the daughters of men" (referring to commoners) and established pologamy as a right of status of the ruling elite. Other theories of the identity of "sons of god" include angelic beings or aliens, off world entities.
The deification of Jesus hinges on resurrection. Without this aspect, he is just another Buddha.
And yet, I see another paradox within this concept of Christianity as it creates a "new god" or idol in stark contrast to the commandments of having no other gods but the one Creator (not speaking of the bible conglomerate Yhwh here) and the command not to make any images, idols, of effigies. Not only is christianity in direct conflict to those edicts, but the superflous images everywhere in advertising this religion is blatant idolatry.
If the body of Jesus was actually stolen at that period in time, then was the excuse of a resurrection already concocted as part of the cover-up? Or did the actual story of resurrection come about many years later as a result of damage control, religious reformation, and new agenda for dominance of the masses?
Here is a painting entitled "Body of Dead Christ in Tomb" by Hans Holbein, the Younger. He was not a Vatican painter, but was known as the King's painter for Henry VIII. Perhaps Jesus is giving a Masonic hand signal to express something to those in power who still continue to twist his words and motives.
upload.wikimedia.org...
reply to post by Alethea
Hi Alethea:
You wrote:
QUOTE
"... I see another paradox within this concept of Christianity as it creates a "new god" or idol in stark contrast to the Commandments of having 'no other gods' but the one Creator (not speaking of the bible conglomerate YHWH here) and the command not to make any images, idols, of effigies.
Not only is christianity in direct conflict to those edicts, but the superflous images everywhere in advertising this religion is blatant idolatry..."
UNQUOTE
Interesting point, except... that when it came to making pagan non Israelite graven or molten idols, both 'Mosheh' and his 'brother Aaron' seemed to spend some of their spare-time doing precisely that which was allegedly forbidden in other parts of the supposedly ancient Torah of the Jews -
And that warped tradition ref: Mosheh ('Moses') making his infamous & allegedly 'illegal' Bronze Midianite Snake Idol Thingy for the benei Yisro'el to burn incense to (and then having the nerve to put it high up on a POLE ! - then having it moved to the Tabernacle, where it remained ensconced there for a couple of hundred years before being set up in the 1st 'Solomon's Temple of YHWH at Jerusalem until the time of Hezekiah, yet !) -- allegedly to protect the benei Yisro'el against flying-snake-bites, see Numbers 21:9ff) had (according to the paleoHebrew texts themselves ! ) been been a ['direct command' to make the Midianite Bronze Snake Idol Thingy (e.g. the Snake god Hapepi) from YHWH himself ! (talk about contradicting oneself within the space of a few chapters !)
Then of course there's Aaron and that nasty habit of his - making all those Golden Calves out of spare earings...must have had waaaay too much time on his hands !!
Either way it casts doubt (like the story of David, from the tribelet of Judah - dancing nude in front of the Ark, something that according the (supposedly-ancient) Torah only LEVITES were allowed to approach...
But like Truman Capote used to say, 'Now don't make me commence....' !!!!
Hi Alethea:
You wrote:
QUOTE
"... I see another paradox within this concept of Christianity as it creates a "new god" or idol in stark contrast to the Commandments of having 'no other gods' but the one Creator (not speaking of the bible conglomerate YHWH here) and the command not to make any images, idols, of effigies.
Not only is christianity in direct conflict to those edicts, but the superflous images everywhere in advertising this religion is blatant idolatry..."
UNQUOTE
Interesting point, except... that when it came to making pagan non Israelite graven or molten idols, both 'Mosheh' and his 'brother Aaron' seemed to spend some of their spare-time doing precisely that which was allegedly forbidden in other parts of the supposedly ancient Torah of the Jews -
And that warped tradition ref: Mosheh ('Moses') making his infamous & allegedly 'illegal' Bronze Midianite Snake Idol Thingy for the benei Yisro'el to burn incense to (and then having the nerve to put it high up on a POLE ! - then having it moved to the Tabernacle, where it remained ensconced there for a couple of hundred years before being set up in the 1st 'Solomon's Temple of YHWH at Jerusalem until the time of Hezekiah, yet !) -- allegedly to protect the benei Yisro'el against flying-snake-bites, see Numbers 21:9ff) had (according to the paleoHebrew texts themselves ! ) been been a ['direct command' to make the Midianite Bronze Snake Idol Thingy (e.g. the Snake god Hapepi) from YHWH himself ! (talk about contradicting oneself within the space of a few chapters !)
Then of course there's Aaron and that nasty habit of his - making all those Golden Calves out of spare earings...must have had waaaay too much time on his hands !!
Either way it casts doubt (like the story of David, from the tribelet of Judah - dancing nude in front of the Ark, something that according the (supposedly-ancient) Torah only LEVITES were allowed to approach...
But like Truman Capote used to say, 'Now don't make me commence....' !!!!
edit on 16-9-2011 by Sigismundus because: stutttteringgggg keeyyyboardddd synnndrommmmeeeee
Originally posted by Sigismundus
And that warped tradition ref: Mosheh ('Moses') making his infamous & allegedly 'illegal' Bronze Midianite Snake Idol Thingy for the benei Yisro'el to burn incense to (and then having the nerve to put it high up on a POLE ! - then having it moved to the Tabernacle, where it remained ensconced there for a couple of hundred years before being set up in the 1st 'Solomon's Temple of YHWH at Jerusalem until the time of Hezekiah, yet !) -- allegedly to protect the benei Yisro'el against flying-snake-bites, see Numbers 21:9ff) had (according to the paleoHebrew texts themselves ! ) been been a ['direct command' to make the Midianite Bronze Snake Idol Thingy (e.g. the Snake god Hapepi) from YHWH himself ! (talk about contradicting oneself within the space of a few chapters !)
Meet the new boss.....
same as the old boss.....
So Judiasm becomes absorbed into xtianity. Religion has something for everyone!
One thing I have noticed is that xtianity is progressive. The Cloth would probably explain that the snake on a pole represents resurrection as the snake becomes "renewed" upon shedding it's skin, and likewise for humans upon trancending their clay bodies.
I just love how they wing it and make up explanations as they go along. It's rather by the seat of their pants that many of these stories have developed. (Reminds me of the Sunday School teacher who explained that the Easter Egg represents the trinity...the shell is god, the clear/whites is the Holy Ghost, and the yolk is Jesus.)
Resurrection is the concrete holding xtianity together. It is only a concept and has not been proven. It is an illusory carrot on a stick. Afterlife has been used to make people conform through fear of condemnation. So I suppose the concept has been a valuable tool for mass behavior control.
Was the body of Jesus stolen? Supposedly, his bones were found buried in India. Here's the story:
www.jesus-kashmir-tomb.com...
reply to post by Alethea
The resurrection became part of a circular argument. People believed Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus died. Rather than give up the idea, they convinced themselves that he was resurrected to become the future returning Messiah.
Once they convinced themselves of the resurrection, they then used the resurrection as proof that he was Messiah. Then arbitrarily used verses from Old Testament and other texts that seemed to support a resurrection in order to prove "from scripture" to other people that Jesus was Messiah because of resurrection. It's all circular reasoning, and not convincing at that.
Once the New Testament was written, Christians could then claim that Jesus is Christ risen from the dead because Paul wrote that. It must be true because Paul wrote it. Again circular.
Afterlife or immortality is the carrot offered to reel in those who fear death. From there, manipulators have free reign to withhold or grant the prize. Even non-sectarian Bible only types are still following rules and conditions set out thousands of years ago, and applying the conditions to themselves in an arbitrary manner on account of conflicting statements, (stress some, ignore others).
I think I'll look into secular humanism for awhile.
Resurrection is the concrete holding xtianity together. It is only a concept and has not been proven. It is an illusory carrot on a stick. Afterlife has been used to make people conform through fear of condemnation. So I suppose the concept has been a valuable tool for mass behavior control.
The resurrection became part of a circular argument. People believed Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus died. Rather than give up the idea, they convinced themselves that he was resurrected to become the future returning Messiah.
Once they convinced themselves of the resurrection, they then used the resurrection as proof that he was Messiah. Then arbitrarily used verses from Old Testament and other texts that seemed to support a resurrection in order to prove "from scripture" to other people that Jesus was Messiah because of resurrection. It's all circular reasoning, and not convincing at that.
Once the New Testament was written, Christians could then claim that Jesus is Christ risen from the dead because Paul wrote that. It must be true because Paul wrote it. Again circular.
Afterlife or immortality is the carrot offered to reel in those who fear death. From there, manipulators have free reign to withhold or grant the prize. Even non-sectarian Bible only types are still following rules and conditions set out thousands of years ago, and applying the conditions to themselves in an arbitrary manner on account of conflicting statements, (stress some, ignore others).
I think I'll look into secular humanism for awhile.
Originally posted by pthena
People believed Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus died.
You say that like he just calmly passes away in his sleep. Jesus did not just "die". The terms of his death is what is important. Jesus was tortured and brutally murdered. BY A CORRUPT SYSTEM. Innocent people are murdered and the evil doers go unpunished.
This corrupt system was based on a religion which allowed the storytellers, soothsayers, etc to live very comfortably and with revered status by riding on the backs of the people. Required sacrifices made good money for the merchants. Politicians (secretly endorsed and chosen by the powerful church) were in place to enforce the laws and moral codes dictated by the church.
Nothing has really changed to this day. Innocents are still murdered, and on a larger scale it becomes genocide to steal the resources of other countries. And the evil doers still go unpunished. Dagon is in charge and his Ba'al priest offspring rule the roost. Merchants get fat off of religious holidays and many other religious promotions and paraphenalia. And the religious lies get bolder and the agendas so complex.
According to Ecclesiastical Canon Law, the pope has the power to veto any law in the country and all laws are in place only by his tacit consent. Church still trumps gov. corps. (This should be obvious by the fact that the religious storytellers get bolder and wilder all the time and no justice system puts these liars and frauds in their place.)
The real aftermath of this murder of an innocent person is what is never discussed. The perpetrators go free and even make a profit off of this murder of innocents. Again, this is still true today. Innocent people are murdered for their resources.
Furthermore, the icon of a tortured man hanging from a stick is a warning to anyone who would dare speak up to tell the truth. This icon is a subliminal threat. Better watch what you say or you'll be next to get your tongue cut out.
And those who drink their grape juice "blood" are those who agree to and support this system of lies, never questioning the injustice and allowing, no demanding---that the suppression of truth continue.
I don't know if the body of Jesus was stolen, but I think the corporations have tried to steal his soul for their agenda.
edit on 17-9-2011 by
Alethea because: (no reason given)
reply to post by Alethea
I get the impression that Pthena is trying to say that he no longer cares to say anything which would lend support to Christianity in general.
It seems that his study into the topic of this thread has led him to the conclusion that the religion is completely fraudulent even if it was a long
time ago based on a good teacher. What has become of it nullifies whatever reality there was there to begin with and the whole thing is better just
dropped and left behind while he pursues his answers without that sort of help.
reply to post by pthena
Thanks for taking the time and putting in the energy for this excursion into the crazy world of religion and I am thankful for the light which
you have cast into the shadows of this imperfect construct.
Originally posted by pthena
The resurrection became part of a circular argument. People believed Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus died. Rather than give up the idea, they convinced themselves that he was resurrected to become the future returning Messiah.
Once they convinced themselves of the resurrection, they then used the resurrection as proof that he was Messiah.
Pthena, there are two very different concepts within your thoughts here. One is resurrection; the second is Jesus as Messiah. One does not prove the other.
Whatever Grand and Glorious Entity that bestowed in us the Spark of Life, gave of it's own Divinity in doing so.
I am fully convinced that whatever Awesome Entity created us also has the power to resurrect us.
If the devious Naqdimon (Nicodemus) and his sidekick Joseph of Arimathea did, in fact, move or "hijack" the body of Jesus, it would really be of no consequence in the great scheme of things. When Jesus spoke of resurrection, he specifically said "flesh and blood" cannot enter the Kingdom of God. These bodies of flesh decay. The resurrected body would be of a different substance. It is said to be incorruptible--non perishable.
This is one reason to know, also, that the "Kingdom of God" is not of this decaying earthly realm. The idea of bringing the Kingdom of God on earth is an elaborate political plan of "British Israel". A very good outline of this scheme is the expose "Union Jack".
Now, the second point you bring up is Jesus as Messiah. Jesus was fully human, having the same divine spark we all have. Over a period of time, he was deified by pagans looking for a hero. He was debased by these pagans as having been a "human sacrifice". Prior to that, a goat would have been sufficient.
Jesus did not "take away" anyone's sins. It's an old Jewish sacrificial ritual (Yom Kippor) to rub your hands on a goats body or a chickens head to "transfer" your sins to the animal and then slaughter the animal in your place. It's all superstition and "scapegoating". This lack of taking person responsibility is a big part of the Garden of Eden story. No one owns up to their wrongdoing---instead they blame others or lamely attempt to justify themselves. No person or animal actually takes anyone's sins away. We will all have to account for ourselves when the day of reckoning comes!
edit on 22-9-2011 by Alethea because: (no reason given)
reply to post by Alethea
That was Paul who said that.
1 Corinthians 15:50
I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable
1 Corinthians 15:50
I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable
reply to post by Alethea
That's why I called it circular. People tried to make one prove the other and vice-versa, that's circular, and really proves nothing.
I've met many gods. I keep looking for the Awesome Entity, so far I've only found the emptiness of where that One would be if s/he were. I don't have any reason to think that I will be resurrected unless somehow that emptiness becomes not-empty. So I hold no promises out to any one.
The only kingdom of God I know of is lived in on earth, today, anywhere on earth, by anyone who lives in the spirit of the one who was, and now is not, and yet lives in us. No political entity is the kingdom of God. Those that pretend to be are liars. Those who believe the lie are idolaters.
Officialdom is the opposite of Pagan. Pagan is homegrown and personal, Officialdom is dictated by authority. Officialdom deified Jesus, not Paganism. I don't have to deify Jesus to consider him my hero. Officialdom deified Jesus so as to keep the obsolete Old Testament alive. But that is a false life in OT now.
Yes, superstition, scapegoating, and it serves to keep the OT false-life going.
Don't mistake my opinions for Christianity. I totally don't qualify to be a Christian, because I don't hold basic Christian beliefs.
Pthena, there are two very different concepts within your thoughts here. One is resurrection; the second is Jesus as Messiah. One does not prove the other.
That's why I called it circular. People tried to make one prove the other and vice-versa, that's circular, and really proves nothing.
I am fully convinced that whatever Awesome Entity created us also has the power to resurrect us.
I've met many gods. I keep looking for the Awesome Entity, so far I've only found the emptiness of where that One would be if s/he were. I don't have any reason to think that I will be resurrected unless somehow that emptiness becomes not-empty. So I hold no promises out to any one.
This is one reason to know, also, that the "Kingdom of God" is not of this decaying earthly realm. The idea of bringing the Kingdom of God on earth is an elaborate political plan of "British Israel". A very good outline of this scheme is the expose "Union Jack".
The only kingdom of God I know of is lived in on earth, today, anywhere on earth, by anyone who lives in the spirit of the one who was, and now is not, and yet lives in us. No political entity is the kingdom of God. Those that pretend to be are liars. Those who believe the lie are idolaters.
Now, the second point you bring up is Jesus as Messiah. Jesus was fully human, having the same divine spark we all have. Over a period of time, he was deified by pagans looking for a hero. He was debased by these pagans as having been a "human sacrifice". Prior to that, a goat would have been sufficient.
Officialdom is the opposite of Pagan. Pagan is homegrown and personal, Officialdom is dictated by authority. Officialdom deified Jesus, not Paganism. I don't have to deify Jesus to consider him my hero. Officialdom deified Jesus so as to keep the obsolete Old Testament alive. But that is a false life in OT now.
Jesus did not "take away" anyone's sins. It's an old Jewish sacrificial ritual (Yom Kippor) to rub your hands on a goats body or a chickens head to "transfer" your sins to the animal and then slaughter the animal in your place. It's all superstition and "scapegoating".
Yes, superstition, scapegoating, and it serves to keep the OT false-life going.
Don't mistake my opinions for Christianity. I totally don't qualify to be a Christian, because I don't hold basic Christian beliefs.
Originally posted by pthena
Don't mistake my opinions for Christianity. I totally don't qualify to be a Christian, because I don't hold basic Christian beliefs.
Just so you know where I am coming from, pthena, I am not a christian, nor do I subscribe to any religion. Religions are man made control mechanisms--some deal in facets of experimental mind control, behavior modification, etc. and some deal in the higher politics of dominionism. And some are just out and out commercial ventures.
As far as Jesus being your hero, yes, some of us find a kindred spirit in that character, whether he was historically real or fictitious. Some identify with his character because they experience the persecution that comes when you "rock the boat" and speak truth by pointing out incongruities and lies that others are so content to believe without question.
I believe that there is some truth in scriptures. The problem is that it is mixed with lies. A little truth here and there goes a long way in making the lies believable. This is what Jesus meant when he spoke of the "leaven of the Pharisees." Leaven is a metaphor for the bits of truth that are mixed in. Perhaps the ritual of eating unleavened bread is also a metaphor for "choking on your own lies". Ever tried to eat that dry tasteless hardtack?
As for Paul, he was a member of Herod's family. I strongly suspect he was a member of a secret society type of group and had political backing behind his agenda. I know that the NT is basically a Pauline doctrine. Paul did a lot to increase the commercial value of religious ritual which was in direct opposition to the teachings of Jesus.
I question the authenticity of whether "Paul" even wrote all of that or whether it was a collaborative effort at a later time to address "damage control" and get the story straight. Even so, the story is not straight. Paul is full of contradictions and puts forth even more "confusion" in his philosophies.
When you consider that Jerusalem was a tiny town without a movie theatre or a National Enquirer, Paul was probably High Drama. People do love to hear tall tales.