Exposing the tragic fabrication of a saviour of the world

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Malcher

 

But you (we) can prove that these people were dead and became alive again. We can prove the occurrence but not the process to go from one state to another. And to be clear, they were not thought to be dead...they were dead.

People were known to come back to life so often that coffins were built with air tubes and bells, so the the reawakened dead could summons someone to rescue them. There are countless stories, of people of all walks of life, who were supposedly dead, coming back.

They were "thought" to be dead. What you are referring to are mistakes, the person was never really dead, but mis-diagnosed. What we are discussing is a very rare occurrence.

This is different from experiences of people who were actually dead -

“But what we’ve found is there is no moment of death; it begins when your heart stops, and it goes on for a period of time.”

Source

I've never understood why people need to identify themselves as Christian as a reason to treat others decently.
Did that make sense?
I'm mean, people will say, Well, I'm a Christian so I wouldn't lie to you or steal from you, etc...
Do most really need a book giving them a set of rules that says "Treat each other in a nice way"?
Do they need fear of eternal punishment to act decently?
If so, they're not very good folks to start with, are they.

reply to post by manna2


That is a very sad commentary on the life and teachings of Jesus.

There are actually 2 schools of thought on the topic of Christianity.

1) Jesus was born from a divine virgin, died for the sins of the world and was resurrected. He is god and the only way into heaven is to believe that story.

or

2) Jesus was a charismatic teacher who revealed the secret mysteries of Jewish mysticism and Essene medicine. He challenged the status quo of the religious leaders of the time, and therefore had to be killed.

He taught that way to god was an inner journey and that love and forgiveness were more important than the laws of the Torah. His life and his teachings were more important that his death, as all men die, and many for a divine cause.

His death and resurrection are pure speculation, as the bible tells the story in a way that supposes he could have survived the crucifixion.

Putting emphasis on his death as opposed to his life and teachings is the downfall and corruption of Christianity.

reply to post by Starchild23

But ask yourselves this question: is religion didn't exist, do you really think we would have the moral fortitude to live decent lives?

In my opinion, of course we would. We do now. The hostility and antagonism that religion spawns would be unnecessary if we all knew the Truth instead of being called liars and condemned by the *cough* Christians who claim we are deceived and want nothing to do with updating their knowledge.

It is preposterous to suppose that no decency or kindness or altruism would exist without religion....it does, and always has. I stopped believing in the resurrection when I was about eleven...I have been seeking ever since. I was brought up in the Episcopal Church. I NEVER believed the bread and wine turned into flesh and blood...ew...sick.

So all the staunch Christians telling me I'm deceived, lying, wrong about what I KNOW is in my heart are only reinforcing the problems that religion created to begin with.

Good question, Starchild, very worthy of consideration...
religion is like money -- the love of it is the root of many an evil (if not all).

Someone above said "with no resurrection there is no Christianity". I believe that statement is wrong. But they will never believe me because I'm a "heathen demon-possessed false prophet liar and blasphemer who surely will burn in the fiery pits of hell"...
to them I say, "whatever. You don't know what you're talking about; you are just parroting what you were told."

I know what I know, and how I know it, and it is every bit as valid as any life-long or born-again claimant. And I don't go around telling people they are demons. Bad form. And not true. So, if they want to tell me I'm a fru-fru nutjob fringe loony spreading satanic evil, I can't stop them. In the end, I know it isn't true. It's the nastiness that belies their holier-than-thou pious pride and condemnation of others...and shows that they don't get the message either way, whether they go to "church" or not. We are all One. We all came from the same Divine Source, and to that Source we will all return eventually. Of that I am absolutely certain.

The path is different for everyone. We all have different lives, different spirits, different minds and experiences and points of view. But we are all connected to the One Source, and someone calling me a liar and tryiing to shush me doesn't make it not so.

As William James pointed out in The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature, 110 years ago:

Ought it to be assumed that in all men the mixture of religion with other elements should be identical?

Ought it, indeed, to be assumed that the lives of all men should show identical religious elements? In other words, is the existence of so many religious types and sects and creeds regrettable?

To these questions I answer "No" emphatically.

And my reason is that I do not see how it is possible that creatures in such different positions and with such different powers as human individuals are, should have exactly the same functions and the same duties.

No two of us have identical difficulties, nor should we be expected to work out identical solutions. Each, from his peculiar angle of observation, takes in a certain sphere of fact and trouble, which each must deal with in a unique manner.

perhaps the Shroud of Turin is proof that a Jesus ben Joseph from Capurnum chose to become the Suffering Messiah... performing the required Acts with a coreographed ministry for 3 1/2 years according to Scriptures..
after which there would be a seventy year period upon which the Herod's Temple would itself be destroyed


the 12th century shroud was the actual burial cloth of the crucified Jesus, but was sent forward in time/space so that the mystery of the 'Christ' could become awesome...
the self defined Naziroean sect member , Jesus, deliberately attempted to self-fufill all the Scriptures about the suffering-messiah

... an act by a very intensely focused human being in his own personal conflict with the Prince of Darkness

the Christian magic cult elevated his drama into a spiritual resurrection & the conquering of mortal death thru the savior Myth

reply to post by St Udio

the 12th century shroud was the actual burial cloth of the crucified Jesus, but was sent forward in time/space so that the mystery of the 'Christ' could become awesome...

I agree with everything you said except this one sentence above. Sent forward in time/space is unnecessary. The Shroud is as likely to be a FAKE as it is likely for a rhoulette wheel spun 52 times to land on the same number-space every time.
(there's a study that proves this with good statistical research...if anyone is interested I can dig out the link I posted in the OT forum a couple of weeks ago or so)

And if it is authentic, it shows that the man who was wrapped in it was treated with ointments and balms, that he continued to bleed after being brought down from the cross, and all of that indicates he was NOT DEAD. He was treated, and recovered. That in itself is miraculous enough for me. But, it doesn't prove anything as to whether that particular person was God or not, only that he did NOT DIE ON THE CROSS.

For more info, see my post in another thread on the topic. Particularly "The Crucifixion: A Medical Perspective"...by NoTurTypical, here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Malcher

 

My whole point is that often times the staue is found first and the story created around it when the fact is someone could have just been creating a statue, just like we do today.

No, the myths are older than the statues. I already mentioned Homer.

We are not discussing those here and really this has been gone over so many times it is getting comical. Your interpretation may be different but i still think it is pushing the limits of the scope of this thread.

I'm afraid I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about.

Not telling us anything new here.

Precisely. So there's your argument demolished by an own goal.

How could humanity have started if not for an unconventional means?

Please explain, first, why you think my views on the origins of humanity have any bearing on the topic of this thread.

I agree your first point was off topic.

The OP does mention virgin birth though.

How can there be one initial living organisms without it being from a virgin/unconventional means? Even to this day every organism alive is a reproduction. The point is the first one could not have reproduced from a predecessor meanwhile every single other organism after was reproduced from conventional means this means life began with a "virgin" birth since it seems to have had to. This goes with conventional wisdom. If you can show me the error then please do so.

To be clear, virgin births do occur in nature, but have you ever seen anything evolve? I am not saying it cannot occur or has not occurred, but have you seen it happen?

Yet you believe it occurred or will occur again. Is that correct?

reply to post by manna2

You forget, MOST of us were pagans before following the way.

Pagan? Or just an unbeliever?

Those of us with passion actually understand the things we read in the Bible as the Holy Spirit enlightens us and testifies to us.

Do you know me personally? Were you there to measure my passion? Were you there to see me witness, and pray the sinners prayer with converts? Were you there when I preached, taught, and served as an elder? Were you there the countless hours I spent pouring over scripture late into the night? Did you hear and answer my prayers for wisdom and revelation? Were you there when I was visiting and praying for the sick and the dying? Or the battered wives of christian husbands? Or to feed and cloth the homeless from my own pocket? Were you there for almost 30 years of my life? No. You weren't my friend. Don't tell me about passion, enlightenment, testimony, and the holy spirit when you have no idea about my life as a christian.

I have read the Bible many times and have been doing word studies for a long time and no, you certainly DO NOT understand the Bible better than us.

As have I. I have worn out more than one. I have studied the lexicons, and the concordances. I have done the word studies. I have read the exegesis, and the commentaries. I have followed the biblical archaeology. All prayerfully. And I said better than most christians. I did not say all. There are a few here at ATS I respect greatly for their knowledge and understanding.

I lived a life outside of truth.
I know it maybe better than you.
I don't have to experience the same pitfalls as you to turn around and go the right way. You are using circle logic in a cheap attempt to get an upper hand without doing the due diligence that has passed you by.

This is a "cheap" shot, and I won't dignify it with an answer.

Your pre-suppositions now drive you and so do mine. To ignore that is to embrace ignorance no matter which path you have chosen.

Actually, it was my pre-suppositions that kept me where I was for almost 30 years. As yours are keeping you there now.

reply to post by wildtimes


Again, thank you for providing this to us. There was a time when such hope, and such a message, such a lie, was necessary for the survival of man. But now, that danger has passed...and there is a new danger on the horizon, one that religion was never intended to combat.

It's time we tossed away the security blanket.

reply to post by Malcher

To be clear virgin births do occur in nature, but have you ever seen anything evolve? Not saying it cannot occur but have you seen it?

First of all, virgin births do not occur in HUMANS.
As for things evolving, one can simply look at fleas. The poisons that once killed them dead are now not as effective. They have "adapted" to them. Same with viri (viruses?), bacteria, etc. We KNOW that a person who takes excessive antibiotics is at the same time changing the bacteria or virus into something else that will resist the treatment.

Have I "seen" it? Not with my own two eyes, no. But there is plenty of "evolution" going on around us...and within us, in my opinion. As for where the first "human" came from....not a spontaneous birth with no conjugal activity. Nope. Possibly a hybrid from another similar species -- a cross-breed, so to speak. They've just figured out that people with dark skin can have blonde hair naturally...and they've also determined via mitochondrial DNA that all blue-eyed people descended from ONE common ancestor with a blip on its genes.

Now there are lots of blue-eyed people, where before that (it is supposed) there were none.

Why can't "religion" be more adaptable to modern knowledge?Thank God for the Dalai Lama.

reply to post by Starchild23


Thank YOU for finding it of some help....
and thanks to everyone who is participating here!

Originally posted by manna2
reply to post by Klassified

 

You forget, MOST of us were pagans before following the way. Those of us with passion actually understand the things we read in the Bible as the Holy Spirit enlightens us and testifies to us.
I have read the Bible many times and have been doing word studies for a long time and no, you certainly DO NOT understand the Bible better than us.
I lived a life outside of truth.
I know it maybe better than you.
I don't have to experience the same pitfalls as you to turn around and go the right way. You are using circle logic in a cheap attempt to get an upper hand without doing the due diligence that has passed you by.
Your pre-suppositions now drive you and so do mine. To ignore that is to embrace ignorance no matter which path you have chosen.

Well said manna2.... well said.

reply to post by wildtimes


There have been many many mesiahs. They seem to follow a common source or theme. Like they were formed in the same school. Jesus school.LOL

I made a thread about christian bushido. In the story of the Japonese sammurai we find a Jesus like mesiah by the name Amakusa Shirō. He walked on water, did miracles, and was a revolutionary in favor of the people. He is an odd forgotten mesiah.

In 1637, strange appearances in the sky and unusual blossoms in the gardens seemed to coincide with the signs foretold by this prophecy. Neither was there lacking a person that was thought to answer to the description of the promised deliverer.

His name was Masuda Shiro, the son of one of the Christian warriors that had left the province of Higo at the time of the persecution under Kato Kiyomasa. The boy had been brought up in Nagasaki, and it is probable that what he learned there from the missionaries and other foreigners enabled him to astonish the people of Amakusa by a display of wisdom.

It was asserted that he could walk upon the sea, make birds fly down from sky to light on his hand, cause stags to issue from a sea-shell, and perform many other miracles.

People believed in him because they thought he was the fulfillment of St. Francis Xavier’s ”prophecy” that there would be ”the Son of God” born in Shimabara and he supposedly did miracles.”

The prophecy

“When five times five years have passed, a remarkable youth will appear. Without study he shall of himself know all things, and he shall be famous throughout the land. Then shall the clouds of the east and west shine with a ruddy glow, wisteria flowers shall blossom from the trunks of dead trees. Multitudes shall bear the cross on their helmets, white flags shall float over sea and river, mountain and plain. Then shall come the time for Jesus to be honored.”

It is like these guys have been popping up since the dawn of time leading rebellions against injustice towards mankind. It is plausible for someone to capitalize on a theme that works across cultures and times for private / personal gain. Horus comes to mind.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by wildtimes


That's assuming science knows everything. That is to say, science is the medium by which we learn, but we also created that medium. If the master is flawed, so will the medium be flawed. Inherently, that medium will not show us everything until we have taken what we've learned, applied it, made the appropriate adjustments, and know where to look next.

This is not today's science. That is tomorrow's science...determined by whomever hands out the research grants.

reply to post by Starchild23

I certainly don't think science knows everything. The other day I came across a magazine called "NewScientist", with a free sample offered...
on the inside front cover, the ad says "We know only 5% today of what we will know in another 50 years"

But the breakthroughs of science have certainly changed our understanding...and also revealed how much we DON'T KNOW.

I love when we get to the " if there were no god would we be good, nice, law abiding citizens.." thing. To answer that question, the answer is no way. Without a true moral restraint any action is neither good nor bad, right, nor wrong. Every human being has been given a conscience by God to know if they do right or wrong so that no one is without excuse.

If there were no god, we could kill, rape, pillage, torture, molest, have sex with animals etc, steal, lie, hate, conspire to cause others to do likewise, and so much more, with wild abandon because there being no consequences for any action under the sun. Without God there is no sense or knowing of right or wrong.

But because we, all of us, you and I, all know what is right and what is wrong, it shows us the truth that there is God, and His truth is all that matters.

reply to post by Fromabove


This is exactly what I have been saying. Without the Church, there is no moral grounding. Without moral grounding, half the nation starts doing whatever the hell it wants, and the rest either give up and go along, or they crawl into holes and die there, too afraid to be out in the open.

Either way, it's total chaos. We are driven by delusion, desire, and impulsive/extremist natures...which means that without control, without some fort of external guidance...we are savages. We will kill each other. We won't feel bad as long as we live another day.

Fear is what it'll be. Pure, unadulterated fear. And it will turn us all into beasts. Either that, or it will make us so desperate for some form of higher power that virtually any man with a brain can step up and turn the nation into his own personal empire. And from there...he does whatever he wants, until he makes a crucial mistake and someone kills him in a bid for power. Because in a world where it's every man for himself...the more people you control, the longer you live.

Survivalism in its raw, natural form. Ugly, ain't it?

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by Fromabove

 

This is exactly what I have been saying. Without the Church, there is no moral grounding. Without moral grounding, half the nation starts doing whatever the hell it wants, and the rest either give up and go along, or they crawl into holes and die there, too afraid to be out in the open.

Either way, it's total chaos. We are driven by delusion, desire, and impulsive/extremist natures...which means that without control, without some fort of external guidance...we are savages. We will kill each other. We won't feel bad as long as we live another day.

Fear is what it'll be. Pure, unadulterated fear. And it will turn us all into beasts. Either that, or it will make us so desperate for some form of higher power that virtually any man with a brain can step up and turn the nation into his own personal empire. And from there...he does whatever he wants, until he makes a crucial mistake and someone kills him in a bid for power. Because in a world where it's every man for himself...the more people you control, the longer you live.

Survivalism in its raw, natural form. Ugly, ain't it?

As they used to say in the 60's Right on ! right on ! You got it. And this is what happened after the fall. Man became his own god and from there on was war, killing, pillaging, incest, animal sex, and much more because he threw off God and sought to be as a god to himself. With his conviction suppressed he began to do as he pleased to himself and to others. Empires were built on the notion that man is god and nations fall by the same thinking of still other nations. One tweak though. It's not so much an organizational force as it is a moral divine conviction coming from the person who is God, supreme and above all. But, still, you got it. Right on !

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by wildtimes

 

I am definitely reading more of that link.

But ask yourselves this question: is religion didn't exist, do you really think we would have the moral fortitude to live decent lives? Or would we convert to pure survivalism...kill or be killed?

If by religion you mean an Abrahamic religion then I have to ask how China managed to develop a culture that is known to be about 8000 years old and is probably much older without an Abrahamic religion to guide them?

And yes China had Buddhism and Daoism but those are voluntary paths to enlightenment and not something forced on people from the cradle to the grave – and you have to experience the teaching/training, faith isn’t a factor

But you do have a point, I think both Christianity and Islam are socio-political systems like communism or capitalism but based around a myth and not an economic type and they did create social unity

So if you have faith in the myth that Jesus died for you or Mohammad is a prophet then you are in the club – and that’s why Christians and Muslims go to so much trouble to get others to join their club because its just a numbers game, the religion with the mostess is winning and so can put more soldiers into battle and get even more recruits

Remember the path bit in ‘path to enlightenment’ signifies an effort to achieve enlightenment – there is no way just having faith in the notion that ‘Jesus died for you’ and that’s it you are done is any form of enlightenment

the question of the existence of God is one of various definitions of a word.
The messiah problem is far more sinister and it's consequences far more real.
Religious folk take offense to science, and thus prefer dogma over truth, this is not inconsequential and is in fact dangerous. The only way to realize the greater significance of our lives, and that of "the creation" is through the truth of it. Most formalized religion are barriers to humanity's "spiritual" development. Once again judgmental prophets and messiahs are 'evil' .