Fundamentalist Christianity: a mind control CULT?

reply to post by network dude


Religions didnt start by becoming cult-type systems of belief. That was procured and adopted to each religion as time goes on. The basis for proof is just, and can only be, from reminders as to why these things have been accepted into our 'shared' society. (wink, wink)

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by protocolsoflove

 

Jesus is for Christians though. I refer to the inner living God as The First Source and Center. Does that make me wrong? Does that mean I am going to hell for the Long Journey?

What about Muslims, eastern religions, pagans, shamans, and the rest? Are their personal faiths wrong and only Christianity right?

These are sincere questions and not intended to mock Christians.

If you have to ask if you're going to hell I think you need to read up a little bit more on your religion. Where is hell and how do you get there? jesus is for christians lol the first thing you list is muslims and they were QUITE fond of jesus. hmm pagans were christians...jesus was a hebrew so there's the whole jews thing...looks like all these religions are connected in many ways.

Maybe you're not actually a freemason or if you are, you must fall asleep in class a lot.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by WhoKnows100

The term fundamental Christian is used today to degrade those who follow Jesus Christ, His teachings and the bible as a whole as being the words of God. But yet, if we look at the definition of fundamental;

That's just the problem, they are not really fundamental and they are not really Christian. It's a misnomer created by THEM.

I agree and respectively disagree with you. Here's why, I asked the OP for his definition of fundamentalism. It is the laws, rules, foundations of anything. So, with that definition, we know what a fundamental Christian should be - one who holds to the truths, rules, laws of Christ, yes? So, therefore any church not preaching these fundamentals of Christ are preaching a false gospel message, yes? In conclusion, these churches are not fundamentalist Christians. It is my point that I am arguing. Now, are they preaching a man-made doctrine and passing it off as the fundamentals of Christ? I would say yes, they are. The only thing that I can ever try to do is get these people to see the error of what they believe, and point them towards the truth in scripture and ask them to pray for understanding.

The OP created a thread blaspheming "fundamental Christianity" as a mind control cult, when my simple point is, he is wrong if he doesn't distinguish between the true fundamental of Christ and the fundamentals of man-made doctrine. He slanders BOTH in the process. He gave us an example of a family member stopping drinking and radically changing their behaviour. The truth of Christ is that IT WILL PRODUCE SUCH CHANGES. It's NORMAL.

Being called judgemental these days is a direct result of humanism's definition of love as "tolerance". The moment that one stops partying with their friends, for example, the friends sit around gossiping about the sudden change and inevitably the conversation takes the line of "who does SHE think she is"? The new Christian may even give their reasons, that all the alcohol led them to sleeping around, abusing their children, or worse behaviours. Now, is when the truth of the matter arises, and the friends feel JUDGED because this new Christian rejects this behaviour. The friends feel rejected and judged because they take it as rejection of themselves instead of what it is - rejection of the behaviour.

Fundamental Christianity is preaching of the Truth. Preaching of false gospel is NOT Fundamental Christianity which by its VERY DEFINITION are the laws, rules and foundational truths OF GOD AND CHRIST.

reply to post by protocolsoflove


I'm sorry. Allow me to elaborate.

I was raised catholic, went to catholic school for nine years at a school called Old Mission Montessori located within the grounds of San Luis Rey Mission, founded by Father Junipero Serra himself.

If you couldn't tell, I am also very fond of Jesus of Nazereth, and of his teachings. I'm also well versed in the old and the new Ts. Walking in the footsteps of him will surely lead you to a happy life and death.

Now can you please answer my questions?

I also don't believe in hell, just to make that clear.

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by protocolsoflove

 

I'm sorry. Allow me to elaborate.

I was raised catholic, went to catholic school for nine years at a school called Old Mission Montessori located within the grounds of San Luis Rey Mission, founded by Father Junipero Serra himself.

If you couldn't tell, I am also very fond of Jesus of Nazereth, and of his teachings. I'm also well versed in the old and the new Ts. Walking in the footsteps of him will surely lead you to a happy life and death.

Now can you please answer my questions?

Based on your background you should have more than enough knowledge to determine whether or not people of faiths other than christianity are going to hell.

The questions you expect me to answer are insulting and simply not worth my time.

reply to post by protocolsoflove


Seriously? Those are honest questions with no disrespect meant whatsoever.

reply to post by W3RLIED2


"Jesus is for Christians though. I refer to the inner living God as The First Source and Center. Does that make me wrong? Does that mean I am going to hell for the Long Journey? "

At best i'll give you that your questions have been rhetorical, if not insulting.

reply to post by protocolsoflove


Dude you have got to be kidding me.

Well the secret name of God was lost to all including the masons so whichever names you wish to attribute to the Universal God is totally fine I would think.

I'm not a religious scholar or anything nor do I claim to have bountiful knowledge. I am a musician by trade and in my mid 20's. I just have felt a strong calling for a long time to look into this stuff.

It is disheartening to see peoples' religious beliefs cause them to oppress certain groups of people. For example, one of my family members believes gay marriage is wrong because "traditionally marriage is between a man and a woman" and that apparently marriage belongs to Christianity (at least that was what was implied). I responded by saying that if the human race always stuck by traditions, we would be burning witches still and hanging people from a noose (in Britain there is no capital punishment). This view is clearly oppressive to gay people but this certain family members won't except it and a popular argument for themselves is that civil partnership is enough. Though gay people should have the same rights as straight people. And sorry to veer into a slightly different topic area, but when the government imposes personal (religious) beliefs in the form of laws, that is wrong.

Originally posted by protocolsoflove
reply to post by W3RLIED2

 

Well the secret name of God was lost to all including the masons so whichever names you wish to attribute to the Universal God is totally fine I would think.

I'm not a religious scholar or anything nor do I claim to have bountiful knowledge. I am a musician by trade and in my mid 20's. I just have felt a strong calling for a long time to look into this stuff.

and a star for you

edit on 25-5-2012 by protocolsoflove because: last line

Ok, honestly, I can't tell what your trying to say. I would use a confused smiley but according to the experts they make posts weak.

An example of why I am so confused about your opinions regarding the OP.

Originally posted by protocolsoflove
Mark 7:7

In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.

Matthew 17:7-23

So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my father who is in heaven. ..

Ephesians 5:11

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

This one is one of my favorites:

Zechariah 11:17

“Woe to my worthless shepherd, who deserts the flock! May the sword strike his arm and his right eye! Let his arm be wholly withered, his right eye utterly blinded!”

edit on 24-5-2012 by protocolsoflove because: (no reason given)

So, with respect, are you now saying there is a Universal God? Or are you calling masons Luciferians because you think the only path to salvation is through Jesus and Christianity? Or are the last several posts of yours and the ones back a few pages where you called me a beer drinking troll just your way of researching?

These are not meant meant rhetorically, I am really trying to figure out your point of view here. There is no wrong answer.

I wish I'd found this thread before it had reached the ninth page.

I left Pauline Christianity in 2007, for a lot of different reasons, one of which was that I was called to Kali Ma. Before I completely walked away from it, however, Ma insisted that I teach myself the truth where it was concerned; and that meant delving deeply into the religion and its' history.

As far as Christianity being a mind control cult is concerned, it is important to understand that that is only true in terms of the contemporary, mainstream form. Christianity has a couple of major issues, which people should be aware of.

Most of Christian theology is correct, and can be verified by direct spiritual experience. However, while saying that it is correct, it is important to understand that it is also distorted severely from the root concepts, and this is usually because of the degree of fear that is typical for Christians, as well as their insistence on their religion's exclusivity.

* The Essene/Pauline split

As a number of great minds have commented on, the fundamental nature of the theology/philosophy espoused by Jesus Christ, and that espoused by Paul, are extremely different. I personally have come to consider Essene Christianity theologically and spiritually legitimate, and Pauline theology as atheistic heresy, which was primarily introduced for the purposes of social and political control.

Paul of Tarsus was a heretic and a liar, to a large extent, and did not, in my opinion, have a genuine divine commission.

Yahshua or Paul?
Concerning Paul And The Disciples Of Jesus
Paul The Liar

* Original Sin

This is an entirely bogus concept, as far as I am concerned, and was introduced for the purposes of creating a sense of debt within an individual to the Church as soon as they were born. It is similar to the contemporary secular scenario, where our birth certificate indicates that we have been sold as collateral to guarantee our nation's debt to the international bankers.

* Vicarious Atonement

Debunked here.

* Hell

This last point is a complex topic, and I could write a lot about it. Unfortunately, a link which I could also cite as important reinforcing material, also no longer exists on the Internet. Briefly, however, my belief system concerning Hell at this point is as follows.

a] Yes, Hell does exist, but not in singular form. There are a very large number of Hells, within astral space. They are mental/astral constructs.

b] Hell is a name for them, but is not necessarily an inherent descriptor of them. Astral space has a very large number of different environments of all kinds, ("In my Father's house, there are many mansions,") and those which we might consider unpleasant, we would call Hells, and those which we consider pleasant, we would call Heavens. A construct where people have sex all the time, as one example, would be a Hell for some, and a Heaven in the minds of others. So it is very dependent on your point of view.

c] Where you go astrally at the end of your life, is determined partly by what you expect or desire, and partly by the karma of your actions in the most recent physical life. Both of these things together, create a particular frequency which matches the construct that you will end up in.

d] It is very possible to leave a Hell, but depending on the nature of the construct in question, some of them can be extremely difficult to get out of. It also depends on the beliefs of the individual spirits, and whether or not they think they deserve to ever get out. If they don't, then yes, the individual personality or fragment can entirely cease to exist, eventually. So the doctrine of the Second Death is quite correct; just not in the way most Christians think.

e] The crucifixion and ressurection didn't happen because human beings need that level of redemption in order to reconnect with God, but because we think we do. The point was to illustrate the lengths to which God will go in order to reconnect with people, but the only barrier that exists to said reconnection is entirely within our own heads. It isn't because God thinks we're inherently dirty and doesn't want to be around us...that idea is just used by Christians, in order to control and scare people. It's because we think that ourselves.

In summary, Jesus Christ has just as much legitimacy as a personal ishta deva as any other. I also believe that Jesus did physically and historically exist, and that he was a man who had completed his cycle of reincarnation/spiritual development to a degree that will not be attained by 99% of us. He was not, however, the son of God in the sense that there was anything about him, which anyone else was not capable of becoming themselves, provided they do the work.

I believe in a Universal God. You are a beer drinking troll, don't deny it haha. That said I appreciate some of your content and appreciate your knowledge. I choose to believe in Christ because that's how I was raised and because of the good things that I have found in life through living a life with purpose. I also think that the Bible is truly understood by very few. Myself included although I try to only expand my knowledge and get closer to the truth.

It's easy to feel a little trolled when I'm scrolling through pages of various compass avatars saying that everything I post is wrong. My Grandfather is a mason and he needs someone to pass the saber to. I don't know if I'll ever do it just because of what Manly Hall said about Socrates (Socrates refused to join the Eleusinian mysteries for knowing its secrets, he knew it would seal his tongue).

You are wise to point out that this has been great "research" although I am also highly fascinated by all this stuff so I would be drawn to it anyways. For now, I like hanging out at clubs where women can join me

reply to post by petrus4


Holy smokes where have you been this whole time *drool* i'll see you all tomorrow gonna digest this information.

I too have been reading some things about paul being an initiate of the mysteries....

Dont you think all religion is a bit culty? hang on did i spell that right.

reply to post by protocolsoflove


I joined ATS in 2007 after reading here since about 2005.

I didn't become a Mason until 2009.

Like I told you before, sometimes it's better to read... A lot, before immediately jumping to the absolute truths. Ask questions, a lot. Then read some more. I've been a conspiracy theorist a lot longer than I have been a mason, and from one enthusiastic ATS member to another I hope you find the truths your seeking.

reply to post by Hecate666


good point, knowledge and don't forget, an open mind!!

A vaccine or cure is not effective against a closed mind.

Originally posted by protocolsoflove
My Grandfather is a mason and he needs someone to pass the saber to. I don't know if I'll ever do it just because of what Manly Hall said about Socrates (Socrates refused to join the Eleusinian mysteries for knowing its secrets, he knew it would seal his tongue).

You mentioned this in another thread, don't know if you saw my response. But Manly Hall was wrong. In the Phaedo, Plato states that Socrates had been initiated, and had recommended initiation to Phaedo in order to learn about virtue.

The definition of cults and cultism needs to be updated to include those who believe (in) ANYTHING without THE most rock-solid, ironclad, undisputed, incontrovetible (etc.) PROOF, which also means those with blind faith in the existing secrecy-BASED political world, or whatever other version or variation that's basically the same pathocratic thing or close enough - anything where mere rhetoric and emotion overcomes reason and scientific truth. Sure is a whole lot of pots calling kettles black going on. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so damn sad and insane. "Resistance is futile; you will be assimilated."

reply to post by network dude


You are exactly right. The scary thing is nobody, despite independent thought processes, knowledge of human foibles and logical mindset, is completely immune to religious mania and cults.

Nothing that makes someone judgemental and breaks up families (like fundy religion of all creeds) can be a good thing.

Fanaticism is the least "Christian" mode of being. It is nothing but evil.

It's a shame because basic Christian thought is rather beautiful; and loving yourself, enemies and whatever creater there may be is a noble and very hard endeavor. Higher theological thought is complex and interesting as well and there might be nothing ultimately more important to spend one's limited time pondering.

A good rule of thumb might be that if a human declares they have all the answers, then they should be avoided and if they declare divine knowledge and want money, they should be spanked... though it seems many self proclaimed agents of god like that.