New Testament Fairy Tales

reply to post by DeadSeraph

I could probably get an entire peer reviewed paper written by scholars with far more credentials than Atwill

Kewl, when will that be out?

reply to post by ALightBreeze


You said dozens with an 's' meaning at least 2 dozen.

12+12=24

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by ALightBreeze

 

You said dozens with an 's' meaning at least 2 dozen.

12+12=24

That's how I took it. And it questions your math?
Everyone should know that an errant or ill-placed 's' changes the entire meaning of a word or phrase...

I've read through the entire Bible, ONCE, and I am halfway through a second. And I started years ago...
But then again, I fully expect to get something more out of it. I'm not browsing, or in a race. Just the slightest distraction can cause one to read over something important, and miss it all together.
I read for comprehension, not just word recognition...

reply to post by jiggerj

"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes?

If this is such great advice why don't we all just quit our jobs. Let's teach our kids that when they grow up they have no need to save money for the future, no need to spend money on food and clothing. Yep, real super advice.

Faith requires trust. It's a simple, yet powerful message. God knows you need these things. Do you agree? Matthew did. You have taken Jesus from his intended context.

Listen to the entire context to this passage: AUDIO You are adding a premise that is not intended by the entire passage. The focus of this passage is on our future reward from God for a life lived and further, our witness to others by where we place our priorities. We definitely should teach our children to value others over our own desires. By adding your own pretext to this one verse, you deny the final conclusion to this chapter: "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well."

By future reward, I am speaking of our white robe received at the end. This robe is the wool that was taken and washed white as snow. Our sin is this wool. See this thread for more: Wool and the Amnion

When Abraham was asked to give the son of the promise, Abraham had faith. God never intended to take what Abraham loved. Instead, he gave it back after faith was demonstrated. If you fail to see context and understand the relationship of the rest of God's word, you will prejudge by your own pretext instead of the ACTUAL text.

And then there's this from the NT.

Matthew 27: The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

Really? I mean, REALLY? And the mature religious adults with an IQ over 80 believe this happened? Come on now.

This world is built on energy and information. From our perspective, matter is not something we can manipulate as a creator like God. We are limited. God is not. For God, matter is creation itself. Why would I doubt this from the CREATOR of matter? Further, this is a resurrected body. You are assuming that a physical body, like a rotted corpse, came out of the grave. These were Saints. The bodies mentioned here could very well have been like Christ's risen body. Either you believe in the entire thing or you don't. We take this on faith by what is evident. All of Science is built on evident axioms that are taken on faith alone.

Religion has been an ongoing conspiracy against the masses for thousands of years. Isn't it time to really look at what you're buying into?

The Christian religion ministers to sick, dying, orphans, widows and single parent families. I hardly see your point. You are condemning religion (caring for others) as a source for tyranny? Are you saying that Christians have caused the wars that plague our society? How about the Moneychangers, Masons (Builders) and the High Priests who are clearly building their NWO? Are you somehow saying that the Christian religion has ANYTHING to do with the greed on Wall Street? Was Stalin a Christian?

You are confusing a true faith based religion with those who take the name in vain. Taking on the name but not the character the name stands for only makes a person a hypocrite and a thief, taking something in duplicity. We can discount anyone who claims to be religious in the sense of being Christ-like if they do not take on the character the name represents. The Bible covers this clearly.

Your pretext in this thread demands your perspective over what the text actually says. I read another post that denies the authenticity of the gospel of Matthew. That was laid to rest when the Hebrew Matthew was found. As for the other texts and letter, each has the Heptadic stamp of one mind working from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. The last 22 books of the Bible are letters, just as there are 22 letters in the Hebrew language.

You are giving in to doubt, yet you have these truths written on your heart. To deny this, you are creating a dissonance within your own soul. Ultimately, this is the proof that makes the evident axioms in the New Testament true by intuition. A rational mind, free from pride, will see this immediately. Aristotle gave us the key to this indwelling of truth within mankind. It is written within and only needs to be awakened.

"All instruction and all processes of intellectual learning depend upon the presence of antecedent cognitions. " LINK

The first part of all learning starts with cognition from what comes before in sequence. Virtue is the bridge to this ability to see truth. Truth is already in the heart and rational intuition is built on the axioms that are mirrored in the world. In other words, rational intuition is built on what is written on the heart. When what we witness agrees, there is balance between mind and heart. You can deny the truths in the New Testament all you want, but that peace will never enter your mind and heart equally. Truth is already there in your heart, mirrored in the Word of God.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight Faith requires trust.

faith (n.) mid-13c., "duty of fulfilling one's trust," from O.Fr. feid, foi "faith, belief, trust, confidence, pledge," from L. fides "trust, faith, confidence, reliance, credence, belief," from root of fidere "to trust," from PIE root *bheidh- (cf. Gk. pistis; see bid). For sense evolution, see belief. Theological sense is from late 14c.; religions called faiths since c.1300.

Here.

late 12c., bileave, replacing O.E. geleafa "belief, faith," from W.Gmc. *ga-laubon "to hold dear, esteem, trust" (cf. O.S. gilobo, M.Du. gelove, O.H.G. giloubo, Ger. Glaube), from *galaub- "dear, esteemed," from intensive prefix *ga- + *leubh- "to care, desire, like, love" (see love (v.)). The prefix was altered on analogy of the verb believe. The distinction of the final consonant from that of believe developed 15c. "The be-, which is not a natural prefix of nouns, was prefixed on the analogy of the vb. (where it is naturally an intensive) .... [OED] Belief used to mean "trust in God," while faith meant "loyalty to a person based on promise or duty" (a sense preserved in keep one's faith, in good (or bad) faith and in common usage of faithful, faithless, which contain no notion of divinity). But faith, as cognate of L. fides, took on the religious sense beginning in 14c. translations, and belief had by 16c. become limited to "mental acceptance of something as true," from the religious use in the sense of "things held to be true as a matter of religious doctrine" (a sense attested from early 13c.).

Here.


Awesome thing is that Faith is still used in this manner. You're loaned money "In Good Faith". Remember that.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


The only duty I can see being even remotely relevant is duty as a result of being spared from death. I think letting the rest of the world f*** itself over, when you can heal everything with a thought, kind of renders that a moot point anyway.

When you both know everything AND can do anything, allowing your servants to destroy the world can only mean you WANT them to. Otherwise, you're obligated to do something. After all, "God" owns us, right? So he should have full responsibility.

But nope. No go. Can't be bothered lifting a finger. Not even to stop 9/11. Not even to stop Hitler. Not even to end any of the wars that have cost thousands of lives. All needless deaths. No, "God" has to remain mysterious at the cost of trillions of innocent lives. Lives he supposedly created. Lives he should have been responsible for, considering he also created the means by which they died. Or created the inventors, or whatever.

It's idiotic. But no one wants to see that, because if they do, the last of their hope dies like the last embers in a cold fire.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ

 

Spirit of truth? The worst thing you can do is assume you're right. I keep seeing people believing that because they've only seen on side of the box, that's the only side. I myself will admit that Christians are right to a certain extent, but they think that means all of it is right.

Your truth is not an absolute truth. Please understand that. It's how YOU look at life. That works for you, but not for everyone.

I didnt say all of it it's right, nor did I say I have all the answers. I've been saying all along it's about perception, however your mind is powerful thing. It does matter what you believe.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by CynicalDrivel

 

The only duty I can see being even remotely relevant is duty as a result of being spared from death. I think letting the rest of the world f*** itself over, when you can heal everything with a thought, kind of renders that a moot point anyway.

When you both know everything AND can do anything, allowing your servants to destroy the world can only mean you WANT them to. Otherwise, you're obligated to do something. After all, "God" owns us, right? So he should have full responsibility.

But nope. No go. Can't be bothered lifting a finger. Not even to stop 9/11. Not even to stop Hitler. Not even to end any of the wars that have cost thousands of lives. All needless deaths. No, "God" has to remain mysterious at the cost of trillions of innocent lives. Lives he supposedly created. Lives he should have been responsible for, considering he also created the means by which they died. Or created the inventors, or whatever.

It's idiotic. But no one wants to see that, because if they do, the last of their hope dies like the last embers in a cold fire.

We aren't owned.... Lol..... We have free will. Our soul has free will to make choices separately from God.

There are laws of the Universe that has been set in motion before we were ever created and we abide by these laws.

Gods already given us a way out. What's that phrase..... Give ya an inch and you take a mile. He is our father.... We have rules.

These stories... Hitler and 911 are stories just as in the Old Testament that touch our heart. We don't understand how the evil doers can get away with such a thing( they won't), but it's our story as man continues to try and separate himself from the good order of nature and God all the while not understanding our very role in said story.

God didn't start a war, we did. The wars have been going on since the beginning of time. The final war will and IS between the sons of god and the sons of darkness.

God IMO is not a mystery. That very sentence is the reason my journey began. He only remains a mystery when you do not seek him out.

reply to post by ALightBreeze


So, basically what you are doing, or conveying is Joseph Atwills words from a book.

He is your God?

The silly thing is..... He doesn't understand the Bible AT ALL so his knowledge base holds no wisdom what so ever.

We are all creating our own story with expression and experience and the only way we are doing this is through God.

We continue to seek and experience and also enter the womb UNTIL we find Jesus and or Christhood within. After we find him within we LIVE the Word!

Eta.... Also Jesus was not supposed to bring peace in his last incarnation. You knew that right?

www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com...

Atwill claims he has learned to read the esoteric secrets of the gospels, whereby they are seen as black-comedic satires of events in the Jewish War. For instance, when Jesus offers his flesh for consumption at the Last Supper, it is “really” a wink to the reader who is somehow supposed to think of a passage in Josephus set during the Roman siege, when a woman eats the roasted flesh of her own infant. When Jesus offers to make his disciples fishers of men, the line is supposed to sardonically anticipate a wartime episode in which the Romans picked off fleeing Jewish rebels swimming in the Lake of Galilee. Thinking his method justified by comparison to the ancient practice of scriptural typology, Atwill gives himself license to indulge in the most outrageous display of “parallelomania” ever seen. He connects widely separated dots and collects sets of incredibly far-fetched verbal correspondences, from gospel to gospel and between the gospels and Josephus, then uses them to create ostensible parallel accounts. Then he declares himself justified in borrowing names, themes, and intended references from one “parallel” account and reading them into the other, thus supplying “missing” features. Triumphantly, Atwill defies the reader to call it all coincidence, working out the math to show such correspondences could never be the product of chance. Well, of course they are not. They are the product of his own arbitrary gematria in the first place. “That the wicked man in the Fulvia story can be seen as a lampoon of Paul seems difficult to dispute” (p. 247), unless of course one forgot to pick up a pair of 3-D glasses on the way into the theatre. Again, Atwill hammers home the “parallel” between Josephus’ story of a Jewish matron, Paulina, tricked into sleeping with a deceiver, Decius Mundus, claiming to be Anubis incarnate, on the one hand, and that of the supposed deception of disguising Titus as the god Jesus, on the other. What do they have in common? Josephus says Decius came forward to gloat, revealing the hoax three days later, while the adjacent Testimonium Flavianum of Josephus says Jesus was seen alive again three days after his crucifixion. “There is, of course, a difference. Whereas Jesus appears on the third day to show that he is a God, Decius appears on the third day to announce that he is not a god. [But] It is implausible that something as unusual as two ‘third-day divinity declarations’ would wind up next to one another by chance.” (p. 245). But there is no declaration of divinity in either case! As Atwill notes, Decius declares the opposite, while Josephus (or whoever wrote the Testimonium passage) says nothing of Jesus or anyone else declaring him divine as a result of the resurrection. Of such airy bricks is Atwill’s cloudy castle built.

Atwill clearly has no clue, he is tryin to divide without the knowledge of division.

Jesus offering his flesh is a pretty simple matter.... It's understandable as we all should do it.

From the same link....

Atwill reasons that Jesus’ prediction of the fall of Jerusalem plainly prefigures Josephus’ account of the actual events, and he infers that both versions (in the future and the past tenses) stem from the same source, Josephus and his Flavian collaborators. Then, he reasons, the Son of Man whose coming was to climax the apocalyptic scenario must be none other than the actual man who did wreak judgment on Jerusalem, Titus. Atwill congratulates the Preterist school of interpreters (like J. Stuart Russell, The Parousia) on recognizing that the Synoptic predictions of the desolation of Jerusalem must have been completely fulfilled in 70 CE, with nothing left over for futurist expectation. Here is one of Atwill’s most attractive suggestions, though he does not put it the way I am about to do. I believe that Bultmann was right that several “son of man” sayings in the gospels referred originally simply to “mankind” in general (e.g., Mark 2:10, 28; Matthew 12:32). In fact, I wonder if they do not retain this non-Christological “Everyman” denotation even in the gospels. Further, I suspect even more of the son of man sayings are intended this way, e.g., Mark 14:21. Perhaps Mark 13:36 (“And then they will see the son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.”) is another one. If it were, then maybe what we read there is a reference to Josephus’ account of the end of Jerusalem, heralded, he says, by people beholding in the flame-tinged clouds the forms of battling soldiers and charioteers. After all, the introductory (redactional) question placed in the disciples’ mouths concerns the time of the temple’s destruction.

The fall of Jerusalem also represents the fall of mankind.

The sons of god are indeed Jerusalem/ Israel. Our bodies are the temple in the New Testament.

So how would one think and reflect upon the destruction of the temple? Do you See?

We are so far away from God now, the temple has been destroyed and we must rebuild it.

reply to post by MamaJ

We aren't owned.... Lol..... We have free will. Our soul has free will to make choices separately from God.

If that's, heaven and hell shouldn't exist. Heaven and hell imply that we must choose between serving "God" or eternal condemnation. That isn't free will. That's barely a choice at all.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I believe it is eternal damnation.
We will be on our own. Not condemned. Just left behind. It's more like condemning ourselves, when we know what's coming, but choose not to get on the last flight out...

reply to post by AfterInfinity


...have you ever read C.S.Louis's books? A lot of Christians believe that heaven and hell are merely a state of mind, and we will choose which state we live in, by our mindset.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


Not the ones I talk to.

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

...have you ever read C.S.Louis's books? A lot of Christians believe that heaven and hell are merely a state of mind, and we will choose which state we live in, by our mindset.

That isn't what the NT says.

If that is the real message then why did god bother throwing together over 138,000 words, which don't even come close to getting that message across?

reply to post by MamaJ


I have always disliked the concept of the Eucharist, in fact, I find it repulsive. But after learning of the Jewish wars, the siege of Jerusalem, a history of which I was sadly and woefully ignorant of, and the story of "Cannibal Mary," I am further disgusted.

I honestly hope that Atwill's theory in wrong. Because if it is correct it reveals an epic glee for the dehumanization of entire populations of simple, humble people just trying to live a meaningful existence in peace, by the powers that be. I don't want to believe that kind of evil can perpetuate, as it must have, if his theory is correct.

Personally, I don't believe in the divinity of Jesus. I don't believe in the virgin birth, the resurrection or that Jesus died to cleanse our sins from us. I believe that there are reasonable explanations for the miracles Jesus supposedly performed.

I do think that the story of Jesus had been manipulated and his words and message twisted, in a quest for power and control, and that is evil in itself. But to believe that the entire story and message of Jesus and Christianity is a sick satire of things held sacred and the religion of a suffering people, trapped, tortured and exterminated would cause me to lose all faith in humanity.

I believe that Jesus was an enlightened fellow, with great compassion and a talent for reaching directly into the minds and souls of those he met. I believe that he was a self determined spiritual being who chose to come to earth when he did. And, I believe that he taught about self determined reincarnation, and how to free the soul from the "karmic wheel."

reply to post by windword

I do think that the story of Jesus had been manipulated and his words and message twisted, in a quest for power and control, and that is evil in itself. But to believe that the entire story and message of Jesus and Christianity is a sick satire of things held sacred and the religion of a suffering people, trapped, tortured and exterminated would cause me to lose all faith in humanity.

You've just nailed it...no pun intended. If the truth is horrifying enough, people will almost always lie to themselves. It makes life easier to get on with.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ

 

We aren't owned.... Lol..... We have free will. Our soul has free will to make choices separately from God.

If that's, heaven and hell shouldn't exist. Heaven and hell imply that we must choose between serving "God" or eternal condemnation. That isn't free will. That's barely a choice at all.

Is there anything I say you actually agree with?

To me.... It's simple once you add it all up.

We do have free will to choose our destiny.

It's really a no brainer and yes it is all in the mind because God is to me a Universal Mind/ consciousness.

Think about it! Lol * Pun Intended* !!!

Mind over matter......

When you really think about it there are many layers of God to consider.

Metaphysical. Religion, science, physics, anything and everything you can THINK of has a nature about it.

Words create sentences and their are different MEANINGS of Words!

They even create a story ( bible included), many stories that compile the nature of God and what he is.

We are truly never away from God but different experiences and expressions keep us at bay and at these times or after we are in a state that reflects the separation.

The story is a selfless one, a story that tells us about a man who represents mankind/consciousness who lived many lives, struggled, however always had an agenda.

Read about Amilius, Adam, Joseph, Enoch, Joshua and Melchezedek and think of the same soul being Jesus. See if you make the connections.

Read the Old Testament and think what it was like in Jesus day. The stories represent us as well.

This universe is about karma. Each person is always accountable for their choices. Cause and effect, what comes around goes around and the story ends with a Revelation/ Relevations.

Because Jesus is the Word...... Words are extremely powerful!!!!! Words have power! Words can make or break you and not be able to take them back.

That's why he said would could do what he does. He mastered the knowledge that lead him back father so he could enjoy life and we are in him and he in us. We are all Gods children. We are the light!

Israel means us. The sons of god! We are already chosen, if we accept. There is truly a way to live life separate from God but doing so, you are on your own.

reply to post by MamaJ

Is there anything I say you actually agree with?

Depends. Is there only one right answer to that question?

I agree with karma, but not with Jesus being the one and only salvation. He's one way to do it, yes...but not the only way.