To some who say they are Christian (WARNING MAY BE OFFENSIVE)

Originally posted by pasttheclouds
reply to post by badmedia

 

one more thing,

you wrote :
There is only 1 true teacher, 1 true master, 1 true authority and neither of us are it.

you are RIGHT, god is everything, so as long you avoid him working towards you as one, as everything being that teacher, you will not reach your goal, and be as jacob, fighting with god.

i maybe sound angry, but ill forgive you faster then the speed of light,
because i need to forgive you. I want to live in peace,
and give love.

No, god is not "everything". Again, you show that you do not understand the difference between spirit and flesh, or why God is only god of the living - not the dead. Honestly, don't think you even know what is life and what is dead. Spirit is life, flesh/physical is dead.

The father is not physical at all. The father is in terms of the physical a void, consciousness, illogical, eternal, always has been - always will be. I am that I am. Pure consciousness/mind. It is from that which creation is born - the word/logic creates "reality" within the "mind/consciousness/void" of the father.

You are just talking about new age paganism.

bm, the best to you, you can always email me personally,
i will always respond as long as i am on ats, but honestly,
that isnt your goal.

a god that is not everything, can not exist as god.
a truth that is not everything is not one.

Originally posted by pasttheclouds
bm, the best to you, you can always email me personally,
i will always respond as long as i am on ats, but honestly,
that isnt your goal.

a god that is not everything, can not exist as god.
a truth that is not everything is not one.

The father knows all, and is omnipresent. That doesn't mean the father is all.

All you have to do is look at Genesis. All of creation is made - NOT GOD. And then the spirit of the father descends unto creation and brings it to LIFE.

Mark 12:27/Luke 20:38 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

Both verses are exactly the same. The verses themselves show that what you say isn't true. But I've also shown you what is life and what is dead in the process.

Gods of the dead is what Paganism worships. They like you see god as "everything". And so they worship physical/nature as being god. But they really don't know what god is to begin with. They do not understand that which is spirit is spirit(life) and that which is flesh is flesh(physical/dead).

Paul also makes this mistake and doesn't understand what is being said. But this is just part of Christianity being a mixture of Judaism and Paganism.

Romans 14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

Of course, if Paul had understood spirit, understood the 2 births and thus the 2 deaths - he would have not said such. He is taking that Jesus is resurrected as "conquering the dead". But the truth is that Jesus only dies the 1st dead, and he doesn't die the 2nd death because he is sin free - so the spirit lives.

I've confirmed the difference due to my own work with AI. Logic and the physical has many limitations. You can't logically create something that has a sense of "being", you can't logically create something which can "understand", to "observe" and all the things which makes something "alive". That is why a robot has no soul and is incapable of "being", understanding and so forth. Without the father within creation, these things simply are not possible.

So the only way I could take AI from "Artificial" to "real" intelligence such as we have, it would have required me to insert my consciousness into the program/computer somehow.

I quit working on AI completely when I figured this out and had the above revelation. Because I realized I would only be doing that which was already done - that which I was already a result of. So when I read Genesis and I see the spirit of the Lord descends onto creation - I know EXACTLY what it is talking about.

Many who work in AI come to understand the above with consciousness. As such, you will find that in the field of AI one of the main current goals is to do exactly that which I quit on - they want to figure out how to get consciousness into the program. No joke. They will also tell you that some things are beyond logic and beyond science and they are talking about consciousness.

And if "I" had continued on, and by some chance been successful - would that program which was created and that my consciousness enter it - would that make all the program "me"? Of course not - such would be absurd. And thus is equally as absurd to say that the father is everything as well. And so just like Jesus told the Pharisees - you error greatly.

And to understand the above things is quite important to understanding the reason why the OP was right.

When you are born of spirit, then you will know the above, and in the process you will see why Jesus said:

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Because the body is dead already. The soul is that which is alive. The death of the soul is the real death, a new body is nothing. Our flesh comes "from the dust of the earth". From the physical. It is all action and reaction and a biological machine.

Knowing this, there is never a reason to kill. Because it is no big deal to lose the body, the soul is that which is worried about. And EVERY single justification you can name as being a "good reason to kill" is ALWAYS in regards to what another man will do to your flesh if you don't.

And so those who do not "take up the cross" and follow Jesus - which means to keep the commandments as in his example, are those who try to save their life, and in the process they will lose it.

This is the reason behind why Jesus does what he does in terms of being murdered. He shows that there is nothing to fear in it. The resurrection is a result of him not sinning to try and save himself.

Such is the greatest test of "faith". I put that in quotes because I am talking about faith in understanding, not blind faith/belief.

Thus, I am not surprised that you believe there is a time and place for it, and at the same time think god is "everything". If you had been born of spirit, and if you knew the truth about spirit - then you would have not said such. You error greatly in this.

And this is also the benefit of a good heart. A good heart can overcome this lack of understanding. Because a good heart applies the start of Matthew 7 as instinct. A person with a good heart is a person who by default will put themselves on the other side of what they do, and realize what it will be like. IE: You see someone get punched in the head, and a person with a good heart will think/see the situation from the person getting hit. And so they can think - would I want to be treated like that. A person with no conscious is unable to see things from the other side. And so the expression: "Have you no heart/soul".

John 3

3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

your logic is growing right, but it can not see the whole in it.

You react on your perception of what i write,
not on what i do write.

genesis says god created creation out of himself,
not outside him. The woman is created from the man out,
not seperated, and are made to come back together.
Earth and sky will be brought together in one.

programmers can not create inteligence because
consciousness = will, is the program itself,
starting from the everything, everything can
blind itself, nothing can not blind itself.
a will is based on knowing something,
knowing is a beliefsystem,
truth is the whole beliefsystem
thats is both personal as impersonal,
the prsonal is created within it,
and dominates the whole space it is created in,
but still there is no impersonal without the personal
willing it to be.
God is both the hardware as the software,
both the program as the consiousness,
and they are never seperated.
the whole is always present,
in a computerprogram people start from nothing,
god never started from nothing,
but from everything.

with this i close it off for now,
I will answer you through life.
because god is one with life, they are one,
and there i will go.

what i tell is something opposite of many versions of new age,
there is no oneness in will with god, before the cause
is fighted through you, as one equal part.
oneness is only there where gods will is
present, that is the goal, the way is blinded
to the own will for gods cause.
but before we become the head,
we already are his body.

oneness is for everybody who wants it, one day.


[edit on 2-3-2010 by pasttheclouds]

Originally posted by pasttheclouds
your logic is growing right, but it can not see the whole in it.

You react on your perception of what i write,
not on what i do write.

Look, communication is a 2 way street. And to put it nicely, your writing style sucks. For you to sit here and blame me because you do a piss poor job of explaining yourself is ridiculous, not to mention annoying.

Of course I react on my perception. All people do. But that perception is based on what you DO write.

This is how communication works. You have an image or idea in your head. You must then take that and convert it into words. You type those words, and then I on the other end try to take those words and convert it back into the image/idea you tried to create.

This process can break down at many points. Either because 1 person is unable to put the pieces back together due to a lack of proper references in meaning(Jesus speaks in parables to try and give reference where none exists). OR the person who is communicating isn't doing a good job in converting the idea/image into words in a meaningful way.

Now, go over this thread and tell me which communication style is different from all the others. Meanwhile, you keep blaming me for not understanding you?

I realize English may not be your first language and I try to be understanding. As the saying goes, I'm sure your English is much better than whatever your first language may be for me. As I only know English. But if you are going to blame me for a communication breakdown then I'm going to point this out.

You offer no real understanding. You make extremely loose connections with no explanation and then expect that the other person is going to somehow get some big message. The short things you have been saying are just false. If the perception of what you are saying is wrong, then project your meaning better.

What you say after what I quoted is mostly false. #1 that is not what Genesis says, #2 Consciousness does not equal will. The problem is that without consciousness there is no free will. A program only follows the will given to it. #3 I think it's safe to assume that you are not a programmer.

reply to post by badmedia


who says that i blame you ?
i dont. did i ? yes, ofcourse, if i would be free of blame,
i would be free and one, meaning one with god.

yes, my writings are poor,
and my sayings are poor.
just as was written down to happen.
Qumran explains it very well.


i tell you something,
if i would have time to write or talk
properly, logic would not become full
in its most optimal possibility,
and that would make god not optimal,
and non exsistent.
You think god can have pain without cause ?
You think pain is without cause ?
Cause without optimality ?
Paradox a waste of time ?

I know you will not understand this yet.
I am not made to be perfect in my human lifetime,
i never was and never will. only after it.
consiousness yes is something else then will,
but it becomes free as real consiousness
there where it is one with will, before that
consiousness is directed, not free.
I was tryin to explain that consiousness
can not exist without beliefs, and beliefs
can not exsist without the full, because
there it is blinded into personality.

i reacted yes,
i didnt set you free yet,
but im there almost.

You can not see gods face and not die to yourself.
You can not see truth, and not be that truth as whole.


[edit on 2-3-2010 by pasttheclouds]

Originally posted by pasttheclouds

i reacted yes,
i didnt set you free yet,
but im there almost.

You can not see gods face and not die to yourself.
You can not see truth, and not be that truth as whole.

There is no "belief" in consciousness, or anything like that. Do you know what the words you are using actually mean?

As for what I quoted here, I'll say it once again. There is only 1 true father, 1 true teacher, and 1 true master. And neither of us are it. Why do you pretend to be such? Why do you pretend that you can at all "set me free"?

All you do is insult me and call me a liar.

reply to post by badmedia


I think you take what i say way more personal then i intend,
i was learning here, dont forget, i was learning the borders
of what absolute is, and i shared that learnprocess for part.
I react sharp because i know its only words in best capacity,
peace is where those words did their share. Maybe not in you,
but maybe they did in the place where they are important.
In one head logic will complete, so the lie can fall.

If you are a lier, everyone is, and i was guilty to that too.

consiousness is based on beliefs, it is a beliefsystem
that believes another belief.
God is not complicated, honor hides the truth.

take care, i thought about you for days,
i take you serious, you brought me a lot.
yes i have to set you free, i have to set your past
and future free in me. i told you in god all is good,
and oneness implies one forgives one, including past and future.
forgiveness is understanding is making one as one good.
One day...

the mistakes i was can be released.





[edit on 2-3-2010 by pasttheclouds]

reply to post by Simplynoone
You are dealing with a double pronged question here.
1) A Christian's duty to preserve 'the faith'.
2) A Christian's duty toward civil society.

How many of you gun toteing kill or be killed,mercy killing crowd of supposed Christians actually READ THE WORD OF GOD (ALL PARTS) are not UNDERSTANDING THESE PARTS OF SCRIPTURE ?
How can any of you after reading the scriptures actually justify KILLING ? Even in self defence ?
How can any of you justify REVENGE (life for a life evil for evil etc) after reading scripture ???
How can any of you returning evil for evil justify any of that after reading the word ?

I dont get it ..and I dont understand how some of you can believe your Holy Spirit filled if you have THIS MINDSET ?

There are certain groups eg KKK, Neo-Nazis, and other violent people who view white Christians as being an endangered species. These are by and large paranoid people, seeing themselves as 'the few, the pure, the persecuted'. They see themselves as the 'noble defenders of faith' while what they actually are defending is their self perceived position of superiority. The Lord they follow is not Jesus, but rather their own whiteness and their own Christianness, and especially their own concept of inherent 'masters of the universe'-ness.

As far as your personal spiritual battle with nominal Christians, keep the full armor on, and realize the battle is with the god 'Elite', sometimes known as ShoVan(Chauvin), god of chauvinism. This is not the same God of the apostles of Christ who looked forward to a kingdom made up of people of every nation, tribe, tongue and people.

I ask you,If this battle is a spiritual battle and can only be won in spirit how can any weapon of war win the battle between good and evil (as evil is spiritual too) if you get rid of or kill all evil doers (as Bush said) wouldnt you have to kill EVERYONE THEN ? because that same EVIL in them will just roam about and SEEK ANOTHER HOST to LIVE IN ........The EVIL ITSELF CANNOT BE KILLED ....

In early Christian history, in the times your scriptures were written, the believers were a minority, with no political power. They refused the cult of emperor worship and thus were seen as dangerous to the empire, therefore they were persecuted by the empire.

The groups I mentioned above (chauvinists) are made much more dangerous in that they are being mainstreamed by cynical politicians who think to control their energy and direct their violence. It's a fool's game they play. But this is not the first time.

I don't want to spend the time discussing the merging of church and state in the Papacy, or even the Crusades because that's well covered territory already. I'd like to bring up other history in order to draw analogies and conclusions from. The Radical Reformation in central Europe by Anabaptists, the Puritan control of England 1649-1661, and the Third Reich of 1930s-1945 are what seem relevant to discussion of so-called Christian zeal put to use in a destructive way. Each of these experiments in 'spiritual warfare' using physical arms in order to usher in a Christian utopia ended in crushing military defeat.

The Amish and Mennonite descendants of European Anabaptists are not inclined to favor war any more. They learned a valuable lesson at Muenster in 1535. The Puritans are not very inclined to violent iconoclasm and control of government since the death of Oliver Cromwell, and the lesson that control gained through arms is just as easily lost. The Nazi attempt to usher in the white Christian thousand years of peace pretty much burned out European Christian zeal for world conquest through war.

In the present time, on the North American continent, there is a strongly political fundamentalist Christian ideology which has never learned the lesson of crush military defeat. It grew up during the 1930s, got a boost in 1970s and 1980s, and has been roaring great guns since 9-11. The goal of these zealots is the same as those groups mentioned above, the control of US politics so as to purge 'ungodliness' from the country, and use the country's military might in order to extend righteousness to the world. These people have not learned the lessons of the past. They think themselves invincible still. They really are no different from the 92% of German Christians who supported the Third Reich.

I think I've read some of your posts about early childhood experience with Jesus and or angels. The immediacy of your relationship to Christianity is not much akin to those who favor arms, killing, and war. As a fundamentalist (unless I mis-remember) Christian you should have some influence on the thinking of those who claim to have the same religion as you. May God be with you in this attempt!

As against this ideology of holy purging as I am, I realize also that a very deadly backlash can come to these very same people. In which case, as they learn the lesson of history as it plays out upon their bodies, we must be prepared to forgive and stand also with those then suffering retribution. History is harsh, Christians are called to mercy.

Blessings to you.



[edit on 2-3-2010 by pthena]

pthena, not really answering the full message you wrote, but
giving you something to think about about one of your concerns...

life is not equal while it is fullfilling paradox,
it is equal where it fullfilled the paradox,
this message is hidden in the books,
but ABUSED by history,
yes there is a truth, that speeds are different,
and purposes are different,
that there is slafe and free,
but slave means driven the purpose,
not enslaving the purpose
in goal we are equal.

"In Buddhism we find an attachment to the Great and Small Vehicles, and much opposition between them. Those of the Small Vehicle won't admit there is a Great Vehicle. And in the Great Vehicle, the attitude toward the Small Vehicle is condescending.

"Those of the Small Vehicle should take a step forward and not be so attached. And those of the Great Vehicle should take a step backward and not be so attached. When the two, those of both the Great and the Small Vehicles, don't have any attachments, they can become one. When they become one, then they can benefit one another and not indulge in mutual slander.

"Within the Buddhadharma itself this difficulty arises. You say I'm false, and I say you're false; as a result, it's become the case that both are false; neither is true. That's because the Buddha's disciples didn't listen to the Buddha's instructions and made the divisions of Great and Small.

"An expression says that one must enter as the master and come out as the servant. If you are a Great Vehicle person, then the Great Vehicle is the master, the lord, and the Small Vehicle is the servant. If you're of the Small Vehicle, then you say the Small Vehicle is the master and the Great Vehicle is the servant. All this struggle occurs right in the basic substance of the Buddhadharma. . . .




[edit on 3-3-2010 by pasttheclouds]

reply to post by pasttheclouds

www.orientalia.org...
"Nowadays people not only don’t seek true principle; they also indulge in slander of one another. Those of the Small Vehicle slander the Great Vehicle; those of the Great Vehicle slander the Small Vehicle. Evolving in this way Buddhism has developed a lot of discriminations: right and wrong, us and them, mine and yours. Such Buddhists don’t understand in the least that the practices which the Buddhas of the past cultivated were without self and others, were beyond right and wrong. They concentrated on cultivating many Dharma doors and did not criticize the Dharma doors cultivated by others as being wrong." (LY I 146-150)

This seems to reflect my current approach. You wrote once before that there wouldn't be time to merge all religions and reach a consensus, that people must reach within their own religions, without prematurely being at rest. Therefore, I have decided to affirm for others what is right in their own belief system without thinking that therefore I must also accept that belief system. Whether that is stepping forward or stepping back, I don't know.

The dharma is an Indian spiritual and religious term that means one's righteous duty, or any virtuous path. (en.wikipedia.org...) and the realm of the dharma is the phycho-physical world in which we live. It is the realm of history, sociology, anthropology, biology, and physics. Our righteous duty is toward each other in the quite physical world. Issues of war, peace, and social justice are very much issues of dharma.

For the current thread, I fully affirm Simplynoone's desire to point out to fellow Christians the non-Christian nature of resorting to violence. The Christian scriptures contain no instructions about who to kill or not kill. The whole concept of grabbing control of civil government is completely absent as is the concept of military missionary work. The whole Christian way seems centered around living as aliens in this world while at the same time taking care of physical needs of others. As such, I affirm Christianity.

My previous post pointed out examples not much looked at of consequences and lessons to be drawn from instances of Christianity straying from its purpose and instead seeking worldly power.

i will tell you something that will explain a lot.

someone is given a lot of time, time to learn,
another is given no time, no peace,
just time enough to attack, release,
attack, release. (judge/forgive = see/understand = repent/reflect/understand)

the old guy of 70 forgave the world at 55,
and had 15 years to proof his world
of his peacefull nature.
( probably he will be 490 years instead of 70)

the other guy of 31 forgave the world at 31,
learned almost double as fast, double intensity,
and had 0 seconds to proof the world
of his peacefull nature.


the biggest war is at the frontlines
of the defence, of the war for love.
Someone who tries to forgive the world,
not just one minor thing,
will show anger every second,
but release it even quicker
before it comes out as sharp pain.
Truth in this world looks opposite,
and thats what i tried to explain you.

At his end jesus still had an directed strong defense of god in the temple,
Mandela learned peace after war,
Ghandi had hard words,
Mother theresa was a warrior.
Saints learnt o leave the war behind,
but they did not live the peace of ignorance.
What they did see is love as the goal,
and on the way learning to see
everything was always allready perfect.
Jesus also evolved, also turned negative
into positive.



LEt's not be hypocrites, we are all
judging each other, more important is the most safe way and most optimal way
to RELEASE that judgement, that is
the way. To recognise yourself in the other.
This is ATS, this is not the world in fear
or in war yet. There are better ways yes,
if they are functional, but every pain
in this world is made as optimal.
Some people are busy forgiving three issues,
can stay calm, other are forgiving 70 issues,
and have it a bit more difficult to stay calm.
Is the one more valueble then the other ?
No, in the goal the oen who learns faster,
learned it because the other learned slower,
he will DEFEND the other AFTER he learned
it was perfect, everyone starts from blindness.

I am sorry that i sometimes sound
angry, i never stay it more then one second,
if my old man (truth) dies, my woman (little I)
marries the next one (truth), there the woman
dies, and the man marries a new creation.
Do this in the most optimal way,
and that is me.

Buddhism is the same teaching as christianity,
there is no difference in the big religions.
Water can be described by opposite descriptions,
and still be the same descriped thing.
There was a delusion promised,
so that after full growth of logic,
everyone can carry his cross.


[edit on 3-3-2010 by pasttheclouds]