Claiming the Ascended Masters for Your Own

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

 

Do you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead?

Heh.

Interesting attempt to corner me.
Not biting, thanks.

The Divinity knows what I believe, and that's all the permission I need. I am not humbled or shushed by another mortal who is struggling through the same wilderness as I.

I have no doubt about my beliefs....except that they are fluid, adapting as I go along, and very much that "Lord" Jesus was delivering a very, very important message. I prefer to listen to his message, and not all the after-thought dogma and rhetoric that has developed since.

Nice try.

1 Corinthians 12:3 "Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."

1 John 4:2 "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:"

I shall lean not on my own understanding but upon the very Word of God and in accordance, I have apparently not misunderstood or misjudged. By thy own words you condemn yourself from the graces of our Father in Jesus Christ. You truly believe neither in the gospels of Christ or in the Divine reality as it exists in truth even though I would to the contrary.

The Word of God illuminates the dark corners of proud knowledge and selfish arrogance that we may see clearly to walk in His ways. I pray you turn to the Father with all your heart, for we do not serve a God whom we do not know. Do you?

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

According to the op's initial rhetoric I would disagree that this a thread for interfaith dialogue but rather a misunderstood rant about Christ.

After re-reading the OP, I realize the error of my ways. My post was way off-topic.

Sorry everybody! I've corrupted myself by getting in a mind-set of religion as power politics and partisanship.

The OP is a set of rhetorical questions interspersed with statements of personal beliefs, practices, and opinions, chief of which is that no organization or book owns exclusive rights to anybody considered as a master.

This is very much what I was intending my thread to be about Pthena. However, we all know how threads tend to take on a life of their own and twist and turn. I'm rather laid back and enjoy discourse with just about anyone. I very much base my beliefs in a very solitary and secular way.

I genuinely don't mind how the direction or the flow of the thread changes, so long as the basics of the discussion stay within the realms of religion, theology, and beliefs.

reply to post by CirqueDeTruth

I very much base my beliefs in a very solitary and secular way.

I genuinely don't mind how the direction or the flow of the thread changes, so long as the basics of the discussion stay within the realms of religion, theology, and beliefs.

Thank you. Mostly I was feeling shame for my own hypocrisy. Being a post Christian, I find it all too easy to slip into christ-speak when communicating with Christians.

The truth is, that we today don't really know anything about the man Jesus. We don't have a reliable biography, or verifiable list of teachings. Therefore people aren't really justified in condemning or praising him. It's a pretty sure bet that if I'd been walking around with him, I would still find occasion to disagree with some of his opinions. It would take a bit of dialog to even determine whether we had compatible world-views.

It's all together possible that his message was for his own generation, especially since he seemed to hold the opinion that whatever was going to happen with regards to the "kingdom of heaven" would happen in the view of his generation. Historically, all I can think of is the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the stone temple.

My conclusion then is that the mission and message are clear: the kingdom of heaven does not involve chosen ethnic group of people or stone temples. These conclusions would seem completely supportable even by the canonical gospels.

Personally, my belief is: if this is the kingdom of heaven we live in, then heaven, aka, Sky, must be God. Sky is available not only to sighted people who can see Big Blue, but even to the blind who breathe.

reply to post by pthena

It's all together possible that his message was for his own generation, especially since he seemed to hold the opinion that whatever was going to happen with regards to the "kingdom of heaven" would happen in the view of his generation. Historically, all I can think of is the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the stone temple.

The Gospels are about that, what you are suggesting, and the biblical New Testament scholars I am reading seem to be saying the same thing. What Jesus was spending most of his time doing is hard to say since what we are left with is basically an explanation of why we are living in the kingdom of Christ, and not the old temple cult of Jerusalem.

There is this enigmatic verse (even after looking at at least 30 commentaries by way of doing word searches in Amazon books) I am looking at, which is in Paul, that seems to me to be going along with this basic idea, 1 Corinthians 15:24,

Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power.

I have to think (regardless of all those books) that Paul was looking at a future event in his time, when he wrote that, but which is a past event from our point of view. I would be attempting to follow your own opinion on this general subject, that Jesus had available to him, the Messiahship, and used that opportunity, not to exercise it as a sort of king, other than as a cosmic warrior, to take down whatever had built itself up in opposition to God. (that part is my own opinion, where yours is the first part, about not accepting a kingly rule, of an earthly type)
Now, of course such a system could hardly be successful by claiming to be the anti-god, and would best serve its own purposes by claiming to be in fact worshiping God.
The Gospels, written after this statement by Paul, would have been describing the same thing, but from the point of view of people who witnessed it being carried out historically, but written in such a way as to be portraying Jesus foretelling these events.
The system we are under, I would have to think, is a spiritual one, initiated under Jesus' authority given to him upon his ascension to heaven, after his resurrection. Jesus transferred God's spirit to his disciples, and this is the same thing we are to ask for and to receive now, to live by that spirit which is the Christ spirit, and what can indwell us. I'm probably not the best person to explain all this since I am in the learning process, but I would recommend the book, Cosmology and Self in the Apostle Paul: The Material Spirit.

reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

1 Corinthians 12:3 "Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."

1 John 4:2 "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:"

The first verse is not about people, but spirits, and is Paul explaining to the Corinthians that there are spirits out there that people are channeling, in different ways, as mediums or oracles, and that these should not be believed in because they are the wrong sort, and that would be made obvious if they are speaking against Jesus. This is not a manual on how to go around judging people. It is a warning about who to not go to to have your fortune told, which was a very normal sort of thing people did, like people now reading their horoscope in the paper every day. (of course now they probably do it on-line)

The second verse is another one that people take to judge people with, which is like the first, about spirits which come to you in some manner. Some people seem to use it in an opposite way, to use it as a way to claim some special status for themselves, since they do say the name, Jesus in an affirmative manner.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Cosmology and Self in the Apostle Paul: The Material Spirit.

So I've now got the kindle version. I remember when you mentioned the book Paul and the Stoics by the same author. I started looking into Stoic philosophy, and then I had to wipe my hard drive due to a virus picked up from whitehouse.gov (thank you whitehouse , always helpful)

Epicurean world view comes much more naturally to me than Stoic.

1 Corinthians 15:24,

Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power.

Legend has it that Paul died circa AD 62. That's 4 years before the riots in Caesaria happened, which led to the destruction of Jerusalem temple. So all of Paul's authentic letters would have already been written. When I visualize a throne room/ hall of Justice, I visualize it as empty, because some work is ongoing, not yet time for the handing out of metals (last scene of Star Wars).


I better just read the book.

reply to post by pthena

I better just read the book.

I generally put my own spin on books I read, so whatever my take is on it may be different from what was intended by the author. I also have a tendency to jump around a bit in books before I ever get to the point where I decide I probably read it, or at least close enough.
The concepts are a little hard to take at first.
I had to go back and read some parts of the Paul and the Stoics book, and over time, it seems to make sense, along with some other essays I have been reading.

Legend has it that Paul died circa AD 62. That's 4 years before the riots in Caesaria happened, which led to the destruction of Jerusalem temple. So all of Paul's authentic letters would have already been written.

I think my point was that when it did happen, the destruction at Jerusalem, then the people who wrote the Gospels probably were reading Paul's letters and figured this was what Paul was talking about when he said the powers would be destroyed. Paul also talks about a hindrance, like the god of this world, and that may be what he meant too, where there wasn't originally meant to be a temple, and that was what the heathens did, build temples, so you had a worldly god, rooted to a spot, who's adherents fought against the traveling god who was going out into the nations.

reply to post by jmdewey60

I also have a tendency to jump around a bit in books before I ever get to the point where I decide I probably read it, or at least close enough.

Speaking of jumping around: I wasn't even through the preface before I jumped to another train of thought.

Epikoros (or Apikoros or Apikores or Epicurus; Hebrew: אפיקורוס, lit. "Heretic", pl. Epicorsim ) is a Jewish term cited in the Mishnah, referring to one who does not have a share in the world to come:

"All Israel have a share in the world to come as states: Your people are all righteous, they shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of My planting, the work of My hands, wherein I glory. And these are the ones who do not have a portion in the world to come: He who maintains that there is no resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah, and [He who maintains] that the Torah was not divinely revealed, and an Epikoros"
—Mishnah, Seder Nezikin, tractate Sanhedrin, 90a
Epikoros_(Judaism)

Well, that certainly puts me in my place! But wait, says I, doesn't that rule out people who think that resurrection comes from Jesus, and not from the Law? (gospel of John, Paul, perhaps even Jesus himself?)

Who wrote the Galilean Mishna? Could it possibly be Jesus' own family? See this:

Johanan ben Zakai (Hebrew: יוחנן בן זכאי‎ c. 30 - 90 CE), also known as Johanan B. Zakkai, or in short ריב״ז (Ribaz), was one of the tannaim, an important Jewish sage in the era of the Second Temple, and a primary contributor to the core text of Rabbinical Judaism, the Mishnah. He is widely regarded as one of the most important Jewish figures of his time. His tomb is located in Tiberias, within the Maimonides burial compound.
. . .
During the siege of Jerusalem in the Great Jewish Revolt, he argued in favour of peace; according to the Talmud, when he found the anger of the besieged populace to be intolerable, he arranged a secret escape from the city inside a coffin, so that he could negotiate with Vespasian (who, at this time, was still just a military commander).[5] Yochanan correctly predicted that Vespasian would become Emperor, and that the temple would soon be destroyed; in return, Vespasian granted Yochanan three wishes: the salvation of Yavneh (Jamnia) and its sages, the descendants of Rabban Gamliel, who was of the Davidic dynasty, and a physician to treat Rabbi Tzadok, who had fasted for 40 years to stave off the destruction of Jerusalem.[6]
Yochanan_ben_Zakai

Plus look at the chart at the end of the article.

What does John say? "For even his brothers didn’t believe in him."John 7:5
Talk about a divided family? Jesus teaching he provides resurrection, and the rest of his family teaching Torah brings resurrection and the age to come.

I can't help but to say many of you are portraying to be self-centered and aren't taking notice of it. The biggest delusion in this world is people thinking they can save themselves by doing certain things. This goes to Buddhism, Islam, Catholicism, alternative spirituality theories, new age teachings, and so on. And don't bother saying your 2012 beliefs, benevolent/malevolent aliens mingling in our affairs, consciousness expansion, paradigm shift, etc etc is not new agism. It is and stop lying to yourself.

Bible Christianity is the exception, because it says you cannot save yourself, because your righteousness is as a filthy rag before the sight of God. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;". Therefore everyone is in need of a savior; a mediator between man and God. Doing little rituals and being a good person isn't how it works. Deny yourself and ask God to help you. Without God, I have no strength.

reply to post by pthena

. . . doesn't that rule out people who think that resurrection comes from Jesus, and not from the Law?

Right, that would make all Christians technically Epicureans, according to rabbinic Judaism.

reply to post by netgamer7k

Without God, I have no strength.

OK, how about with God?
Romans 8:11
And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

reply to post by netgamer7k

This goes to Buddhism, Islam, Catholicism, alternative spirituality theories, new age teachings, and so on. And don't bother saying your 2012 beliefs, benevolent/malevolent aliens mingling in our affairs, consciousness expansion, paradigm shift, etc etc is not new agism. It is and stop lying to yourself.

The thing is this: The people responding to this thread aren't necessarily of the same age group. Hence, not necessarily approaching current life and current life issues from a single perspective.

I'm personally 56 (I think. It's hard to pin down because my age seems to change every year or so). My particular world view was forming in the Western U.S. in the 1960s. In that place, in that time, secular humanism was seen as an acceptable approach to life.

Sadly, since I grew up under the influence of a separatist Christian sect, most of the social movements of the 1960s passed me by, on account of, they were pre-judged as a threat to "true godliness". Therefore I missed out on Neoorthodoxy, Christian Existentialism, Christian Atheism(God is Dead) and Jazz. I despair of truly catching up on these grand movements. For once a movement stops, it isn't a movement any more. Research into them is more like archeology than anything else.

With freedom from affiliation comes freedom of experience and thought. I can listen to jazz if I please! I can protest if I please! I can recover from the effects of pepper spray and police batons if it becomes appropriate. I can pursue a left-handed path (you can look that up) when I find it necessary to break the barriers of taboo.

The great taboo, with the strongest bulwark of protection is the question of validity in Judeo-Christian monotheism. Is that monotheism more beneficial to humanity and the World than a Greco-Roman monotheism based upon philosophical (Platonic or Stoic) premises? Has humanity been enhanced or retarded by the spread of Judean and Christian monotheism?

Look at this statement of yours:

Bible Christianity is the exception, because it says you cannot save yourself, because your righteousness is as a filthy rag before the sight of God. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;". Therefore everyone is in need of a savior;

If there were not a god before whom we stood condemned, then we would have no need for a savior. In fact, as some forms of Christianity (the ones that didn't survive the sword, hammer, and torch of official arbiters) held that Jesus was the one to save us from that very god. Salvation then was the freedom from that tyrant. "Heresy", you say. "Heresy is choice", I say.

A God who lives in us and around us without separation is one with whom no reconciliation is necessary. So says pantheism and panentheism. They too, are forms of monotheism.

reply to post by pthena

If there were not a god before whom we stood condemned, then we would have no need for a savior. In fact, as some forms of Christianity (the ones that didn't survive the sword, hammer, and torch of official arbiters) held that Jesus was the one to save us from that very god. Salvation then was the freedom from that tyrant. "Heresy", you say. "Heresy is choice", I say.

A God who lives in us and around us without separation is one with whom no reconciliation is necessary. So says pantheism and panentheism. They too, are forms of monotheism.

Well said... I find this idea much more believeable then the Jesus is the same God theory...

His saving grace comes in the form of words... Not through his sacrifice in my humble opinion...

As he said...

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

reply to post by pthena


I agree it has been enhanced but is that through the pursuit of knowledge and the great invention of math?

I guess the age of Conan went corrupt too... so the truth would be to teach people how to be good and surely the Catholic Church has failed at this via paying for sin with denominations of coin. (the great math invention)

the cycle seems viciously defeating.

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by pthena

 

If there were not a god before whom we stood condemned, then we would have no need for a savior. In fact, as some forms of Christianity (the ones that didn't survive the sword, hammer, and torch of official arbiters) held that Jesus was the one to save us from that very god. Salvation then was the freedom from that tyrant. "Heresy", you say. "Heresy is choice", I say.

A God who lives in us and around us without separation is one with whom no reconciliation is necessary. So says pantheism and panentheism. They too, are forms of monotheism.

Well said... I find this idea much more believeable then the Jesus is the same God theory...

His saving grace comes in the form of words... Not through his sacrifice in my humble opinion...

As he said...

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

it's not what one says it's what one does...

reply to post by SisyphusRide

I agree it has been enhanced but is that through the pursuit of knowledge and the great invention of math?

Actually, that was a question:

Has humanity been enhanced or retarded by the spread of Judean and Christian monotheism?

My implication was that maybe retarded. You mention Robert E. Howard's alternate history, "...Between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities, and the years of the rise of the Sons of Aryas..." I've had the whole collection at three different times. More to the point:

O'BRIEN: You sound disappointed, Major.
KIRA: I guess I am. Part of me was hoping that the Prophets were behind it. That they were finally going to show themselves to the Bajoran people.
WORF: I prefer Klingon beliefs.
KIRA: I suppose your gods aren't as cryptic as ours.
WORF: Our gods are dead. Ancient Klingon warriors slew them a millennia ago. They were more trouble than they were worth.

Star Trek Deep Space 9, Original Airdate: Jan 1, 1996

I'm not saying that Klingon culture seems exactly ideal or anything, I just like the quote. Plus, Conan slew a couple of gods in his career, not to mention many powerful sorcerers and their summoned demons.

I've read a book that hypothesized a better seeming history, which veered off from ours during the time of Alexander the Great. Instead of dying in Babylon he lived on to consolidate the Greek Empire. The philosophy and science flourished as the tribute to the gods faded. The Judea/Samaria territory became completely Hellenized. The Jews assimilated. No Maccabean rebellion, no Hanukkah, no birth of Jesus. No Roman Empire, no Roman Catholic Church. In short, no Dark Ages.

reply to post by pthena


the underlying problem to me is that math yes was a great invention but it is corrupt no matter how you look at it... Jesus was the new way and you still have men and women on earth who think they are godlike because of this betterment thru maths wealth which they find so difficult to let go.

the desire is to seek out "life" no command it or purchase it... which seems to be the old way of becoming a godlike figure amongst your mortal others.

The truth is the adventure of math has advanced us in knowledge... it that really what God wants for us?

History will be rewritten and alot of philosophies are going to get left out of the annals I think, the good parts will be taken (the flame)

0, 1, the End... truth is in love not numbers.

reply to post by netgamer7k


Virtually all religions address the issue of sin and morality of the soul. Several religions suggest that in order to transcend or be "saved", that you must first come to God through a medium. This isn't always a man, but in many religions it is. Buddha was the mediator, the teacher in which the religion was founded.This is no less great than Christ. In fact it's very similar. The same for the Islamic faith. Each religion has their own system to help in achieving the betterment of the soul by doing good. These are common themes that runs through all religions, as religion began as a way of helping ancient mankind in defining moral society.

Plenty of ancient manuscripts exist predating Christianity. Those that didn't exist in the Great libraries of Alexandria where much history and knowledge was lost because of two Christian sieges and resulting fire, and then a Muslim siege. What knowledge did we lose in such atrocities? In history predating Christianity, such as with Aristotle and Plato, it shows a great complexity of mind and a deep, deep interest in Deity, reality, and life after death. They conversed and theorized in groups, and much of what we experience today in way of complexity of thought - was surely done before us, tens of thousands of times over. So crying "new agism" is neither here nor there, in my opinion, as it is a natural way of being. We will always seek to understand that which we do not know. Thus, new age thought is only relative to it's time. Yet, the themes remain constant. Ancient even, and repeated over and over. It only changes names and variates according to culture.

I don't hold to the idea that anyone can dictate to another as how they should believe or think. It is not selfish to follow one's heart in spiritual matters. It is a false statement that Christ is the only claim to divine "sonship". It is a false statement that Christ is the only divine son to rise from the dead. It is also a false statement that no other religion or faith has a claim to antiquity. As though antiquity led credence to ancient texts in any case. The principles remain when you strip away all the anthropomorphism. Everything else is pretty wrapping.

Originally posted by pthena
I'm not saying that Klingon culture seems exactly ideal or anything, I just like the quote. Plus, Conan slew a couple of gods in his career, not to mention many powerful sorcerers and their summoned demons.

the Americans have all these virtues and those of the Captians, seemingly knowing not much of the outside world nor its somewhat infected history... the locals out in public are already very liberal minded. Somethings holding them back.

Picard is an explorer, he doesn't know the reason why he is there, they never figure out the universe in any star trek episode... they do discover how it is being manipulated by certain species for their own goals (which are unjust)

God is out there... the two other philosophies or world views make Gods on earth as they have done in the past, we just call them Kings and Queens and Dictators now.

America chooses to go to the moon... and I am a very liberal republican myself.


they read from the (old) testament... Atheism is like Warf I suppose

reply to post by CirqueDeTruth


I think that is the problem with Judaism and why the theism's can not be united into its true from as mono (one voice) Gematria seem to be searching for this medium thru numerology and I am not even sure if Islam has a medium? they are trained from the onset not to explore.

Jesus points up to the Heavens with that burning flame in his heart which has a crown of thorns hurting it.


the Bible is not only a book to live by, it is a civilization building guide here on earth and possibly in the deep cold and foreboding darkness of space.

Jesus is the only way... (for humanity or the individual) all the other methods seem to make gods of Wealth here on earth and I can easily see why some may not like that idea.

...woof woof!