The Truth About Jesus

a reply to: quintessentone

Preconceived notions are just that, we know not what awaits us in the beyond.

I take that back, it wouldn't be hell because I would not even be aware of my existence without the fleshy computer. In fact, it'd be just like I no longer existed at all.

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: quintessentone

Preconceived notions are just that, we know not what awaits us in the beyond.

I take that back, it wouldn't be hell because I would not even be aware of my existence without the fleshy computer. In fact, it'd be just like I no longer existed at all.

I suppose you can make the afterlife any reality you wish even become a sleeper within it.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone

Aka the Bible.

Predestination and free will are a doozy quintessentone.

Ideologies that are not exactly synonymous.

Point of fact, they would appear to be in direct conflict with one another.

As Jesus taught Mary for Mary to teach others, predestination is the soul's ascension and free will is growing one's knowledge to feed the soul is the path, so I don't see the conflict.

originally posted by: quintessentone
Why do you think certain gospels were deliberately not included in the final version?

Because the Catholic Council of Carthege in 397AD, which put the bible together, decided that other texts were not 'of God' and not authentic. Errors and contradictions were found in them. The gnostics are historical fiction that place salvation in our own hands via knowledge rather than through the saving power of Jesus passion, death, and resurrection. They contradict the earlier eyewitness gospels. The book of Enoch is pseudopigrapha and it contradicts the bible. Why the church rejected gnostic 'gospels'

a reply to: quintessentone

The thing is just because you don't see a conflict between predestination vs freewill does not mean it does not exist.

It just means you choose to use some mental gymnastics and Biblical interpretations to circumvent the obvious logical conundrum.

Again people's interpretations are the real dilemma, and for rather an apparent reason aka they want to believe.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone

The thing is just because you don't see a conflict between predestination vs freewill does not mean it does not exist.

It just means you choose to use some mental gymnastics and Biblical interpretations to circumvent the obvious logical conundrum.

Again people's interpretations are the real dilemma, and for rather an apparent reason aka they want to believe.

In my mind, I am trying to deconstruct the existing Biblical cherrypicked interpretation commonly known as the Bible.

You call it mental gymnastics, I call it exploring ancient gospels and the different forms of Christianity that were popular at the beginning of the religion.

I can also call it having an open mind and denying ignorance.

ETA:

Here, Jesus explains it in such a way as I never could.

The text begins immediately with dialogue between James and Jesus. Jesus refers to himself as an image of God and explains that everything came from Him-who-is. He also speaks of femaleness and how it prepared for itself powers and gods, but it did not exist when he came forth. Jesus predicts that he will be seized the day after tomorrow, but his redemption will be near. He tells James to leave Jerusalem because it is a dwelling place of a great number of archons, and his redemption will be preserved from them. Jesus then explains the nature of the archons and the 72 heavens, which are their subordinates. He explains that Him-who-is has been given on account of them, and they are unnumbered. Jesus tells James that he will no longer be James but the One-who-is, and all those who are unnumbered will have been named when he casts away from his blind thought the bond of flesh that encircles him.

James asks Jesus how he can reach Him-who-is, given that the powers and hosts of the archons are armed against him. Jesus tells James that the powers are not armed against James specifically but against Jesus himself. Jesus expresses his concern for James, who has descended into great ignorance but has not been defiled by it, unlike those who have succumbed to it. Jesus acknowledges that he is not like them, but he has clothed himself with everything of theirs. James and Jesus discuss their respective states of mind and being, with Jesus acknowledging his faintheartedness before the anger of the archons. The text emphasizes the importance of knowledge and recollection in the pursuit of spiritual understanding and the attainment of salvation.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: 19Bones79

Mark Dice interprets Jesus through the filter of his right-wing views.

He's just catering to the bigger market, the market for truth and beneficial teaching is so small that it's kinda hard to sell books to and make some decent money off (see his sales pitch at 11:38; technically, the entire video is the sales pitch for that book). “You received free, give free.” (Matthew 10:8) Jesus issued that instruction to his apostles when he sent them forth to preach the good news. Did the apostles obey this directive? Yes, and they continued to do so even after Jesus departed from the earth. One can't say the same for the “teachers” catering/pandering to their markets ('tickling their ears') mentioned below:

“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4)

“Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it [the big market]; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it.”[the small market] (Matthew 7:13,14)

Coming back to the adoption of pagan philosophies*, customs, rituals and festivals...(by Christendom; *: eg. the myth/false story and doctrine of the Trinity, the myth of the immortal soul, the myth that the wicked suffer in a fiery hell, the myth that Mary is the Mother of God, a consequence of the myth that Jesus is Jehovah God and the Trinity myth)

Christendom’s house of worship is so infected with demonism and so loaded with the appendages of demonism as to be inseparable from it. This was admitted more than a hundred years ago by one of Christendom’s famous clergymen. In the year 1878 the Roman Catholic prelate, John Cardinal Newman, published his book entitled “Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine.” In this he expressed his belief that the early professed Christians had not been infected with spiritual disease by any adopting into their religious organization the things that had to do with the worship of devilish demons. Accordingly he wrote:

“Confiding then in the power of Christianity to resist the infection of evil, and to transmute the very instruments and appendages of demon-worship to an evangelical use, and feeling also that these usages had originally come from primitive revelations and from the instinct of nature, though they had been corrupted; and that they must invent what they needed, if they did not use what they found; and that they were moreover possessed of the very archetypes, of which paganism attempted the shadows; the rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the populace, as well as the philosophy of the educated class.”

Proceeding now to show the origin of Christendom’s things, he says:

“The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the [song] Kyrie Eleison [Lord, have mercy], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church.”—Pages 355, 371, 373, of the edition of 1881.

Expressing the same spirit of compromise as continuing into the twentieth century is the statement made to newspapermen in Rome, Italy, by the late Pope Pius XI (died 1939):

“The head of the Catholic Church would consider it his duty to deal with the Devil himself, to say nothing about any mortals who, hypothetically, or in reality, were merely agents of the Dictator of Diabolism, if reasonable grounds existed to support the hope that such dealings would protect, or advance, the interests of religion among mankind.”—Quoted by Michael Williams, in the February 21, 1943, issue of the Brooklyn Eagle, New York.

Even the Eastern Orthodox churches and the Protestant churches of Christendom have not discarded the practices and the “misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons” that were to mark “later periods of time.” (1 Timothy 4:1) As regards the Israelites in the days of the prophet Ezekiel, there was no Biblical excuse for them to adopt the rites and teachings of demon worship, as this course was forbidden even back in the Law of Moses. (Deuteronomy 18:9-14) Likewise, as respects those who profess to be Christians, there is no excuse for them to contaminate themselves with the teachings, practices, instruments and appendages of demonism, especially in view of the apostolic command:

“Do not become unevenly yoked with unbelievers. For what fellowship do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what sharing does light have with darkness? Further, what harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what portion does a faithful person have with an unbeliever? And what agreement does God’s temple have with idols? For we are a temple of a living God; just as God said: ‘I shall reside among them and walk among them, and I shall be their God, and they will be my people.’ ‘“Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves,” says Jehovah, “and quit touching the unclean thing”’; ‘“and I will take you in.”’ ‘“And I shall be a father to you, and you will be sons and daughters to me,” says Jehovah the Almighty.’ Therefore, since we have these promises, beloved ones, let us cleanse ourselves of every defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in God’s fear.”—2 Corinthians 6:14 to 7:1; Isaiah 52:11; Jeremiah 31:9.

Disobedience to such inspired commands has resulted in the confused, contaminated religious condition of Christendom today. She is beyond recovery. Like her ancient prototype, ancient Jerusalem, she is bound to suffer execution at the hands of the God against whom she has so greatly offended. A “great tribulation” exceeding even that which came upon Jerusalem in the days of the apostles of Jesus Christ is prophesied to come upon her. (Matthew 24:15-22; Mark 13:14-20) In view of this, searching questions present themselves to each one of us: Am I an active member of Christendom’s religious organization? Or, Am I in sympathy with her and cooperating with her? If so, how will the “great tribulation” that is coming upon her affect me? Is there any way to escape sharing with her in that destructive “great tribulation”? Will even anyone who is in the midst of Christendom but who is not a sympathetic part of her be spared alive?

To help a person answer these questions for themselves, try these videos (note what is mentioned after 7:02 concerning the doctrine of Sola Fide/"faith alone" as it relates to something promoted by Mark Dice at 0:45 in his video):

a reply to: quintessentone

If you have an open mind then you must be able to see the conflict between free will vs predestination.

As the debate between free will and predestination grapples with profound questions about human responsibility and the nature of existence.

Free will suggests individuals possess the capacity to make choices independent of external influences, fostering notions of moral and personal accountability.

Conversely, predestination contends that outcomes are predetermined by forces beyond human control, challenging concepts of individual choice and responsibility.

Both perspectives raise complex philosophical, and ethical dilemmas regarding justice, fairness, and the relationship between divine sovereignty and human freedom.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone

If you have an open mind then you must be able to see the conflict between free will vs predestination.

As the debate between free will and predestination grapples with profound questions about human responsibility and the nature of existence.

Free will suggests individuals possess the capacity to make choices independent of external influences, fostering notions of moral and personal accountability.

Conversely, predestination contends that outcomes are predetermined by forces beyond human control, challenging concepts of individual choice and responsibility.

Both perspectives raise complex philosophical, and ethical dilemmas regarding justice, fairness, and the relationship between divine sovereignty and human freedom.

If the underlying subject you and I are discussing is the original sin, then I can't discuss that with you as I don't believe there was an original sin as per Jesus' secret teachings.

Knowledge is the key, without it nothing makes any sense.

a reply to: quintessentone

If the underlying subject you and I are discussing is the original sin, then I can't discuss that with you as I don't believe there was an original sin as per Jesus' secret teachings.

Seems to me your beliefs could be a hurdle in some respect there.

Knowledge is the key, without it nothing makes any sense.

Knowledge provides the foundation upon which we build our perceptions, beliefs, and interpretations of reality.

Without knowledge, our understanding of the world around us would be severely limited, to say the least.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone

If the underlying subject you and I are discussing is the original sin, then I can't discuss that with you as I don't believe there was an original sin as per Jesus' secret teachings.

Seems to me your beliefs could be a hurdle in some respect there.

Knowledge is the key, without it nothing makes any sense.

Knowledge provides the foundation upon which we build our perceptions, beliefs, and interpretations of reality.

Without knowledge, our understanding of the world around us would be severely limited, to say the least.

My belief that the original sin is a nonstarter is not a hurdle for me, rather for you, it appears.

Jesus teaches that we all have self-knowledge so Adam and Eve already had it and did not have to steal it, so in my mind, there was no original sin.

Predestination from flesh to spirit is a given, the free will is whether or not you choose redemption.

Free will = predestination, it's just so composed it seems like free will and predestination at the same time.

a reply to: quintessentone

Jesus teaches that we all have self-knowledge

If that was the case babies would be born prescient would they not?

Buddy, there is sin all over the place, and the original sin, the main theme regarding the Old Testament as far as i can establish.

a reply to: andy06shake

If the solution for sin was to kill the sinner, we would have to sin to solve sin.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone

Jesus teaches that we all have self-knowledge

If that was the case babies would be born prescient would they not?

Buddy, there is sin all over the place, and the original sin, the main theme regarding the Old Testament as far as i can establish.

Jesus meant self-knowledge of the divine where growing that knowledge will lead one to a redeemed soul when he speaks of others, he does not refer to himself in that context but IMO even Jesus had to grow that self-knowledge into awareness just as a baby would need to do.

There is no disputing the Old Testament, the cherry picked Old Testament, points out our inherent sin, the sin of flesh...that is nature, God's design.

I am discussing Jesus' secret teachings where there is what we call sin in our present state of matter/flesh but there will be no sin once we become spirit as he teaches sin cannot exist in that state.

a reply to: quintessentone

So what are Jesus's secret teachings?

To be honest with you i did not know there were any.

I mean as far as I'm aware there are not explicit records of secret teachings from Jesus in mainstream Christian scriptures such as the New Testament.

originally posted by: andy06shake
So what are Jesus's secret teachings?

If there were 'secret teachings' then no one would know about them because they'd be in secret. But the gospel of John, which is an eyewitness account that was written long before the gnostics, puts any notion of 'secret teachings' to rest.

John 18:20 - “I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: quintessentone

So what are Jesus's secret teachings?

To be honest with you i did not know there were any.

I mean as far as I'm aware there are not explicit records of secret teachings from Jesus in mainstream Christian scriptures such as the New Testament.

Neither did I until a few years ago, now I realize early Christianity had many paths for us to follow.

a reply to: quintessentone

So did the crystal maze quintessentone.

Following paths is one thing mate.

Its where that can lead that the problems tend to arise.

What are these secret teachings all the same as you have piqued my interest?

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: andy06shake
So what are Jesus's secret teachings?

If there were 'secret teachings' then no one would know about them because they'd be in secret. But the gospel of John, which is an eyewitness account that was written long before the gnostics, puts any notion of 'secret teachings' to rest.

John 18:20 - “I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret.

Jesus of course does not call any of his teachings secret because when he supposedly singled out Mary for 'special' teachings and then he told Mary to go forth and teach others.

When Mary told the other disciples of what Jesus taught her they rebuked her and then Peter became violent in speech towards her, but one of the other disciples spoke reason in that Jesus held Mary in high esteem so they should as well.

“Peter said to Mary, ‘Sister, we know that the Savior loved you more than all other women. Tell us the words of the Savior that you remember, the things which you know that we don’t because we haven’t heard them.’ Mary responded, ‘I will teach you about what is hidden from you.'”

allthatsinteresting.com...