Jesus Christ's Superderterministic, Cosmological, Magnum Opus.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


You're ignoring the possibility of Rome adding those things into the story. Even if you don't believe he really died you still believe he was born of a virgin and performed miracles, right?

Speaking of miracles, let's take a look at a passage where Jesus mentions them being performed.

Matthew 7

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

Jesus says that those who perform miracles are "evildoers", guess who performed miracles and cast out demons in his name? Paul and Peter, the founders of the church and the ones who pushed their faith and salvation theory on the people.

Jesus also performed miracles (supposedly), so is he calling himself an evildoer? I don't think so because I don't think her ever performed any miracles.

Another version says "you who practice lawlessness" instead of "evildoers". What did the miracles break? The LAWS of physics and by breaking these laws they were practicing lawlessness. Was Jesus lawless?

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

No one's born of a virgin and the half-God hybrid story doesn't add any value whatsoever, so no I don't think that (have you read nothing that I've posted in this thread?).

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by daskakik

 

You're right, it was supposedly Herod the Great who ordered the killing of the babies. That's interesting, I always thought of him as Herod Antipas. Surely they wouldn't leave something THAT obvious in the story, would they?

Alternatively, Jesus could have been a few years older than the 33 ascribed to him, which is a symbolic number in esoteric circles signifying the 33 vertebrae and the rise of kundalini enlightenment.. could have been a 38 year old virgin (unblemished lamb) at the time of the cross. Probably had those rolling hills in the distance strongly in mind.. but there again symbolically, as a spiritual consummation (comingling of the spirit of God and man, with a sense of urgency), that part too is meaningful ie: spirit and the bride, bride of Christ, wedded together.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


What about the miracles? Do you believe them?

I have read what you've posted, but like I've been saying, it doesn't make any sense to me personally. It seems like you're just putting words together in a way to sound in-depth when it's just convoluted. I couldn't find any kind of consensus on what you believe from what I've read, sorry.

Do you believe in the story of the three wise men coming and bringing the baby Jesus gifts? Because that's a reference to Orion's Belt, another pagan symbol put into the story. The 3 Mary's at the cross? Another pagan theme that relates to Orion's Belt. Latin Americans calls Orion's Belt "The Three Mary's", coincidence? I think not.

The whole nativity scene was fabricated and is rife with paganism and so are the events surrounding his crucifixion. While I do believe someone was crucified that day, I do not believe in the resurrection or transfiguration.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


The bride of Christ is Mother Earth. The Father (Christ/consciousness) is married to the Mother (Earth/physical universe).

The Whore of Babylon is the church because it claims to be the bride of Christ when it actually stole that title, a.k.a. committed adultery. Have you read the Gospels of Peace? I think that's a great source to learn of Jesus' full message and a great way to start to understand what I mean (if you don't already).

With the Father and the Mother combined, you get the Son (the true Trinity), or mankind and the animal kingdom. Without your physical body, your spirit would have nothing to reside in and express itself. Without your spirit, your body would have no reason to exist. One without the other is completely useless, but the two together make EVERYTHING that is. Hopefully that makes sense.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I like that description, yes, and it also goes well with the avatar, whether yours or mine.

And the "New Jerusalem" or the "city of God" that's the rest of the cosmos, coming down from above, as from a first/last cause in eternity i.e.: by superintelligent design. An astrophysicist by the name of Bernard Haisch he's convinced that the radiant ocean of the akashic field or zero point field, in it's interaction with and generation of matter and the physical world we inhabit , represents an intentional and intelligent subtraction from, the Absolute Formless Potential out of which everything has arisen (to make our experience possible). So you're right that the body (earth, manifestation) and the spirit are the Spirit and the Bride, that's very good, very interesting. And what you're saying is that the church swapped out the true meaning and significance by dispensing mass in the form of a dry and stale solar-disc wafer, which for all we know contains the spittle of priests and bishops.

Whereas Jesus is the universal man, son of God, who if anything came to remind us of our common sonship with God the heavenly father (originator). To know him is to eat of him, to "grok", but that's not mediated by the church, so they put a subtle twist on the intended meaning and significance of Jesus' message, mission and purpose, and turn it into a priest's hand placing a dry solar wafer on the tongues of the flock.

I'm still glad however that the church formed the stained glass bottle in which the message has been floated down to us. When taken together with these additional writings like the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hemmadi Library, something emerges, and it cannot be so easily cast aside or written off as having no meaning or significance.

Miracles, you asked?

He did some, yes, some, because there were "works" and wonders, and I think that some "miracles" occurred simply because Jesus really was a focal point of increasing power and authority in creation as the true son, so in some cases reality might have played along, for a time, when each act was performed for all the right reasons, and in the sense that they were demonstrations of universal principals in that sense they didn't really break the laws of physics, only the laws of physics as we know them. He might have risen in stature to the point of accessing the power of the throne, when required, which is situated right in the brain of a human being at that interface between spirit and the creation, including the body. For example I don't think that he walked on water, or that his fearful disciple did either, and I don't think we're meant to take that story literally, and of course if that one's not really "true" then why accept others..? (hint: because it was to be read allegorically as part of the apocrypha of the gospels).

I do believe that he calmed a storm, brought immediate wellness to people of many ailments, the "water to wine" that can be done very easily with a concentrate of the highest grade mixed with water placed in the barrels in advance (and his mother knew it and they were playing along together where she says to the wineless servants "do whatever he tells you" ..lol so some things he might have done for effect, not as "tricks" but as symbolic demonstrations of a higher truth, and others, as his power continue to grow he became ever more capable of doing the "impossible".

It is said that he was possessed of an immense virtue where virtue may be defined as power, restrained.

Any miracles, authentic miracles by ever normal standard, contained at their core a deep fundamental universal truth, and that's why they happened because he compelled them to happen and they just couldn't help but play along.

His mission, like when they came across Jacob's Well and the town of Sychar, appears to have been one that might be considered a karmic (historical) cleanup mission, and I believe that his power accumulated all along the way, as expected, and as his faith was perfected if it wasn't already to the nth degree by the time he re-entered the scene as a full grown adult. Then again, something happened at his baptism and during the 40 days in the wilderness, and when news came of John's beheading (which as I've pointed out earlier was probably anticipated in advance by both Jesus and John), so there was transformation and increasing power of which the transfiguration on the Mount of Olives could have taken place..

Many of the Eastern traditions are ripe with miracle stories.

One of the early historians of the time referred to Jesus who was crucified under Pontias Pilate as a "sorcerer". Now why would that be? And then there's all of Jesus' exchanges with the Scribes and Pharisees wherein Jesus continually refers, not just to his words and character, but to his "works", which runs through all the gospels time and again so yes, I believe there were some miracles.

But in his "retirement" after leaving town never to return again, I don't think there were miracles. They were no longer needed.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


The cosmos is the kingdom of god, Earth is "Jerusalem" while the "New Jerusalem" is any number of planets in which we are reincarnated onto. You know the phrase "one ring to rule them all"? That's a reference to the wedding ring that the church stole from the true bride in order to rule the world., in my opinion.

As for Jesus' works, why do you assume he meant miracles when he said that? Good works is respecting mother nature and one another, it has nothing to do with miracles in my opinion. His works are what he showed during his life, respect and love for everything and everyone.

Jesus turning water into wine is a pagan theme put into the story. What else can turn water into wine? The sun, which is what pagans worshiped. With sunlight and water a grape vine will grow which in turn can be made into wine. If one doesn't know the science behind that process (read: pretty much everyone around that time) then I could understand it being considered a "miracle", as is child birth.

In my opinion the wedding party never happened. Whose wedding was it? Why did Jesus attend it? These are details that are not included in the bible, which strengthens my opinion that it was just shoehorned in, just as all the other miracles were.



ETA: A "solar" wafer is it? What a coincidence, Rome worshiped Sol, a.k.a. the sun.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Read the gospels again. He was pointing to something more than just a life well lived when he was talking to them of "works" they ought to believe in. The overall context makes it pretty clear that he was referring to extraordinary works, powerful works.

Yes some of it is masked in mythology, I know that, in fact the gospels were not written to be taken exclusively as a purely factual historical account but are like I said in the OP, apocrypha - but any open minded inquiry based on a reading of the Gospels, which can be read in a single sitting (if you're a good reader), reveals quite a lot in terms of trying to discern motives and causes and effects.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Could you point me to the passage? Or maybe post it? I'll have a look at it.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Although I am not religious...the value of the teachings of Jesus are apparent. After all there is very little if anything a person could be in arguement with as far as what he believed that being the wisdom of Love.

I believe people get to hung up upon the details and such people come in the form of those who believe he was the Son of GOD and those who do not. The reality is whether he was or was not really does not matter and Jesus himself said...If you do not believe in me...Believe in what I do. Very wise words.

Besides the obvious issue over being the Son of GOD...the other prevelent issues are about how Jesus fits or does not fit into various Religious Beliefs and specifically the beliefs that are specific to varying religions texts of what or who is or is not.

Most people do not know that one of the greatest sources of such conflicting beliefs came in the form of various Gospels which were not allowed to be placed in the New Testament. The Gospels of Judas and Mary Magdalyne as well as others that were in conflict with the Son of GOD statements. The Gospels of the base 4 apostles in the New Testament were selected by the church becuse they all stated that Jesus declared that he was the actual Son of GOD...where as the other Gospels not allowed in the Bible stated that Jesus taught that by following his teachings that we could ALL be the Son's and Daughter's of GOD.

This descrepency was left out for obvious reasons as well as to not show any hint of incontinuity that would be seized upon by other Monotheistic Religions.

Personally I think the only thing important is the lesson. Even if I am not religious.

Split Infinity

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I just made that up - solar wafer. Glad you like it. Ha, you thought that that's what it's really called i guess neither have us have spent much time in a Roman Catholic Church. The actual term is of course the Eucharist.

Transubstantiation of the Eucharist no less, so they ask you to accept that it's not even a symbol, but the ACTUAL BLOOD AND BODY of Christ, no less. It's kind of creepy imho, and I don't feel comfortable taking mass at a Roman Catholic Church, whereas at other churches it can bring tears to my eyes it's that meaningful and significant to me.

reply to post by SplitInfinity

Well said.

Thanks.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


I knew it wasn't actually called a solar wafer, but then again I didn't know it was called a Eucharist either.

I always just referred to it as a wafer or crisp, thanks for enlightening me.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Your Welcome.

Split Infinity

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

As NewAgeMan argued earlier in the thread, they had no idea that the software was going to be developed that would show what was going on in the sky back then.

I see that NAM has posted that it could be that Jesus was older at the time of the crucifixion but just adding years to his life does not change the fact that when the signs in the sky where happening Herod the Great was already dead and Jesus would have already been a toddler which makes the following, false:

It reveals a management of resources, and of historical causation, of unparalleled ingenuity (where the woman at the well episode is but a prelude), who's frame of reference moves through every domain and degree of complexity (and order) imaginable, all the way up to the movement (and prophetic import) of the sun, the earth, the moon, the planets, and the stars of the 12 signs of the zodiac and precession of the equinox ie: to "angels ascending and descending on the son of man".

He would have known about the visitation of the Magi and how they found him (that his conception and birth was written in the stars, in this case stars that are planets), and, that Herod had 300 children murdered to try to get to him, and, under the tutelage of those same Magi during the "lost years", precisely when his Magnum Opus would culminate on a certain passover coinciding with an eclipse of the sun and a blood-red moon.

That is what the thread is about. How everything was so in sync and how he knew but if you add years to his life then everything falls out of sync and the premise of the thread is shown for what it is.

The whole Birth/Magi/Herod/Star story is shown to be a flat out fabrication.

reply to post by daskakik


I agree 100%.

The only way to move forward and grow is to admit to your mistakes and learn from them, something NAM hasn't seemed to do up to this point. No disrespect NAM.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You've raised a very interesting issue however, involving what might very well be considered a universal controversy over spiritual authority i.e.: who holds the ring of power.

That kind of goes back to and relates to that other thread I posted asking the American people to once again consider themselves the root and source of power, instead of the nincompoops at the top who don't even know what they are doing in so many ways, where what I call "the keepers of the flame" (italics represent sarcasm) simply dropped the ball, leaving everything "up in the air" and "out of control". I like what Terrance McKenna said about that. He said "If everything's out of control, then who's control is it out of?".

Spiritual authority is another matter, because it goes to the very heart of things, and what I understand Jesus to have been doing, was to work to bring about our individual, and collective, unconstrained and unfettered freedom/liberation, to pursue the good and the best of the best that's both possible and freely available.

No one can rob heaven however, or control the gateway.

But a good doorman can still man the door if his reception is invitational and non-coercive.

I also understand Christ's church to be the Bride as the body of all believers who love him and who love God through him and vice versa. It is not and cannot be the sole purview of the Roman Catholic Church, who just might be playing a rigged game of both sides against the middle (or worse still), in which case it would be a house divided.

Jesus is not some religious icon of worship, he's our true friend, and worshiping him isn't loving him or being in relationship with him, so I say the authority still rests in him and him alone where all the treasure is in Christ since the treasure is his love. Anything apart from that, especially concerning matters of him and the father, does not have the authority, an authority that God can dispense to whoever he pleases and in whatever way he pleases.

In truth then there is no controversy, just people and institutions "kicking against the goads" - and that's funny!

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Spiritual authority is another matter, because it goes to the very heart of things, and what I understand Jesus to have been doing, was to work to bring about our individual, and collective, unconstrained and unfettered freedom/liberation, to pursue the good and the best of the best that's both possible and freely available.

I agree with this.

No one can rob heaven however, or control the gateway.

But a good doorman can still man the door if his reception is invitational and non-coercive.

Are the gateway and doorway two separate things or do they represent the same idea? If they're the same then how is having a door/gatekeeper choosing when to open and close it not having control over it? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you here?

I also understand Christ's church to be the Bride as the body of all believers who love him and who love God through him and vice versa. It is not and cannot be the sole purview of the Roman Catholic Church, who just might be playing a rigged game of both sides against the middle (or worse still), in which case it would be a house divided.

I understand it as the body of believers as well, but I do not agree with it. What I understand and also agree with is that the Bride is the body of everyone, not just believers. The Bride is the body/world that we live within, all the RCC has done is switch who the bride truly is and then shuffled it down to only a few people instead of all people.

The church most definitely is a house divided, just look at the 40,000+ denominations it has.

Jesus is not some religious icon of worship, he's our true friend, and worshiping him isn't loving him or being in relationship with him, so I say the authority still rests in him and him alone where all the treasure is in Christ since the treasure is his love. Anything apart from that, especially concerning matters of him and the father, does not have the authority, an authority that God can dispense to whoever he pleases and in whatever way he pleases.

Jesus is not the only one with authority. Anyone who truly understands and practices his teachings is an authority. Jesus wasn't the first to teach about love and forgiveness and he won't be the last, Buddha comes to mind here.

In truth then there is no controversy, just people and institutions "kicking against the goads" - and that's funny!

In my opinion it is quite sad because all this bickering and separation is what causes hate and then war.

Radical freedom of the spirit

reply to post by Biliverdin

 

I disagree. The Gospels indicate that Jesus held John The Baptist in the very highest regard ie: "there are none born of a woman greater than John", the only differentiation here being that Jesus, although of course also born of a woman considered himself re-born from above, not of the flesh, but of the spirit.

Nicodemus and Jesus - Reborn
go to 2:24 in the vid - segment runs to 5:35

Note catefully the subtle nuances (intentionally directed) in this exchange between Jesus and Nicodemus surrounding the issue of rebirth.

The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”
~ John 3:8
www.biblegateway.com...

The Greek for Spirit is the same as that for wind.

What is wind in this context, but radically free to blow wherever it pleases..

It cannot be bottled or contained, neither can anyone defend or repel against the love of God, how absurd.

What I mean by that is, either the church (RCC) loves Jesus or hates him, and from everything that I can tell, the jury's still out, and it's not looking so good for the church.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I think Jesus was unique in terms of his final conflict, and resolution. I love his great passion, and the object of his desire, which is you and me, that we might get to be with him where he is (next to the Godhead).