quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:
My impression is that there must have been a literal Jesus somewhere in there. The new religious movement happened all too quickly for it to have been otherwise, IMHO, especially since there was both a Jewish and Gentile component to it.

But that is not to say that all the Gospel stories were literally true since each Gospel story is actually quite different. But it does seem to me that they are speaking of a real person, while at the same time wrapping him in mythical language.

The real difference that I see between the Jesus teachings and the other pharisaic teachings is spiritual/legalistic. And in that sense Jesus' teachings were a return to the pre-Hezekiah/Josiah reformation; to a pre-Moses' Law religion.

quote:

It is possible that these missing years from Josephus could have been the result of pious editing. The actual crucifixion of Judas the Galilean may have been deleted. Note that Josephus detailed the deaths of Judas’ three sons, James, Simon, and Menahem and his grandson, Eleazar. With each of these occasions, Josephus referred back to Judas the Galilean. It is hard to believe that Josephus omitted the circumstances behind the death of Judas. So it is very possible that the writings of Josephus were edited to remove some interesting details of Judas’ life and his eventual crucifixion.

quote:

Then fall the Gospel!
Byjudaswasjameson April 1, 2014
Format: Kindle Edition|Verified Purchase
Wow, this guy is smart. I could review a lot of his stuff line by line, but it is best for everyone to see for themselves this fine work. He does a better Mythicist case than the case of the Caesar connection, which in itself is pretty good, as well. Carrier, Doherty, and the rest have a new contender for the best of the Mythicist proponents. Really sharp guy, with amazing command and logic. Well worth the three or four bucks on Kindle. I would pay twice that.

quote:

Originally posted by bluelamp:
Well if Jesus is entheogen/channeling then one can rediscover Jesus in the present even if he does get lost. Paul's vision though could be of a historical guy even if we have to channel to get back to who that guy was.

quote:

Originally posted by bluelamp:

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:
My impression is that there must have been a literal Jesus somewhere in there. The new religious movement happened all too quickly for it to have been otherwise, IMHO, especially since there was both a Jewish and Gentile component to it.

But that is not to say that all the Gospel stories were literally true since each Gospel story is actually quite different. But it does seem to me that they are speaking of a real person, while at the same time wrapping him in mythical language.

The real difference that I see between the Jesus teachings and the other pharisaic teachings is spiritual/legalistic. And in that sense Jesus' teachings were a return to the pre-Hezekiah/Josiah reformation; to a pre-Moses' Law religion.

Paul certainly seemed to think he had the same vision of a martyred leader as the James gang (with Cephas and John) and Dan Unterbrink has a view for who that could be historically:

https://thethreemessiahs.wordp...s-the-galilean-6-10/

quote:

It is possible that these missing years from Josephus could have been the result of pious editing. The actual crucifixion of Judas the Galilean may have been deleted. Note that Josephus detailed the deaths of Judas’ three sons, James, Simon, and Menahem and his grandson, Eleazar. With each of these occasions, Josephus referred back to Judas the Galilean. It is hard to believe that Josephus omitted the circumstances behind the death of Judas. So it is very possible that the writings of Josephus were edited to remove some interesting details of Judas’ life and his eventual crucifixion.

But as our Judaswasjames liked to mention, Paul may not have overly stayed a James gang fan and even began to think his vision was actually of a gentile on a tropaeum:

https://www.amazon.com/Judas-T...ewerType=all_reviews

quote:

Then fall the Gospel!
Byjudaswasjameson April 1, 2014
Format: Kindle Edition|Verified Purchase
Wow, this guy is smart. I could review a lot of his stuff line by line, but it is best for everyone to see for themselves this fine work. He does a better Mythicist case than the case of the Caesar connection, which in itself is pretty good, as well. Carrier, Doherty, and the rest have a new contender for the best of the Mythicist proponents. Really sharp guy, with amazing command and logic. Well worth the three or four bucks on Kindle. I would pay twice that.

The Gospels would then kind of redo a Julius Caesar passion play with a generic Jewish martyr in place of Caesar. I suspect Paul was OK with the play as a Gentile/Jew morph but it was not supposed to be literal history except in a loose historical fiction sense for Julius Caesar and Judas of Galilee. Carrier has mentioned that Luke/Acts could be historical fiction.

Paul taught in former Caesarean colonies and likely took over Hellenistic churches descended from Divus Julius churches. Caesar himself was into the Stoic Posidonius and Caesar's army was considered the source of Mithraism (kind of a folk religion version of Stoicism). Not surprising that Paul would have Hellenistic aspects as well as Jewish ones. Caesar was very much a messiah for the Jews in the Cyrus the Great-like sense.

These ideas trace back through Socrates and Zoroaster, then back Allan-like to Shamanism if you go back far enough.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:
Doesn't surprise me at all that much of Christianity can be traced back to some of the more ancient mystical religions though, since that seems to be the entire point; going back to a more mystical/spiritual religion, and far away from a legalistic one.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan:
The Dead Sea Scrolls show us there was yet another major breach in Judaism.

Still reckon the Qumran sect was a breakaway from the ruling Sadducee class. Paul most likely was one of their hit men, as Assyria would hardly be likely to permit any Jew to attack their citizens, even Jewish ones.

Has also been suggested that John the Baptist and Jesus were, for a time at least, members of Qumran.

Still am convinced the Bible will never be understood unless and until the politics of the time are taken fully into account. Excluding politics is fatal to understanding.

Think US Presidents since at least Reagan.

Think infidel Islam today.

Think Versailles immediately before the Revolution, when priests and princes shared the same life.

All humans are either Alphas or followers, regardless of the culture or the era.

Alphas will rule, and for most it matters not how they rule.

Simplicity itself.

quote:

The real original dreamtime/shamanistic source for me was simply channeling/visions and those can be redone when information gets lost/distorted. Zoroaster, Socrates, and Paul had their prophecies, divine signs, and visions to help them get back to more correct ideas.

Things though get redistorted by the Polycarps of the planet so you really can't stop paying attention to modern prophecies/divine signs/visions. These however are really just subtle hints about which modern researchers are on the right track for a given subject like the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis for Noah/Atlantis.

Dreamtime/Shamanistic journeys occur in a real realm with actual physics and really are a timeless home for our ancestors/descendents. It might be timeless but there are rules for information exchanges that even the power seekers playing in the fringes of that timeless realm have to obey.

In simple terms, the Wizard of Oz is supposedly a channeling inspired rendition of our human situation with respect to our evolution. Dorothy's three friends would represent the head, heart, and gut structure of the Chakras, Enneagram, Centers, Sephirot, Sri Yantra, Wheel of Life, etc.

We mostly need to work on ourselves (head, heart, and gut) as we follow the yellow brick road of our evolution and channel/get effected by those already higher (witches), some of whom are still power seekers. The Jungian idea that deep truths can be channeled into epic works at any time is quite true.

That head, heart, and gut are embedded in sacred geometry hints at a useful actual geometry too (for physics and personality theory).

quote:

Originally posted by Allan:
Interesting you referenced Zarathustra and Paul earlier, given that Zarathustra said haoma created our gods, and Paul certain had an entheogenic experience on his road to Qumran.

quote:

The training for priesthood probably started very early around seven years of age.[52] He became a priest probably around the age of fifteen, and according to Gathas, he gained knowledge from other teachers and personal experience from traveling when left his parents at twenty years old.[53] By the age of thirty, he experienced a revelation during a spring festival; on the river bank he saw a shining Being, who revealed himself as Vohu Manah (Good Purpose) and taught him about Ahura Mazda (Wise Spirit) and five other radiant figures. Zoroaster soon became aware of the existence of two primal Spirits, the second being Angra Mainyu (Hostile Spirit), with opposing concepts of Asha (truth) and Druj (lie). Thus he decided to spend his life teaching people to seek Asha.[54] He received further revelations and saw a vision of the seven Amesha Spenta, and his teachings were collected in the Gathas and the Avesta.[55]

He taught about free will,[56] and opposed the use of the hallucinogenic Haoma plant in rituals, polytheism, over-ritualising religious ceremonies and animal sacrifices, as well an oppressive class system in Persia which earned him strong opposition among local authorities.[1] Eventually, at the age of about forty-two, he received the patronage of queen Hutaosa and a ruler named Vishtaspa, an early adherent of Zoroastrianism (possibly from Bactria according to the Shahnameh).[57] Zoroaster's teaching about individual judgment, Heaven and Hell, the resurrection of the body, the Last Judgment, and everlasting life for the reunited soul and body, among other things, became borrowings in the Abrahamic religions, but they lost the context of the original teaching.

quote:

I rather think you may be missing telepathy. It certainly can be taken into account into both my one predictive dream and even the warning given to me in my one experience in a Spiritual Church -- why else did I go there and then?

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:
There are several biblical verses which state to "call upon the name" or "believe in/on the name" of Jesus, so the "name" Jesus/Joshua/Yahoshua seems to be important. When translated, it means "YHWH/GOD is salvation." Regardless of his actual name, Yahoshua seems to be unanimously agreed to in the NT.

Doesn't surprise me at all that much of Christianity can be traced back to some of the more ancient mystical religions though, since that seems to be the entire point; going back to a more mystical/spiritual religion, and far away from a legalistic one.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan:
The Dead Sea Scrolls show us there was yet another major breach in Judaism.

Still reckon the Qumran sect was a breakaway from the ruling Sadducee class. Paul most likely was one of their hit men, as Assyria would hardly be likely to permit any Jew to attack their citizens, even Jewish ones.

Has also been suggested that John the Baptist and Jesus were, for a time at least, members of Qumran.

quote:

Originally posted by Allan:

Well, Herbert (or his son) has a book in the Dune series where that does happen. The computers lose that battle, however are still there many books later. IIRC the series closes with the impending merger of human and robotic minds.

Asimov is the world expert on sci-fi robots, and one of his stories ends with the same merger.

Those who know Asimov know he wrote two major series, The Caves of Steel and Foundation. He then merged the two. R. Daneel Olivaw was there from start to finish.

Asimov explored that human-computer mind in a way neither Hawking nor that program speaker could imagine.

quote:

Imagine, then, that Brahman concept I envy. A Gaia multiverse and a creating entity capable of experiencing that exists , in every reality.

quote:

Reading anything in isolation, especially politics and religion, means we are in the control of the Alphas, and they have had aeons of experience in creating effective mind-controlling propaganda...

Before one begins to study anything, one must first get deep inside all the authors to determine who is decent and who is not.

The rules applying to evangelical ministers apply to all religious writers, no matter what our first impression may be.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
There are too many references that have been read as I am the “only” one to hope for too much change! I believe some of that is because the OT is read to say there is One coming, rather than there is one coming, as in always renewing. I was fortunate that I learned early that the Christ was what showed you who you are and depending on maturity was envisioned as Jesus or just a Light of knowledge etc. however, being fairly young isn’t when you want half of what you’ve learned to believe falling apart!

Yeah, but...WHEN one understands that the literal "coming one" was spoken of during a time when there were no "anointed" kings in Jerusalem, then it can start to make sense "if/when" they see the referenced quotes in the NT as ALSO applying, in context, to those of the time in which they were written - and NOT a "prophecy" specifically "about" Jesus. THAT is where Margaret Barker was the most help to me, because I needed to understand the major changes in the religion, along with the major changes in the political arena of the same time frame in order to make sense of it.

IOW, the religion had undergone a major overhaul - from spiritual (under which there was an anointed/Christ/Messiah) to legal (Moses Law) - during the time of Hezekiah/Josiah. THAT is why there was such longing amongst the "people of the land" for the RETURN of the spiritual because the legal was used as a means of "separation" rather than unification.

Seems to me we deliberately separate the spiritual from the legal. And the current desire to return to the Spiritual isn’t at all what was being longed for! Or perhaps better stated, legalistic spiritualism seems to be one of the current goals. For the life of me I don’t see how anyone can think that even God could do that! Or should that be would do that?

To me legalism happens when things change faster than some can adapt or when there is a desire to have rules rather than experience and be fully human and involved in thinking and feeling.

"We" don't have to separate the spiritual from the legal because they "are" by their very nature separate!
Spiritual: relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.
Legal: of, based on, or concerned with the law.

My experience with fundies, both on forums and within my family, legalism is a way to hide from spiritual responsibility. It removes them from actually participating in spiritual matters and focuses purely on "theology" or "nit noid" rules; something they can judge others by rather than focusing on their own spiritual growth.

From what I've been able to gather, legalism is a "control" mechanism. And in the particular biblical instance with Hezekiah/Josiah, the control that was being sought was specifically that of identity/separation from surrounding peoples. But it also gave the priests a much greater role in control of the masses - including the King...which Barker points out. The power of the king was greatly reduced following the Hezekiah/Josiah period.

In the instance of the fundies (especially the dispensationalists), the point seems to be to restrict "true Christianity" to a very narrow theological view and thereby boost the adherent's ability to "judge" others as "less than" just as the pharisees did.

Following the return of the Babylonian exiles, the priestly class took full advantage of the lack of a king in Judea and made themselves ultra rich and ultra important in ruling of the nation, essentially taking the place of king - especially starting with the Hasmonean Dynasty, and most especially with John Hyrcanus who formed a military (something only a king would do) and conquered 3 surrounding nations and annexed Edom. His son, Aristobulus I, was the first to actually declare himself King of Judea.

The fundies, especially the dispensationalists, have been trying to get "one of their own" in the White House for some time now. They find it desirable for the same reasons as the Hasmonean Dynasty did: control.

Then, came the pharisees who took "the law" to a whole new level. More people were disenfranchised by the pharisee's treatment of the law than at any other time during the Hebrew nation(s).

If the dispensationalists/fundies should ever find themselves in power, I expect that isolation and disenfranchisement would be the most widespread outcome.

I think it was David who said it so clearly: "There is nothing new under the sun."

quote:

Originally posted by bluelamp:

quote:

Originally posted by Allan:

Well, Herbert (or his son) has a book in the Dune series where that does happen. The computers lose that battle, however are still there many books later. IIRC the series closes with the impending merger of human and robotic minds.

Asimov is the world expert on sci-fi robots, and one of his stories ends with the same merger.

Those who know Asimov know he wrote two major series, The Caves of Steel and Foundation. He then merged the two. R. Daneel Olivaw was there from start to finish.

Asimov explored that human-computer mind in a way neither Hawking nor that program speaker could imagine.

Humanity's technological empire could though crumble catastrophically before we ever get there.

quote:

Imagine, then, that Brahman concept I envy. A Gaia multiverse and a creating entity capable of experiencing that exists , in every reality.

and we are it on the way back to being it

quote:

Reading anything in isolation, especially politics and religion, means we are in the control of the Alphas, and they have had aeons of experience in creating effective mind-controlling propaganda...

Before one begins to study anything, one must first get deep inside all the authors to determine who is decent and who is not.

The rules applying to evangelical ministers apply to all religious writers, no matter what our first impression may be.

Yeah alternative internet news sources are not loved by the mainstream press which kind of hints that there are things out there that the alphas don't want you to see.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:
Heard from Steve today. Poor baby has had the flu...

Says the weather is beautiful though and that he's gonna make himself a Chocolate Silk Pie tomorrow. Been a while since I've had a bite of one of those.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
As for not asking questions yet, how many times did many of us say to Cheri et al ... and then what? We’re way past what you are preaching and thing you are just at the beginning. What I haven’t figured out is if one can start without a physical Noah’s flood, for example, and still get to where one understands the meaning. Or better, skip a physical resurrection? Must one always start at the physical and move on from there?

Yep, it's when they never leave the physical to graduate to the spiritual that things get stuck in neverland.

How many times have you listened to someone speak of 1 Colossians 1:27 "...to whom God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory" and realized they were thinking Jesus in you rather than Christ in you?

I was amazed at how many people treat the word "Christ" as if it were Jesus' last name. They don't seem to understand that it means anointed; the same meaning as Messiah.

I realized just how screwed up their understanding was while listening to one of my brothers going on and on about "Jesus Christ, the Messiah" as if the two words had different meanings. Not only that, but while trying to straighten out his misunderstanding, I realized that he also presumed that Jesus was the only Christ/Messiah!

Once I started tracking it back through the OT and showing that all the biblical Hebrew Kings and Priests (not to mention Cyrus) were anointed, making them Christs/Messiahs, they somehow managed to get lost because it doesn't fit their indoctrination. They either cannot or refuse to wrap their heads around it.

Boggles the mind how they can so easily accept that Jesus is actually in them, but cannot accept that Christ is ('cause that would make you a Christ/Messiah (never mind that they even call themselves Christian))...even though several verses plainly state it:
1 John 2:20 "But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know."
1 John 2:27 "As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it (not HE) has taught you, you abide in Him."
2 Corinthians 1:21 "Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God,..."

So the kings and priests were anointed - and Peter, writing to ..."God's elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia,... plainly calls them a royal priesthood:
1 Peter 2:9 "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."

Just do not understand people not looking up the meaning of words unless it is for the purpose of remaining ignorant - because in their ignorance, they can assign any meaning they want to any word they choose in order to have it state whatever their pitifully small faith will accept.

Rant over

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by bluelamp:

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:
My impression is that there must have been a literal Jesus somewhere in there. The new religious movement happened all too quickly for it to have been otherwise, IMHO, especially since there was both a Jewish and Gentile component to it.

But that is not to say that all the Gospel stories were literally true since each Gospel story is actually quite different. But it does seem to me that they are speaking of a real person, while at the same time wrapping him in mythical language.

The real difference that I see between the Jesus teachings and the other pharisaic teachings is spiritual/legalistic. And in that sense Jesus' teachings were a return to the pre-Hezekiah/Josiah reformation; to a pre-Moses' Law religion.

Paul certainly seemed to think he had the same vision of a martyred leader as the James gang (with Cephas and John) and Dan Unterbrink has a view for who that could be historically:

https://thethreemessiahs.wordp...s-the-galilean-6-10/

quote:

It is possible that these missing years from Josephus could have been the result of pious editing. The actual crucifixion of Judas the Galilean may have been deleted. Note that Josephus detailed the deaths of Judas’ three sons, James, Simon, and Menahem and his grandson, Eleazar. With each of these occasions, Josephus referred back to Judas the Galilean. It is hard to believe that Josephus omitted the circumstances behind the death of Judas. So it is very possible that the writings of Josephus were edited to remove some interesting details of Judas’ life and his eventual crucifixion.

But as our Judaswasjames liked to mention, Paul may not have overly stayed a James gang fan and even began to think his vision was actually of a gentile on a tropaeum:

https://www.amazon.com/Judas-T...ewerType=all_reviews

quote:

Then fall the Gospel!
Byjudaswasjameson April 1, 2014
Format: Kindle Edition|Verified Purchase
Wow, this guy is smart. I could review a lot of his stuff line by line, but it is best for everyone to see for themselves this fine work. He does a better Mythicist case than the case of the Caesar connection, which in itself is pretty good, as well. Carrier, Doherty, and the rest have a new contender for the best of the Mythicist proponents. Really sharp guy, with amazing command and logic. Well worth the three or four bucks on Kindle. I would pay twice that.

The Gospels would then kind of redo a Julius Caesar passion play with a generic Jewish martyr in place of Caesar. I suspect Paul was OK with the play as a Gentile/Jew morph but it was not supposed to be literal history except in a loose historical fiction sense for Julius Caesar and Judas of Galilee. Carrier has mentioned that Luke/Acts could be historical fiction.

Paul taught in former Caesarean colonies and likely took over Hellenistic churches descended from Divus Julius churches. Caesar himself was into the Stoic Posidonius and Caesar's army was considered the source of Mithraism (kind of a folk religion version of Stoicism). Not surprising that Paul would have Hellenistic aspects as well as Jewish ones. Caesar was very much a messiah for the Jews in the Cyrus the Great-like sense.

These ideas trace back through Socrates and Zoroaster, then back Allan-like to Shamanism if you go back far enough.

Dizzying sometimes how many theories there are about who Jesus might actually have been! And then there is the theory that he didn't exist at all...

There are several biblical verses which state to "call upon the name" or "believe in/on the name" of Jesus, so the "name" Jesus/Joshua/Yahoshua seems to be important. When translated, it means "YHWH/GOD is salvation." Regardless of his actual name, Yahoshua seems to be unanimously agreed to in the NT.

Doesn't surprise me at all that much of Christianity can be traced back to some of the more ancient mystical religions though, since that seems to be the entire point; going back to a more mystical/spiritual religion, and far away from a legalistic one.

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
As for not asking questions yet, how many times did many of us say to Cheri et al ... and then what? We’re way past what you are preaching and thing you are just at the beginning. What I haven’t figured out is if one can start without a physical Noah’s flood, for example, and still get to where one understands the meaning. Or better, skip a physical resurrection? Must one always start at the physical and move on from there?

Yep, it's when they never leave the physical to graduate to the spiritual that things get stuck in neverland.

How many times have you listened to someone speak of 1 Colossians 1:27 "...to whom God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory" and realized they were thinking Jesus in you rather than Christ in you?

I was amazed at how many people treat the word "Christ" as if it were Jesus' last name. They don't seem to understand that it means anointed; the same meaning as Messiah.

I realized just how screwed up their understanding was while listening to one of my brothers going on and on about "Jesus Christ, the Messiah" as if the two words had different meanings. Not only that, but while trying to straighten out his misunderstanding, I realized that he also presumed that Jesus was the only Christ/Messiah!

Once I started tracking it back through the OT and showing that all the biblical Hebrew Kings and Priests (not to mention Cyrus) were anointed, making them Christs/Messiahs, they somehow managed to get lost because it doesn't fit their indoctrination. They either cannot or refuse to wrap their heads around it.

Boggles the mind how they can so easily accept that Jesus is actually in them, but cannot accept that Christ is ('cause that would make you a Christ/Messiah (never mind that they even call themselves Christian))...even though several verses plainly state it:
1 John 2:20 "But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know."
1 John 2:27 "As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it (not HE) has taught you, you abide in Him."
2 Corinthians 1:21 "Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God,..."

So the kings and priests were anointed - and Peter, writing to ..."God's elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia,... plainly calls them a royal priesthood:
1 Peter 2:9 "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."

Just do not understand people not looking up the meaning of words unless it is for the purpose of remaining ignorant - because in their ignorance, they can assign any meaning they want to any word they choose in order to have it state whatever their pitifully small faith will accept.

Rant over

Been there/done that enough with Vicki pointing out she claims to be Christ. Among the other usual problems like following Jesus command to be Perfect. Or the fact everytime she sins she's recrucifying Jesus and never was one of 'them'.

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
When I was in jr high it was pointed out to me that experimental learning projects often succeed but fail when they become the standard. There is something to be said for the novelty of a project that just doesn’t seem to ever transfer well. But then I’ve always believed that different teacher should have different styles of learning, especially if they match the style to the students that are trying to learn. I had thought that kids might understand maths better if they could relate to it. No one understands what a grocer used to be or how nuts were mixed! Then a teacher in California did just that he changed the Brazil nuts and walnuts to drugs and other things kids could relate to. The parents were appalled that the school was teaching the kids how to be drug dealers!!!
As for not asking questions yet, how many times did many of us say to Cheri et al ... and then what? We’re way past what you are preaching and thing you are just at the beginning. What I haven’t figured out is if one can start without a physical Noah’s flood, for example, and still get to where one understands the meaning. Or better, skip a physical resurrection? Must one always start at the physical and move on from there?

quote:

Originally posted by Allan:
Actually, no. We stick with the conventional, the orthodox, no matter what the cost.

quote:

I have said repeatedly that virtually all posters do not go back to the beginning.

Have yet to see any religious poster go back more than 4000 years, and by that time we all had well and truly lost our way.

quote:

The key is individual perception, and neuropsychology had just left the starting line on that.

I have yet to see anyone, in everything I have read, seen, or listen to, ask why we find it necessary to believe in deities at all.

quote:

As for education:

I do not know enough about Steiner or other systems, but I do know the Montessori system, as a base at least, is so far ahead of orthodox education systems they are a sick joke. Remember, I have spent some 17 years as a volunteer tutor in three high schools and a college, working with all types from mentally handicapped to some top students..

Bloody hell, we didn't even have sense enough to drop the QWERTY keyboard.

quote:

We have all the information we need to get back in the path we lost some 12,000 years ago.

Whether anyone likes it or not, understanding entheogens is an essential place to start.

quote:

As I said to bluelamp, it has now become essential to look deeply at words, how and why we create them, what connotations they have which control the way the listener/reader interprets them.

quote:

We have more than enough established evidence to make it impossible to understand any religion without a full understanding of what we experience in those altered states of consciousness.

quote:

Huxley's Doors of Perception is as good a place to start for anyone determined to find what, if any, truth there is in what I am saying.