Author Topic: The return of Christ personality  (Read 24753 times)

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Interesting connection,

Seth said:

"Christ, the historical Christ, was not crucified. - You will have to give me time here. (Pause.)

He had no intention of dying in that manner; but others felt that to fulfill the prophecies in all ways, a crucifixion was a necessity. Christ did not take part in it (Pause.) There was a conspiracy in which Judas: played a role an attempt to make a martyr out of Christ.  The man chosen was drugged-hence the necessity of helping him carry the cross (see Luke:23) and he was told that he was the Christ. He believed that he was. He was one of deluded, but he also himself believed that he, not the historical Christ, was to fulfill the prophecies. "


I recently found this in one of the Nag Hamaddi scrolls:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_of_the_Great_Seth

Second Treatise of the Great Seth is an apocryphal Gnostic writing discovered in the Codex VII of the Nag Hammadi codices and dates to around the third century. The author is unknown, and the Seth referenced in the title appears nowhere in the text. Instead Seth is thought to reference the third son of Adam and Eve to whom gnosis was first revealed, according to some gnostics. The author appears to belong to a group of gnostics who maintain that Jesus Christ was not crucified on the cross. Instead the text says that Simon of Cyrene was mistaken for Jesus and crucified in his place. Jesus is described as standing by and "laughing at their ignorance."

Those who believe Jesus to have died on the cross are said to believe in "a doctrine of a dead man." All those without gnosis - including those who had what would become orthodox beliefs, as well as the figures of Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, the prophets, and Moses - are all referred to as a "laughingstock." The text shows the derision which the gnostics felt towards those who did not realize their supposed "truth"; that the biblical text was false (in at least certain important respects) and that the God of the Jews was not the true God. Only the gnostics have access to the "truth".

The Treatise of the Great Seth is written from the first-person perspective of "Jesus".

Some Gnostics believed Jesus was not a man but a docetistic spirit, and therefore could not die. From the translation by Roger A. Bullard and Joseph A. Gibbons:" (end quote)


One of the Nag Hamaddi was given to Jung in 1961 but that was codex 1. I know Jane was into Jung. This text was from codex VII which according to Wiki was not translated until 1977, after Jane wrote that Seth stuff (I think?) So I don't think Jane would have seen this codex.

Obviously Seth does not claim to be related to Gnostic text (as far as I know?) but it is an interesting coincidence as they both are saying the same thing about the crufixion being someone other than Jesus. I admit it's just one point so it could just be a coincidence and "Seth" isn't that uncommon of a name (Adam and Eve's 3rd son was Seth) but still.....


Wait, did I just find a Seth connection that no one has ever known before? Or am I getting ahead of myself?
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 05:21:55 PM by Joelr »

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Joel, I think Joseph Atwill is more plausible than the Great Seth story:

"American Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill will be appearing before the British public for the first time in London on the 19th of October 2013 to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to Atwill, that the New Testament was written by first-century Roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of Jesus Christ. ....

Atwill asserts that Christianity did not really begin as a religion, but a sophisticated government project, a kind of propaganda exercise used to pacify the subjects of the Roman Empire. "Jewish sects in Palestine at the time, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century," he explains. "When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That's when the 'peaceful' Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to 'give onto Caesar' and pay their taxes to Rome."

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Sena
Joel, I think Joseph Atwill is more plausible than the Great Seth story:

"American Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill will be appearing before the British public for the first time in London on the 19th of October 2013 to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to Atwill, that the New Testament was written by first-century Roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of Jesus Christ. ....

Atwill asserts that Christianity did not really begin as a religion, but a sophisticated government project, a kind of propaganda exercise used to pacify the subjects of the Roman Empire. "Jewish sects in Palestine at the time, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century," he explains. "When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That's when the 'peaceful' Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to 'give onto Caesar' and pay their taxes to Rome."

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm


Ugg Atwill, beware of crank theories. Read Richard Carriers review post before taking Atwill serious.

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/4664

"Joseph Atwill is one of those crank mythers I often get conflated with. Mythicists like him make the job of serious scholars like me so much harder, because people see, hear, or read them and think their nonsense is what mythicism is. They make mythicism look ridiculous. So I have to waste time (oh by the gods, so much time) explaining how I am not arguing anything like their theories or using anything like their terrible methods, and unlike them I actually know what I am talking about, and have an actual Ph.D. in a relevant subject from a real university......"


Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Joelr
Quote from: Sena
Joel, I think Joseph Atwill is more plausible than the Great Seth story:

"American Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill will be appearing before the British public for the first time in London on the 19th of October 2013 to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to Atwill, that the New Testament was written by first-century Roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of Jesus Christ. ....

Atwill asserts that Christianity did not really begin as a religion, but a sophisticated government project, a kind of propaganda exercise used to pacify the subjects of the Roman Empire. "Jewish sects in Palestine at the time, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century," he explains. "When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That's when the 'peaceful' Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to 'give onto Caesar' and pay their taxes to Rome."

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm


Ugg Atwill, beware of crank theories. Read Richard Carriers review post before taking Atwill serious.

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/4664

"Joseph Atwill is one of those crank mythers I often get conflated with. Mythicists like him make the job of serious scholars like me so much harder, because people see, hear, or read them and think their nonsense is what mythicism is. They make mythicism look ridiculous. So I have to waste time (oh by the gods, so much time) explaining how I am not arguing anything like their theories or using anything like their terrible methods, and unlike them I actually know what I am talking about, and have an actual Ph.D. in a relevant subject from a real university......"



"Jesus Did Not Exist: A Debate Among Atheists, was published November 12, 2015, with foreword and afterword by Richard Carrier."
"Per any evidence outside of the New Testament, for Jesus’s existence, Carrier writes;

There is no independent evidence of Jesus’s existence outside the New Testament. All external evidence for his existence, even if it were fully authentic (though much of it isn’t), cannot be shown to be independent of the Gospels, or Christian informants relying on the Gospels. None of it can be shown to independently corroborate the Gospels as to the historicity of Jesus. Not one single item of evidence. Regardless of why no independent evidence survives (it does not matter the reason), no such evidence survives."

"Carrier asserts that originally "Jesus was the name of a celestial being, subordinate to God, with whom some people hallucinated conversations"[87] and "The Gospel began as a mythic allegory about the celestial Jesus, set on earth, as most myths then were"[87] (see Jesus in comparative mythology). Stories were created that placed Jesus on Earth, in context with historical figures and places. Eventually people began to believe that these allegorical stories were real.[87][89]

A celestial being, subordinate to God:
Carrier notes, "Jesus was originally a god just like any other god (properly speaking, a demigod in pagan terms; an archangel in Jewish terms; in either sense, a deity), who was later historicized."[4] (I would be inclined to agree with this)
Hallucinated conversations:
Carrier gives as example Joseph Smith—the founder of Mormonism—who declared that he had conversations with the Angel Moroni."

"Reviewing On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, Christina Petterson of the University of Newcastle, Australia, in the academic journal Relegere, says Carrier's methodology is "tenuous", that she was "shocked" by the way he uses mathematics,and that Carrier uses statistics in a way that seems designed "to intentionally confuse and obfuscate". Petterson says that statements in the book "reveal Carrier's ignorance of the field of New Testament studies and early Christianity"."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Carrier#Jesus_ahistoricity_theory

Slanging matches appear to be the rule in Jesus studies.

Joel, you and Carrier may well be right about Atwill. I am personally not inclined to take Jesus seriously.
The gods of Candomblé are probably as credible as Jesus.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2018, 06:06:59 AM by Sena »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Sena

"Reviewing On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, Christina Petterson of the University of Newcastle, Australia, in the academic journal Relegere, says Carrier's methodology is "tenuous", that she was "shocked" by the way he uses mathematics,and that Carrier uses statistics in a way that seems designed "to intentionally confuse and obfuscate". Petterson says that statements in the book "reveal Carrier's ignorance of the field of New Testament studies and early Christianity"."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Carrier#Jesus_ahistoricity_theory

Slanging matches appear to be the rule in Jesus studies.

Joel, you and Carrier may well be right about Atwill. I am personally not inclined to take Jesus seriously.
The gods of Candomblé are probably as credible as Jesus.



Carrier wrote a piece about that review where he pointed out she admitted to not understanding the math and had no actual criticisms of his book. In his archives there is a page that lists all the reviews for each of his books and he writes about them sometimes showing the criticism is just apologetics and absurd and sometimes stuff needs further explaining, anyway.....for the life of me I cannot find that page. I have links to individual review discussions they are under "archives" but I can't find any parent archive page and searches don't work under "review responses".
.

So the hell with it, if Carrier doesn't want to organize his blog so people can actually find stuff then I can't go any further with that. It's a page with every review of every book and a link to a response and it's just IMPOSSIBLE to locate?? Lame?

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Sena


"Reviewing On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, Christina Petterson of the University of Newcastle, Australia, in the academic journal Relegere, says Carrier's methodology is "tenuous", that she was "shocked" by the way he uses mathematics,and that Carrier uses statistics in a way that seems designed "to intentionally confuse and obfuscate". Petterson says that statements in the book "reveal Carrier's ignorance of the field of New Testament studies and early Christianity"."




Ok here it is:
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/12038

this is a response by Carrier to Christina Petterson's review, he really chopped her up pretty good.

Carrier tends to really bring out anger in people as do all of the atheist/mythicist theory people do.
It's really neither here nor there if you're not a Christian anyways, it doesn't really matter what the exact history was. It's like Hercules and Zeus, who cares how the myth started. But since I was raised christian the historicity stuff is interesting to me.

But the more interesting questions are the metaphysical questions, like what is reality. It's cool that Seth put his model forward. It's a much much more realistic model than religion offers anyways.

Offline strangerthings

  • ***
  • Posts: 411
@Joelr

There is some wonderful information in the Nag Hammadi. Yes I have seen this before.

I also list toward the concept that the Jesus referred to here is also not just one person but a part of each person. To me Jesus is the divine feminine portion of self. The imagination, from which....all life springs. The Sacred Feminine. The power of god on earth. Seth shares  that we are both male and female.

Even during these “days” was the concept of you being divine, a god, in training, using your reproductive power to create reality was a hush hush topic. One, we dont just open mouth and talk about the learnings to people who will not listen with the ear or see with the eyes, we dont fish out the millions of small fish and ignore the huge fish so-to-speak, and two.....we would get our heads lopped off or worse. People spoke .....in parables, code, metaphors that are trickier than most. IMHO

We now to this day, dont go around to everyone pushing this onto everyone. Those are for the blue blooded folks (church dogma).

We are the gods, and I can see and understand how laughable it would be, for example, if someone were pretending to be me, and place their life at the hands of a sacrificial ritual ......willingly. While the unbelievers all proclaim, faux me is dying for THEIR sins? Get the f outta here! Lolol

As in what do I have to do with your freedom? What do I have to do with your choices you have made voluntarily. Why do I die for your laziness? And this person, dying in my name, actually believes this is A) not meddling, B) applicable and beneficial C) what I am and what I represent

Guess what? The people fell for it! The blue bloods pushed this concept and murdered in its name.

If that took place in my name, I would be astounded! I would laugh too!

Like those prayer dolls.....given to people in Egypt when the old ways were being demolished and mediators were thus set in place. Mediators between god and people.

Someone can ask me to pray for them, and I can then do this by imagining they have what they have desired. If I am one who believes in the Great I Am, as me, their prayer more than likely will be a success. They began charging for this. Through these obnoxious prayer doll concepts.

This is what the pope is to people, same with preachers, priests etc. The blue blooded mediators.

It is almost like we are seeing the blood rites of the blue bloods in the crucifixion story.

It is laughable!

Also, from MY perspective, the writings are addessed to our imagination, Jesus. Telling our imagination, this behaviour is laughable! Therefor the ego sees this is not something only I/you have and I am not and you arent the be all end all.

We are each divine. We are all gods.

Perhaps the clever tale is trickier than we thought?
« Last Edit: May 01, 2018, 05:17:42 PM by strangerthings »

Offline strangerthings

  • ***
  • Posts: 411
@Sena

IMO:

They piggy backed an already held concept of the people of, The Way.

Spirit crushers indeed.

But it wasnt a government project called Christianity though the crushing/wars/witch hunts/crusades may have been a project indeed.

Christ believers, Horus believers, Hunahapu believers, are into the same concepts, for their own culture. Even Sumer. Words are different, concepts altered, but who we are, what will happen, and our individuated prophecy, had not changed. Its ..... our second birth. That wont change as foundation in this earth school.

Of course the foolery will try and take over and blend it in with dogma and tyrannical systems. The, hide a lie in plain sight kind of thing. The bible isnt discussing real actual people they are everyone at some point in their life.

You know as well as I do that you dont do what someone tells you less you want to. We are jealous in this way.

Their I AM is not your I AM ....so a jealous god indeed!

Your I AM is not going to like worshipping anothers I AM.

Jacob is all of us wrestling with our angel. Our creative power and states of mind.

ISREAL is not a place here on earth we can all go and visit physically. Nor is Jerusalem.  The city of David. David the Christ child, Horus, Hunahpu. Your second birth. To be REborn from within (above).

Golgotha is your skull! No one will ever find its actual place located on earth unless they see that it is buried inside. Eternity ....infinity....buried in the mind of man.





« Last Edit: May 01, 2018, 05:50:23 PM by strangerthings »

Offline strangerthings

  • ***
  • Posts: 411
Quote from: Joelr


n the Last Supper when Christ said, "This is my body, and this is my blood," He meant to show that the spirit was within all matter, interconnected, and yet apart--that His own spirit was independent of His body, and also in His own way to hint that He should no longer be identified with His body. "

Last suppers are standard mythological themes and are in Christianity because it's part of an important parable, not because it happened?!




The last suppers do not take place in the physical world.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2018, 05:57:26 PM by strangerthings »

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: strangerthings
Christ believers, Horus believers, Hunahapu believers, are into the same concepts, for their own culture.
ST, welcome back to the forum. Horus is Egyptian, Hunahapu is Native American. There was a post recently about "That Art Thou" (Tat Twam Asi).

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
I thought I'd toss this into the mix, it's an unpublished session from one of Rob's typed transcript, courtesy of Ron Card on Facebook who has original transcripts with some unpublished sessions. I'll be adding this to the related "Seth On" topic when I get the time.

Seth: “The exploits of the historical Christ were composed of the activities of several men, wound into myth and fantasy – woven into a tale so spectacular, however, that it changed the course of civilization. Christianity is so important precisely because it is not based upon that realm of activity that you call fact.

Christianity gained its vitality because its roots superseded the world of fact, and formed the legend of a man called Christ, who within himself contained the most divine attributes that man could imagine, and gave birth in an historical context to an understandable picture of man’s greater reality. Men believed what they wanted to believe, and so from the lives of several men they formed a legend – each believing the legend to be true. One of the men, Paul, was a charlatan. Yet he was a miracle-worker, for he inflamed men’s imaginations and in his deception proved the validity of a vision in which he himself did not believe.

Now, the story of Paul comes down to you, and the story of his miraculous conversion — yet there were numberless unknown others as “legitimately” struck by God — awakened into truth, who followed other Gods, other pathways that were not accepted in your historic line of continuity. None of this contradicts the existence of the Christ spirit — which always existed despite, or separate from, the individual or individuals involved.

There were miracle-workers all over Jerusalem. Rome was dead already, and no fire was burning. That fire became Christianity, but it burned messiahs in its wake. Early Christianity was filled with fire, and only its oriental connections gave it touches of mercy.

The texts were rewritten time and time again. In some ways Paul destroyed more than he saved. It took centuries for the theories to jell.”

- Seth’s unpublished session 748 for June 2, 1975.

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
That is interesting. But what the history is looking like is that the Jesus story had already been done and was moving through Asia  - Romulus, Zalmoxus, Innanna, and four other pre-Christian gods that we know for sure were before Christ.
They all contained elements of a personal savior demi-god who battled satan/death, died and was ressurected and baptisim into the cult gave a follower forgiveness of sins and entry into an eternal realm. 12 apostles, virgin birth, carpenter demi-god, all that stuff was created with this new model.

The Jewish version was the last version. It's believed that writers of early scripture were looking for a way to re-vitalize Judaisim because the Jesus story is also a re-working of Moses and Isaih but for a new generation, which also included the new updated demi-god myth that was popular. People were tired of going to temple daily so Jesus replaced that need as well. Also the temple was destroyed.

Because of the Persian invasion and other wars the cultures were being mixed. The Seth version seems to give a lot of emphasis on Christ being a sort of original movement - "Christ entity" seems a bit intense being that it's really just mythology.
So is there a "Hercules entity" or a Thor entity or whatnot? If there is a Christ entity then why not an "entity" for every single myth? What about Santa Clause?
Seth's material on Christ seems to be influenced by Jane is what I'm getting at.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Seth
The texts were rewritten time and time again. In some ways Paul destroyed more than he saved. It took centuries for the theories to jell.

Blame it all on Paul. Just sayin'.

"CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS is a work of investigative history. It documents and describes Christianity’s creation-event, which occurred in the year 49 or 50, in Antioch (present-day Antakya, Turkey), 20 years after Jesus had been crucified in Jerusalem for sedition against Roman rule. At this event, Paul broke away from the Jewish sect that Jesus had begun, and he took with him the majority of this new Jewish sect’s members; he convinced these people that Jesus had been a god, and that the way to win eternal salvation in heaven is to worship him as such."

[. . .]

"This book also explains and documents the tortuous 14-year-long conflict Paul had had with this sect’s leader, Jesus’s brother James, a conflict which caused Paul, in about the year 50, to perpetrate his coup d’état against James, and to start his own new religion: Christianity. 

"Then, this historical probe documents that the four canonical Gospel accounts of the words and actions of “Jesus” were written decades after Jesus, by followers of Paul, not by followers of Jesus; and that these writings placed into the mouth of “Jesus” the agenda of Paul. Paul thus became, via his followers, Christ’s ventriloquist."

https://www.amazon.com/CHRISTS-VENTRILOQUISTS-Event-Created-Christianity-ebook/dp/B007Q1H4EG/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
hey Deb,
      you remind me of a term I read years ago...... Pauline Christianity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Christianity

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: chasman
hey Deb,
      you remind me of a term I read years ago...... Pauline Christianity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Christianity
chasman, Paul was a nice guy.

"This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus." (Paul to the Thessalonians)

http://biblehub.com/esv/2_thessalonians/1.htm

Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
wow. brutal.
Jesus was teaching love.
that quote from Paul does not paint a loving picture.

imagine instead a loving, unconditionally loving God and Lord.
non-judgmental. nurturing. all forgiving. all caring.
those would be the God and Lord for me.

« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 06:12:06 AM by chasman »

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: chasman
imagine instead a loving, unconditionally loving God and Lord.
non-judgmental. nurturing. all forgiving. all caring.

And that sounds like ATI to me. The Safe Universe.

I don't know, could be due to my lack of religious education (despite the efforts of family and more recently, neighbors), but Paul is starting to sound like a bit if a fanatic to me.


Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
right on Deb.
very good.
thank you.

I have no religion. have not for decades.
born and raised Catholic.
but that was long ago now.
that said, I've said it before, but perhaps its worth repeating.
as for religion, I like what the Dalai Lama said:
my religion is simple. my religion is kindness.

as for God, ATI, I think of the source of all good kind things. the source of love power.
joy energy.
I wonder if Jesus (who taught love), would have been a-pauled (appalled), at what Paul said. lol
when I think of God, I think of wisdom.
and to me, to be kind is to be wise.
 

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb
Quote from: Seth
The texts were rewritten time and time again. In some ways Paul destroyed more than he saved. It took centuries for the theories to jell.

Blame it all on Paul. Just sayin'.

"CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS is a work of investigative history. It documents and describes Christianity’s creation-event, which occurred in the year 49 or 50, in Antioch (present-day Antakya, Turkey), 20 years after Jesus had been crucified in Jerusalem for sedition against Roman rule. At this event, Paul broke away from the Jewish sect that Jesus had begun, and he took with him the majority of this new Jewish sect’s members; he convinced these people that Jesus had been a god, and that the way to win eternal salvation in heaven is to worship him as such."

[. . .]

"This book also explains and documents the tortuous 14-year-long conflict Paul had had with this sect’s leader, Jesus’s brother James, a conflict which caused Paul, in about the year 50, to perpetrate his coup d’état against James, and to start his own new religion: Christianity.

"Then, this historical probe documents that the four canonical Gospel accounts of the words and actions of “Jesus” were written decades after Jesus, by followers of Paul, not by followers of Jesus; and that these writings placed into the mouth of “Jesus” the agenda of Paul. Paul thus became, via his followers, Christ’s ventriloquist."

https://www.amazon.com/CHRISTS-VENTRILOQUISTS-Event-Created-Christianity-ebook/dp/B007Q1H4EG/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8


That book is full of speculation and has not passed peer review by the pHD history community. The actual field of biblical studies have pointed out that Mark might have already been written when Paul wrote his letters because Paul references only revelation and scripture.

There is no evidence that Jesus has an Earthly brother except in ACTS which is fiction created by the church to add facts to Jesus's life.

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: chasman
wow. brutal.
Jesus was teaching love.
that quote from Paul does not paint a loving picture.

imagine instead a loving, unconditionally loving God and Lord.
non-judgmental. nurturing. all forgiving. all caring.
those would be the God and Lord for me.



Jesus was teaching lots of things. In Matthew he said he does not come for peace but with the sword for non-believers and he will cast them into an eternal lake of fire.

Jesus teaching only love is a new-age idea that isn't based in reality at all.

In Mark Jesus sens a disciple to a town and he says:
"Whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you.... It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." In other words - Any city that doesn't "receive" the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah.
 Jesus taught vengence, death to non-believers, it's ok to rape a slave girl, and many many mean and violent ideas, not just love. Not even close.

Just pick up a bible and read the new testament.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2018, 06:05:00 AM by Joelr »

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Joelr
There is no evidence that Jesus has an Earthly brother except in ACTS which is fiction created by the church to add facts to Jesus's life
"Explanations of the true relationship of the 'brothers' of Jesus within his immediate nuclear family fall primarily into three categories. The first, called "the most natural inference" of the Gospel text by the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, is that the brothers of Jesus were the children of his parents, Joseph and Mary": See the family tree at Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_of_Jesus#Degree_of_consanguinity_between_Jesus_and_his_brothers

It is the doctrine of the Virgin Birth which is a total lie fabricated by the Church. If it was a Virgin Birth, Jesus should have been female.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2018, 08:16:51 AM by Sena »

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Joelr
Jesus taught vengence, death to non-believers, it's ok to rape a slave girl, and many many mean and violent ideas, not just love. Not even close.
And the doctrine of Everlasting Hell, which was not there in the Old Testament.

Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
Quote from: Sena
And the doctrine of Everlasting Hell, which was not there in the Old Testament.
I recently heard in a Coast-to-Coast interview a pretty logical argument against an eternal Hell: If you take the most evil person in history (say Hitler, for the sake of argument), as much suffering as he caused, it is still finite suffering. But eternal damnation is infinite, thus infinitely more suffering than this person caused.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Sena
If it was a Virgin Birth, Jesus should have been female.

Heh, heh, heh, great point Sena. I guess by the same token, Eve would have to be a guy, right? But I don't suppose miracles follow the rules, that's what makes them special.

Quote from: Joelr
That book is full of speculation and has not passed peer review by the pHD history community. The actual field of biblical studies have pointed out that Mark might have already been written when Paul wrote his letters because Paul references only revelation and scripture.

There is no evidence that Jesus has an Earthly brother except in ACTS which is fiction created by the church to add facts to Jesus's life.

Peer review by the PhD history community? Do they really know the absolute truth?

Being the heathen that I am, I tend to take everything in the bible and attributed to Jesus with a salt lick. I also consider anything that Jesus supposedly said as hearsay, and anything written about Jesus and those times has to be speculation. You wrote "might have already been written"—"might" would be speculation, don't you think? As far as I know there is still no solid proof of anything in this area. While I'm not researching Christian history, I would think that if there was some major recent proof discovered it would be in the news.

Some interesting points are made here in this 20 year old article:
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

And to be fair, there is no proof that Seth ever existed either, right? But that doesn't stop me from enjoying and benefiting from the books and messages within. No hell or brimstone either.


Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101

"Jesus was teaching lots of things. In Matthew he said he does not come for peace but with the sword for non-believers and he will cast them into an eternal lake of fire.

Jesus teaching only love is a new-age idea that isn't based in reality at all.

In Mark Jesus sens a disciple to a town and he says:
"Whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you.... It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." In other words - Any city that doesn't "receive" the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah.
 Jesus taught vengence, death to non-believers, it's ok to rape a slave girl, and many many mean and violent ideas, not just love. Not even close.

Just pick up a bible and read the new testament."

This is very upsetting.
I have not been a Catholic for many decades now.  No organized religion at all.
But for a long time  I have believed in the utter goodness and lovingness of Jesus.
And now I wonder.
Is it possible you are  wrong?
I'm only wondering.
What if Jesus really was all the good things.  But  people wrote things about him that were not true.
Even in the new testament.




Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
I like your  post very much Deb.

Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
"Jesus taught vengence, death to non-believers, it's ok to rape a slave girl, and many many mean and violent ideas, not just love. Not even close."

(I'm able to type on my laptop, much better than on my phone, so here goes.)

Joel, ouch.
that's very harsh.
but if its true, than I need to forget my previous belief in the excellent loving wonderful awesome nature of Jesus. I thought he was the great teacher of love.
if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.
my God, would be a loving forgiving God. always. to everyone.
what if Jesus, really was a good guy. not a hood guy. not a thug. not a dude telling people to hurt and kill each other. (utterly despicable.)
and then his ideas, were corrupted.
his loving message and teachings were hijacked.
and the rest is history.
just wondering. how reliable are your and my sources?
how do we  know what to believe?
I think that the Seth stuff is clearly on a high plane. I think that it is saying love is supreme.
to be loving........ it is the way to be.
ATI is just alright with me (sung to the tune of Jesus is Just Alright With Me, of course).

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: chasman
"Jesus taught vengence, death to non-believers, it's ok to rape a slave girl, and many many mean and violent ideas, not just love. Not even close."

(I'm able to type on my laptop, much better than on my phone, so here goes.)

Joel, ouch.
that's very harsh.
but if its true, than I need to forget my previous belief in the excellent loving wonderful awesome nature of Jesus. I thought he was the great teacher of love.
if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.
my God, would be a loving forgiving God. always. to everyone.
what if Jesus, really was a good guy. not a hood guy. not a thug. not a dude telling people to hurt and kill each other. (utterly despicable.)
and then his ideas, were corrupted.
his loving message and teachings were hijacked.
and the rest is history.
just wondering. how reliable are your and my sources?
how do we  know what to believe?
I think that the Seth stuff is clearly on a high plane. I think that it is saying love is supreme.
to be loving........ it is the way to be.
ATI is just alright with me (sung to the tune of Jesus is Just Alright With Me, of course).


Looking through the new testament it's clear a lot of the good wisdom people knew of at that time (from Hindu and other established sources)was attributed to Jesus to bring this wisdom to a more modern crowd. So a lot of good stuff is there. But there is a lot of now-outdated knowledge as well. Jesus was a big believer in hell and Satan and non-believers going to hell and suffering for eternity.

the skeptics bible has a section of cruelty in the OT and NT
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

and on intolerance:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html

The stuff about non-judgment and love and all the good stuff was also in Hindu and other pre-Christian religions as well as in Judiasim in some forms. It was also in the Gnostic Christian religions that were wiped out by the orthadox church.

It's believed the gospels are not actually historical but that is all we have as far as information on Jesus goes. If you want to imagine Jesus as some hippy, love is all you need guy then why not? What does it matter?

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb
Quote from: Sena
If it was a Virgin Birth, Jesus should have been female.



Quote from: Joelr
That book is full of speculation and has not passed peer review by the pHD history community. The actual field of biblical studies have pointed out that Mark might have already been written when Paul wrote his letters because Paul references only revelation and scripture.

There is no evidence that Jesus has an Earthly brother except in ACTS which is fiction created by the church to add facts to Jesus's life.

Peer review by the PhD history community? Do they really know the absolute truth?

Being the heathen that I am, I tend to take everything in the bible and attributed to Jesus with a salt lick. I also consider anything that Jesus supposedly said as hearsay, and anything written about Jesus and those times has to be speculation. You wrote "might have already been written"—"might" would be speculation, don't you think? As far as I know there is still no solid proof of anything in this area. While I'm not researching Christian history, I would think that if there was some major recent proof discovered it would be in the news.

Some interesting points are made here in this 20 year old article:
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

And to be fair, there is no proof that Seth ever existed either, right? But that doesn't stop me from enjoying and benefiting from the books and messages within. No hell or brimstone either.



The thing about "peer review" in the historicity field is significant. To go from masters to pHD the entire several years are all spent learning how to verify sources to make the most accurate work possible. Then when a work is completed it must be combed over very carefully by other PHD people who check sources and so on.
Why is this important? Well I used to not care about that and I read all these books on early Christianity and I had all this information that I would discuss with people. Then I started paying attention to what actual scholars had to say and I realized all the "historical" books were largely made up nonsense designed to sell books.

So the field itself isn't perfect but they take all historical information and very carefully weigh sources and this and that and try to come to a reasonable consensis of what actually happened. And when they all agree then it's likely that that is what actually happened historically. Or at least that is our best guess. On the flip side, ANYONE can write a book and make up sources and actually completely lie and it's been done. I've seen articles explaining why one particular book (a book on Ceasar being Jesus) was completely made up and the author would just use complete denial and never even went to any school or used any source to write his book.

Another guy - Bart Ehrman wrote a book on Jesus and Richard Carrier wrote a piece on it exposing many many lies Ehrman used. So because of how many people out there will write books on subjects and claim to be "experts" it's important to have some type of standard.
So real historians are the ones who have the time to check sources and do the work. I started reading history thinking information was easy to get and everyone tells the truth but I was so wrong.
So when it comes to historical information I think it's important to see how a work fares with peer review.

Right now we know Mark was the first gospel but we don't know if Paul knew of the Mark gospel or if Paul was referencing some other scripture when he mentioned scripture.
We do know ACTS is fiction, there are several good peer reviewed books on that topic. Acts says Jesus had a brother but we are pretty sure that Acts is a fiction made up by the church mach later, to give Jesus and Paul certain features they wanted him to have (like a brother)
In the Paulean letters is where the other reference to "brother" is but many scholars believe this is a reference to "brothers in the lord" type brother.

That is the extent of the "brother" thing.

Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
thank you for your reply Joelr.
what do you think about Hell and Satan?
do you think they exist?
« Last Edit: May 09, 2018, 07:10:41 AM by chasman »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: chasman
thank you for your reply Joelr.
what do you think about Hell and Satan?
do you think they exist?


Well I am a mythicist meaning I believe the latest work by pHD Richard Carrier proves the Jesus story was 100% mythology.
The demonology - hell/Satan - comes from the same place the dying/rising messiah demigod comes from, originally Zorastrinisim then into several other religions then came a Jewish version which was Jesus.

If you read this blog post:
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13890

you will see that all of Christianity is taken from pagan sources which originated from Zorastrianism. So that included Satan and hell. Judaism didn't have any afterlife or evil Satan god before the Persian invasion, then suddenly you see that stuff appearing in the OT. The Persians were the Zorastrianism people.

So I believe the idea of Satan and hell is a pagan idea (we know it is) and the only connection to reality is that it's a metaphor.
Do bad things and bad things might happen to you. Promote violence and eventually you will get violence.
That is a general rule, not 100% because peaceful people also meet violent ends as well. So nothing is 100% but it seems like a good metaphor.
Hell and Satan are one of the things I mean by "outdated", it's ancient demonology that no longer serves us because most people don't believe that stuff is literal anymore.

Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
thank you.
fascinating. I skimmed that article.
wow. so much I have absolutely no clue about.
I'm looking forward to reading more.
thank you again.

Offline Michael Sternbach

  • Star-Lord
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • My blog:
Hey folks,

Good to "see" you. Haven't been around for awhile.  :)

Just for the record, Christ's Ventriloquists, if anything, lends support to the statements Seth makes towards the end of Seth Speaks. For one thing (running from memory), he does say there that Paul was overly zealous in his approach to spreading the new religion and consequently messed up. And Zuesse's book (which I haven't read yet, though I am surely going to) seems to greatly illustrate and elaborate on this important point.

Seth also emphasizes that the story around the Crucifixion was primarily a psychic event, meaningful in its own right, while much of it didn't occur on the physical level. That again seems consistent with Zuesse's hypothesis, according to which the content of the Gospels was partially contrived for 'political' reasons.

But Zuesse does NOT suggest that the story of Jesus had no foundation in reality whatsoever, rather, he hints (in the introduction) at those mentions of Jesus in sources outside the Biblical Gospels. Just saying that those sources didn't have any appreciable impact on Christianity overall. Again, he seems quite in keeping with Seth's view.

Some such (Gnostic) texts are at odds with the story of the Crucifixion, much like Seth's version of the historical events. So more power to him.

However, I learned quickly that there is no safer way to upset even a moderate Christian more than by questioning the reality of the Crucifixion.  ;D Whereas personally, I always cared more for Jesus's teachings, as they have come down to us also outside the Biblical Gospels, most note-worthy in the Gospel of Thomas. Great wisdom in there, IMO! And it strikes me as weird that some devout Christians refuse to even look at this and certain other apocryphal texts.

I may have additional remarks to make once I have read Christ's Ventriloquists, and reread the relevant chapter of Seth Speaks.

For the time being, I just applaud Seth and Jane Roberts for their psychic foresight as well as courage to present what now looks like a more accurate picture of what actually happened in those days, published at a time when there was basically no critical discussion allowed yet regarding it.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Michael Sternbach
I may have additional remarks to make once I have read Christ's Ventriloquists

Please do! At this point all I can think is that the whole Christ story was for the most part a fabrication, as well as the quotes, actions and history attributed to him. Seth does indicate that there was a Jesus person who did exist in reality, but the facts around his existence and history are for the most part legend. Which is what I personally feel and can accept.

Even such a basic tenet as the Golden Rule, attributed solely to Jesus in my upbringing, has historical roots beyond the scope Christ and Christianity.


Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule#Ancient_India

I would wait and see what scholarship has to say about Eric Zuesse's work. Check out the reviews from scholars to see how accurate his work is.

Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
I do not recall a source for this tidbit, but I once heard or read that one of my favorite quotes attributed to Jesus, defending an accused woman about to be stoned, "He who is without sin, let him throw the first stone," was not in the earliest known version of the gospels - it was added later.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Nice one Larry! There are a lot of great adages from the bible. I've always loved adages in general because they contain eternal truths in just a few words. Another favorite of mine is the "first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will be able to see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye."

People still seem to have trouble with that one.  ;)

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Deb
Another favorite of mine is the "first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will be able to see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye."
Deb, not sitting in judgement on other people is a clear message from Seth.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Yes, true. And to not judge ourselves, to trust that who and what we are, as individuals, have a purpose. Charity begins at home, right?

I had the weirdest thought today that the return of the Christ personality could be Seth. I'll have to think about that some more. Judging by all the Seth Facebook groups and pages and members, his message is certainly stronger and more widely spread than ever before. World wide. Having that many Seth readers (who actually understand the materials and the messages) has to be good for humanity as a whole, don't you think? The trinity of Seth, Jane and Rob made the seed planting a possibility, and the message continues to grow far and wide. Laurel marrying Rob was no accident either, she's much younger than Jane and Rob and I think it was pre-planned in F2 that she would continue to carry the torch after Jane and Rob passed. Laurel helped Rob publish books after Jane passed, so she knows the process.

Ron put this up on FB, it caught my attention:

"Physically speaking, man's purpose is to help enrich the quality of existence in all of its dimensions. Spiritually speaking, his purpose is to understand the qualities of love and creativity, to intellectually and physically understand the sources of his being, and lovingly create other dimensions of reality of which his is presently unaware."

Dreams, Evolution I, Session 901

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Deb
I had the weirdest thought today that the return of the Christ personality could be Seth.
That is a distinct (and exciting) possibility.
Seth would not have said so explicitly, as that would have been blowing his own trumpet.
This is a gospel quotation:

"And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. He who has ears, let him hear. To what can I compare this generation? They are like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling out to others."

http://biblehub.com/matthew/11-15.htm

Offline Michael Sternbach

  • Star-Lord
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • My blog:
Quote from: Deb
Yes, true. And to not judge ourselves, to trust that who and what we are, as individuals, have a purpose. Charity begins at home, right?

I had the weirdest thought today that the return of the Christ personality could be Seth. I'll have to think about that some more. Judging by all the Seth Facebook groups and pages and members, his message is certainly stronger and more widely spread than ever before. World wide. Having that many Seth readers (who actually understand the materials and the messages) has to be good for humanity as a whole, don't you think? The trinity of Seth, Jane and Rob made the seed planting a possibility, and the message continues to grow far and wide. Laurel marrying Rob was no accident either, she's much younger than Jane and Rob and I think it was pre-planned in F2 that she would continue to carry the torch after Jane and Rob passed. Laurel helped Rob publish books after Jane passed, so she knows the process.

Ron put this up on FB, it caught my attention:

"Physically speaking, man's purpose is to help enrich the quality of existence in all of its dimensions. Spiritually speaking, his purpose is to understand the qualities of love and creativity, to intellectually and physically understand the sources of his being, and lovingly create other dimensions of reality of which his is presently unaware."

Dreams, Evolution I, Session 901


That's an interesting view, but I don't think it to be correct in a literal sense. Seth's description of the return of the Christ entity is too detailed for that.

Personally, I imagine that this individual will have a broad understanding of all the major spiritual and esoteric bodies of knowledge, and that would include the Seth material to be sure, so foundational to many of the more modern spiritual approaches.

Rather than limiting himself to any particular system (traditional or modern), he will demonstrate how they all refer to certain common topics, although sometimes looking at them from different perspectives. Based on that, the utter folly of waging war over divergent religious views should become entirely obvious to any but the most ignorant human beings. (Okay, ideally speaking.)

I further assume that the reincarnated Christ will also show ways to reconcile the spiritual with the scientific view, along the lines suggested by the Seth books.

All this seems to me in keeping with Seth's announcement that the reincarnated Christ will provide humanity with a much needed new 'metaphysical system of thought.'

Thoughts? (No pun intended.)

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Michael Sternbach
That's an interesting view, but I don't think it to be correct in a literal sense. Seth's description of the return of the Christ entity is too detailed for that.
. . .
Thoughts? (No pun intended.)

Shhhhh. I'm still enjoying the new perspective that Seth may be the Returned One. I've been too busy with work to do much more than think about that, but I intend to go over what he said about that topic with this new perspective in mind and see if anything looks different now. Little tidbits keep coming to mind. I could certainly be chasing after a red herring, but right now it has captured my imagination and I like that. And as far as I can tell, what you said in your post does not contradict that possibility.

I should also probably read this topic again from the beginning. Ouch, by far it is the most popular topic in the history of this forum. 23,707 views, 290 replies. This will be 291.


Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
hey Deb,
     just felt like chiming in.
this is my opinion. it is the way I see things right now.
I am not able to quote from the Bible and Scripture. I will probably make misteaks (har har de har).
but I hope the general gist will be clear, of how I see things.
I could be wrong about some things. but this is what I think anyway............

Seth was more advanced than Jesus.
Seth taught about and described love stuff.
a loving creative benevolent life energy force. all that is.
he did not talk about being God fearing.
he talked about love.
he did not talk about the threat of hell, and eternal damnation, and the devil if you did not believe in God and follow the commandments.
he talked about this Earthly existence being a school for all of us. we are here as students learning how to use energy. we are here to learn how to use energy in constructive ways. not destructive. constructive.
thats my thinking.
it would be interesting to hear a conversation between Jesus and Seth.
what would Jesus have to say about Seth's ideas regarding hell and eternal damnation?
wow, I would so love to know.
I just so prefer and love the idea of an all loving God force, compared to a mean punishing angry God.
 

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: chasman
Seth was more advanced than Jesus.
Yes.
Quote
he did not talk about the threat of hell, and eternal damnation, and the devil if you did not believe in God and follow the commandments.
He corrected Jesus's mistakes.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2018, 02:26:22 AM by Sena »

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Deb
but I intend to go over what he said about that topic with this new perspective in mind and see if anything looks different now. Little tidbits keep coming to mind.
"Now: the message of the Christ entity was, in religious terms “You are all children of God—the ‘sinner’ as well as the saint.” Indeed, according to the original Christ thesis, while a man could sin, no man was identified as a sinner. He was not identified with his failures or limitations, but instead with his potential.

The Christ entity knew the vitality, power, and strength of myths. That vitality allows for different readings, of course, and through man’s changing development he reads his myths differently, yet they serve as containers for intuitional knowledge.

Christ’s thesis was inserted into a Jewish tradition dealing deeply with guilt, and the new thesis was meant to temper that tradition, and to spread beyond it. Instead, while carrying the belief in man’s potential, Christianity smothered the thesis beneath a slag heap of old guilt. Guilt can be used to manipulate people, of course, and it is a fine tool in the hands of government, religion, science, or any large organization that wants to retain its power.

Christ dealt with myths, once again—potent ones that stood for inner realities. Christ clothed those realities in colorful stories geared to people’s understanding. I am using the name here, Christ, as one person for the sake of discussion, for that entity touched many lives, each leaping into a kind of super-reality as it joyfully played its part in the religious drama."

—TPS4 Deleted Session January 9, 1978

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: chasman
Seth was more advanced than Jesus.
Seth taught about and described love stuff.
a loving creative benevolent life energy force. all that is.
he did not talk about being God fearing.
he talked about love.
he did not talk about the threat of hell, and eternal damnation, and the devil if you did not believe in God and follow the commandments.

Thanks for chiming in, I'm with you as far as avoiding quoting the bible. And this too is just my personal feeling, since I'm certainly no biblical scholar. Just the opposite actually.

I agree that Seth is more advanced than the character we understand to be Jesus from the New Testament, but my feeling is that everything the NT says about him has been completely fabricated to fit various religious agendas over the millennia. Words attributed to having been said by him were not even written down until decades(?) after his 'death.' Seth's teachings feel more entity-level to me, beyond the scope of one individual consciousness. Wise and benevolent with knowledge way beyond this plane of existence.

There may have been a man Jesus, I have no reason to doubt that, he had new ideas and was more loving in his teachings about ATI than what the Old-T Rabbis were maintaining, but any truth about the man has been dressed up and remade and disguised. Or as Seth said about his own teachings, the teachings of Speakers over the ages:

Rob: "I was just wondering why a body of knowledge like this couldn't have accumulated over the centuries, slowly."

Seth: "It has. But it has been taken into various doctrines and religions that have grown up about it until it is almost unrecognizable. Bits of it appear here and there, scattered, distorted and misleading. It comes naked and everyone must put clothing on it, which usually ends up as either nonsense or armored dogma."

The Early Sessions, Book 1, Session 34

An interesting twist to the Jesus story came through Facebook today. I'll add it in a spoiler because it's long and no one may be interested in reading it. But basically, it adds Jesus stories from Indian, Japanese and Muslim folklore. There's actually a "Tomb of Christ" in Japan, supposedly recognized by Israel (whatever that means).

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2018, 08:33:15 AM by Deb »

Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
thank you very much for your reply Sena.
thank you for all you wrote Deb.
I love reading everything you write.
here are a couple more thoughts of mine.
the Christian Jesus, God the Father stuff is riddled with hypocrisy.
God loves us, and is all forgiving.
but, he'll send you to hell forever, if you don't believe in him, and obey him.
that is sooooooooo bad.
the Seth description of the almighty higher power All That Is, is super excellent.
All That Is, is "all that".
do you get my play on words? "all that"

http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/all-that

"superior, as good as it gets"

edit:  more thoughts.
its the utter meanness that I find so awful beyond words to describe though.
what kind of a God is that mean. that unforgiving. that messed up, that he (or she or it) sends you to hell forever? I think its absolutely awful.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2018, 03:13:34 PM by chasman »

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: chasman
what kind of a God is that mean. that unforgiving. that messed up, that he (or she or it) sends you to hell forever?
It all boils down to money. The Catholic Church became powerful because it was able to attract a lot of money in donations. You could be saved from hell if you gave money to the Church. This was called an "indulgence".

" .....in the later Middle Ages growth of considerable abuses occurred. Greedy commissaries sought to extract the maximum amount of money for each indulgence. Professional "pardoners" - who were sent to collect alms for a specific project - practiced the unrestricted sale of indulgences. Many of these quaestores exceeded official Church doctrine, whether in avarice or ignorant zeal, and promised rewards like salvation from eternal damnation in return for money."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence

Offline chasman

  • ***
  • Posts: 101
wow. thank you very much Sena.
just amazing.

 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.
Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
The opposite of black:
Twelve divided by two (word):