Christians loving their genocidal God is like Jews adoring Hitler, and just as foolish.

Greatest I am

Greatest I am

Active Member
Christians loving their genocidal God is like Jews adoring Hitler, and just as foolish.

As above, so below.

Above.
God condemned Christians to hell and extinction.

Below.
Hitler condemned the Jews to extinction.

Expected result.
The same expected results if both plans are successful. Except that God gets the bonus of the smell of burning human flesh. Um, Um, Good. Hitler was not so inclined.

=========================================

The Jews know not to call evil good. They would not bend the knee to Hitler.

Christians and most of the other Abrahamic faiths, bend the knee to the God who used genocide on man and killed when the moral thing to do was to cure. Christians and Muslims thus call evil good.

I think this all began when the Christian and Muslim version of Eden were called a fall. This is the reversed of the Jewish version and is wrong. Christians and Muslims should have usurped the moral of the story when they usurped and altered the Jewish myths. Reading this myth literally has been quite harmful.

Remember the Dark Ages and the Inquisitions.

If, as above so below is to be the dream of religion, and it is as we are to match laws with heaven, then the near perfect analogy above of as above so below must be brought into synch.

If you are a Christian or Muslim, please justify why you bend the knee to a God that does not deserve that title. A God who would blame his own creation for his errors in creating.

The claim that your God is good does not hold water in either the esoteric world, or in this one. Not in the literal world or the fantasy world of the Gods. Genocide is evil everywhere.

I know that you likely inherited your God and did not choose him for yourself. You can do better. You can find a God who owns up to his errors and repents to his victims, if he was man enough, instead of blaming others for his errors.

I think it time for believers to reject the genocidal God and stop wishing for the tyranny above in heaven, --- while trying to live in a democracy here below.

Bring democracy to heaven by telling your tyrannical God where to go.

God may have begun as foolish, --- Hebrews 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; --- but God is almost ready to obey his betters. Mankind.

Will Christianity revive itself morally by returning to a more Jewish view? After all, the entire Bible was written by Jews and their take is more intelligent and moral.

If Jews are bright enough to reject the God who would annihilate them, why are Christians not following that good example and instead lovingly bend the knee to a proven tyrant, --- while at the same time promoting a less tyrannical life here on earth?

To believe is good but to believe in a condemning genocidal God is foolish. Do you agree?

Regards
DL
 
MARVEL0US

MARVEL0US

Member
I agree we must remember the inquisition and the dark ages.

As above, so below.
The laws in heaven are actually the laws in the heavens. The stars mate. What they are doing up there in their travels throughout space, affect the mini solar systems in our bodies down here.

And I don't know if the Christians or Jews are hip2 "as above so below". Never heard that in church.

How sure are you the entire bible was written by the Jews and not the Romans? The tone of the new testament does not match those found in jewish texts of the same era.

In the esoteric world God is indeed good. That is ALL that is good.
 
Greatest I am

Greatest I am

Active Member
MARVEL0US said:
I agree we must remember the inquisition and the dark ages.

As above, so below.
The laws in heaven are actually the laws in the heavens. The stars mate. What they are doing up there in their travels throughout space, affect the mini solar systems in our bodies down here.

And I don't know if the Christians or Jews are hip2 "as above so below". Never heard that in church.

How sure are you the entire bible was written by the Jews and not the Romans? The tone of the new testament does not match those found in jewish texts of the same era.

In the esoteric world God is indeed good. That is ALL that is good.
Click to expand...

The clip above shows partly how I think. I think Rome created the Jesus that most believe in. That is why the messiah went from a freedom fighter to a Roman ass kissing pacifist.

As to as above so below, churches do not use that term but use --- on earth as it is in heaven in their Lords Prayer.

You have to wonder if Christians even think about what they are saying when they say it because Satan is supposed to be the tempter meanwhile they ask God not to lead them into temptation. Strange.

Regards
DL
 
MARVEL0US

MARVEL0US

Member
Glad2 see you brought up Atwill as a source. I am on that same train of thought.
I never thought of the "lead us not in2 temptation" line in that light, and it is profounding. But hey, they memorize ritual2 be saved. I find most are not capable of debate (I try. Love Jehova witness visitors.. Plus you 'Greatest' ask deep thought provoking questions) because they don't study or learn more than what's written in the book. Because when you look elsewhere, new thoughts come pouring in. And the masses are kept from original thought.

"Instantly something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he regained his sight." Acts 9:18

Looking forward2 Gnostic Mystery school lesson #2.
 
R

reasonevangelist

Well-Known Member
Greatest I am said:

The clip above shows partly how I think. I think Rome created the Jesus that most believe in. That is why the messiah went from a freedom fighter to a Roman ass kissing pacifist.

As to as above so below, churches do not use that term but use --- on earth as it is in heaven in their Lords Prayer.

You have to wonder if Christians even think about what they are saying when they say it because Satan is supposed to be the tempter meanwhile they ask God not to lead them into temptation. Strange.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
^^ Didn't watch the video, liked for the comment; especially the bold parts. I've been headed in that direction for quite a while, but i don't spend much time on it. What lead me down that path (ironically or not) was when, a while back, i came across what i will call "the historical significance of disgracing the deceased." It was a pretty random encounter during an aimless web-surf session (stacked upon all the prior contemplation through the years). They used to strike names from stone tablets and scratch faces off coins. When they couldn't entirely remove someone from the historical record, they would sometimes intentionally mis-tell the person's story, making them out to be very unappealing. It's entirely possible that Jesus knew that sacrificing himself willingly, submitting to the Romans' sinister intentions, might be the only way to save his friends... and so he tried to sort of hint to them, what he would do, and why... but he couldn't really tell them directly, without compromising their plausible deniability, and thus endangering them (which would defeat the purpose of trying to use his own submission to death, to spare them), so he sort of encrypted everything in metaphors, so that maybe later, after some time and the bulk of the danger had passed, his true intentions and message would "sink in" or "hit them," or "be revealed," or they would "know the way through him," and they'd figure out what really happened, and go on to do whatever they felt should be done with such knowledge. I don't think it quite worked out as intended, partly because of Rome's posthumous disgrace tactics, and in this case, they took it further than just making up a few rumors. They used him as a sort of trojan horse, to infiltrate the minds of not just his followers, but the masses they knew would be interested in opposing Rome (it's almost as if Rome was employing advanced war tactics from Lao Tzu)... so they basically tricked them all into pacifism, and perhaps intentionally sponsored creation of a "christianity," in order to hack the minds of their potential enemies. I think he wanted to teach people how to think for themselves, but the Romans turned that into "follow me to salvation," which created followers, not thinkers and leaders. Something like that, anyway. I don't think anyone is telling the real story, the way it really happened... and if i'm estimating correctly, Especially not anything called a "christian bible." Maybe it makes so little sense intentionally? Maybe it is meant to keep people confused, preoccupied, passive and subservient; something the Romans would want, but probably not what Jesus would have wanted. But he probably knew that a direct confrontation was a bad idea. He also was betrayed, so maybe there was a bit of that "screw you guys, i'm going home." (lol) Maybe he was tired of all the bullshit, and saw an opportunity to spare the people he cared about, without having to persist among the problems. "Man this sucks... but i can use my death to save my friends... Close enough."

I watched something called "Ring of Power" (allegedly heavily debunked; perhaps such allegations stem from people who have excess Faith) many years ago, and it made me realize a lot of things, and think in many unorthodox directions; a real eye-opener, even if it's not all "correct." It at least raises the valid issue that we're not really as sure about what all happened back then, as some people like to insist.
 
Greatest I am

Greatest I am

Active Member
MARVEL0US said:
Glad2 see you brought up Atwill as a source. I am on that same train of thought.
I never thought of the "lead us not in2 temptation" line in that light, and it is profounding. But hey, they memorize ritual2 be saved. I find most are not capable of debate (I try. Love Jehova witness visitors.. Plus you 'Greatest' ask deep thought provoking questions) because they don't study or learn more than what's written in the book. Because when you look elsewhere, new thoughts come pouring in. And the masses are kept from original thought.

"Instantly something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he regained his sight." Acts 9:18

Looking forward2 Gnostic Mystery school lesson #2.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

I don't know if # 2 will ever be written in that tone. # 1 was either too deep or 2 good as it flopped in terms of having Christians respond.

It is getting harder to phrase something in a way that will incite Christians to put their foot into their mouths. I have had to do it in a sneaky way of late and they tend not to like that.

I would rather go strait up but Christians are too sneaky so I fight fire with fire.

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am

Greatest I am

Active Member
reasonevangelist said:
^^ Didn't watch the video, liked for the comment; especially the bold parts. I've been headed in that direction for quite a while, but i don't spend much time on it. What lead me down that path (ironically or not) was when, a while back, i came across what i will call "the historical significance of disgracing the deceased." It was a pretty random encounter during an aimless web-surf session (stacked upon all the prior contemplation through the years). They used to strike names from stone tablets and scratch faces off coins. When they couldn't entirely remove someone from the historical record, they would sometimes intentionally mis-tell the person's story, making them out to be very unappealing. It's entirely possible that Jesus knew that sacrificing himself willingly, submitting to the Romans' sinister intentions, might be the only way to save his friends... and so he tried to sort of hint to them, what he would do, and why... but he couldn't really tell them directly, without compromising their plausible deniability, and thus endangering them (which would defeat the purpose of trying to use his own submission to death, to spare them), so he sort of encrypted everything in metaphors, so that maybe later, after some time and the bulk of the danger had passed, his true intentions and message would "sink in" or "hit them," or "be revealed," or they would "know the way through him," and they'd figure out what really happened, and go on to do whatever they felt should be done with such knowledge. I don't think it quite worked out as intended, partly because of Rome's posthumous disgrace tactics, and in this case, they took it further than just making up a few rumors. They used him as a sort of trojan horse, to infiltrate the minds of not just his followers, but the masses they knew would be interested in opposing Rome (it's almost as if Rome was employing advanced war tactics from Lao Tzu)... so they basically tricked them all into pacifism, and perhaps intentionally sponsored creation of a "christianity," in order to hack the minds of their potential enemies. I think he wanted to teach people how to think for themselves, but the Romans turned that into "follow me to salvation," which created followers, not thinkers and leaders. Something like that, anyway. I don't think anyone is telling the real story, the way it really happened... and if i'm estimating correctly, Especially not anything called a "christian bible." Maybe it makes so little sense intentionally? Maybe it is meant to keep people confused, preoccupied, passive and subservient; something the Romans would want, but probably not what Jesus would have wanted. But he probably knew that a direct confrontation was a bad idea. He also was betrayed, so maybe there was a bit of that "screw you guys, i'm going home." (lol) Maybe he was tired of all the bullshit, and saw an opportunity to spare the people he cared about, without having to persist among the problems. "Man this sucks... but i can use my death to save my friends... Close enough."

I watched something called "Ring of Power" (allegedly heavily debunked; perhaps such allegations stem from people who have excess Faith) many years ago, and it made me realize a lot of things, and think in many unorthodox directions; a real eye-opener, even if it's not all "correct." It at least raises the valid issue that we're not really as sure about what all happened back then, as some people like to insist.
Click to expand...
Well thought out. You are definitely Gnostic Christian material especially with your view of Jesus.

" I think he wanted to teach people how to think for themselves, but the Romans turned that into "follow me to salvation," which created followers, not thinkers and leaders."

Please view these and opine if you like.

This thinking is the Gnostic Christian’s goal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesfXXw&feature=player_embedded

This method and mind set is how you become I am and brethren to Jesus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdSVl_HOo8Y

When you can name your God, I am, and mean yourself, then you will begin to know the only God you will ever find.

Let me also give you this for the history.

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am

Greatest I am

Active Member
dashcues said:
Greatest I Am.
Aren't you a christian?
Click to expand...
Hell no.

I am a Gnostic Christian. We and Christians are like water and oil. We have been ever since they killed off the ancient Gnostic Christians and burned our scriptures.

Have a bit of history.


Regards
DL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top