Jump to content

READ ME, AND YOU WILL BE LIKE GODS - KNOWING ALL THINGS GOOD AND EVIL


PH196
 Share

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

I agree there is no evidence of a Pagan Saviour dying for humanity's sins, I already agreed that in last post. 

 

He wasn't born at Christmas and Jesus was not his name.

 

Perhaps you could explain to me - why do Christians celebrate the date of their saviours birth on the 25th December?

 

Out of all the 365 days of the year why did they pick that one?

 

 

Ask the Roman Church..... nothing to do with me.

 

I'm a Christian...... I still love Christmas though....

 

I would distrust anyone who didn't.

 

What's not to like about holidays and enjoying yourself.... I'm sure Jesus would love it.

 

 

Jesus: What's all this? Why are you giving each other gifts and getting drunk on sherry?

 

Me: Because it's your birthday Jesus!

 

Jesus: I don't think so.... When I was born the shepherds were watching their flocks at

night.... Would be too cold for the sheep to be out in the Winter in Palestine. It can get kind of chilly, especially in December.

 

Me: Shut up and have a drink Jesus....let's play charades......  The Great Escape is on later.

 

Jesus: Oh great.... classic movie. I always root for the Germans.... just wish they'd won that war though.  

 

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pi3141 said:

 

I agree there is no evidence of a Pagan Saviour dying for humanity's sins, I already agreed that in last post. 

 

He wasn't born at Christmas and Jesus was not his name.

 

Perhaps you could explain to me - why do Christians celebrate the date of their saviours birth on the 25th December?

 

Out of all the 365 days of the year why did they pick that one?

 

Have you watched the film 'Zeitgeist', if I remember correctly there is a whole bunch of stuff surrounding that date detailed within this film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, bobb said:

 

Have you watched the film 'Zeitgeist', if I remember correctly there is a whole bunch of stuff surrounding that date detailed within this film.

 

Oh yes, I watched it, followed its sources, then followed the idea, reading books from 19th century, 18th century and 17th century all detailing these ideas and mostly scholarly work, as well as reading Occultist and Spiritual sources on the subject to.

 

I would recommend to anyone Zeitgeist as an introduction to these ideas, then many books I listed on my thread in Religion forum. Then I would recommend the 'Pharmacratic Inquisition' DVD which is available and a low quality version is still on youtube.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RobSS said:

It's not a very good reply... a bit rushed, but I have to pop out... back later and will have more time.

 

Thats fine, you get the gist. I see you know the story.

 

I just think its good to spread a little light about, especially here on the General forum which probably gets a few more views than the Religion forum. So I wanted you to kinda spell it out for anyone reading along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm sorry but Zeitgeist is not a scholarly work. It is mostly bullshit. There are no authentic sources which state for instance that Horus was born of a virgin and was sacrificed and rose from the dead after three days.....

 

Almost everything cited by Zeitgeist is pure invention from one particular 18th Century source and when you try to find 1st hand corroboration it soon becomes apparent that the 18th Century author (whose name escapes me for the present) is playing on people's ignorance and certitude at that time that no-one would be able to check the original texts because he offers no evidence or genuine footnotes to show where he got his claims.

 

Zeitgeist is bullshit..... If you don't know that then you don't know the subject.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

I'm sorry but Zeitgeist is not a scholarly work. It is mostly bullshit. There are no authentic sources which state for instance that Horus was born of a virgin and was sacrificed and rose from the dead after three days.....

 

Almost everything cited by Zeitgeist is pure invention from one particular 19th Century source and when you try to find 1st hand corroboration it soon becomes apparent that the 19th Century author (whose name escapes me for the present) is playing on people's ignorance and certitude at that time that no-one would be able to check the original texts. They can now and I have. Zeitgeist is bullshit.....

 

 

Zeitgeist isn't scholarly no I agree, but the theory in scholarly terms from what I can find dates back to 17th Century and Charles-Francois Dupuis and his, largely scholarly work although outside his field, called 'The Origin Of All Religious Worship' in which he condenses 5 volumes of work on the subject into the book.

 

From there at various points we have work at the scholarly level such as John Allegro's book on the origin of Christianity being largely based on Mushroom and Fertility cults. Then there is work from ex-clergy with the same accusation that again is scholarly work throughout the centuries. Even Manly P Hall had academic connections and qualifications so there is plenty of scholarly work on the subject.

 

Zeitgeist is a very basic introduction to it but it is still a good introduction. Scratch the surface behind it and there's much more.

Edited by pi3141
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

 

I'm sorry but Zeitgeist is not a scholarly work. It is mostly bullshit. There are no authentic sources which state for instance that Horus was born of a virgin and was sacrificed and rose from the dead after three days.....

 

Almost everything cited by Zeitgeist is pure invention from one particular 18th Century source and when you try to find 1st hand corroboration it soon becomes apparent that the 18th Century author (whose name escapes me for the present) is playing on people's ignorance and certitude at that time that no-one would be able to check the original texts because he offers no evidence or genuine footnotes to show where he got his claims.

 

Zeitgeist is bullshit..... If you don't know that then you don't know the subject.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, it's damage-control....by mr.bigshot---Sam Gold("...no one lives, and this pleases Gold...").

Sammie's game is just about up.

Edited by novymir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

@Truthspoon  Anyway let me keep up I'm trying to think of something witty to your last post!!

 

I'd prefer it if you could demonstrate that you were on the side of truth....

 

You seem to be too keen to follow error........and you don't seem to notice.

 

If you scratch the surface there's nothing beneath. The classic example is '16 Crucified Saviours by Kersey Graves' cited by Zeitgeist.

 

None of his claims are true. They may have tricked people in the 19th Century when people couldn't check whether Krishna had been crucified... but now it is easy to verify that he was not... for instance.

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

I'd prefer it if you could demonstrate that you were on the side of truth....

 

You seem to be too keen to follow error........and you don't seem to notice.

 

RE James George Frazer he was 18th Century a quick Google shows, yet Dupuis was 17th Century.

 

Anyway, didn't some early church fathers also make the accusation that Christianity was adopting Pagan influences? 

 

What do you disagree with? where is my error? 

 

I wish you would post your disagreement on my thread in the Religion forum, we can only get to the truth if we discuss it.

 

In addition of course I would site Martin Luther King and his paper - 'The Pagan Influence on Christianity' which he wrote at Stamford University and got good marks for. There's lots of scholarly work on the idea and it even goes back through the centuries to early church fathers and other Christian sects I am sure.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

 

I'd prefer it if you could demonstrate that you were on the side of truth....

 

You seem to be too keen to follow error........and you don't seem to notice.

 

If you scratch the surface there's nothing beneath. The classic example is '16 Crucified Saviours by Kersey Graves' cited by Zeitgeist.

 

None of his claims are true. They may have tricked people in the 19th Century when people couldn't check whether Krishna had been crucified... but now it is easy to verify that he was not... for instance.

 

 

yes.

to displease Gold is to be ALIVE.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

RE James George Frazer he was 18th Century a quick Google shows, yet Dupuis was 17th Century.

 

 

 

No dear. James George Frazer's Golden Bough was written in the late 19th Century.

 

I'm sorry Pi... but you seem to be perpetually in error... You just don't know how to 'sense' the truth.......of course, there are more logical approaches..... maybe a combination of all of them.... but you seem to lack in all departments....

 

I don''t know what to suggest...... You seem to be stuck in a half-way house.

 

You're neither a scholar, nor a historian, nor a man of faith.


Therefore you are easily led by charlatans into believing you know something that historians and men of faith do not.

 

I suggest you go back to the drawing board and try to genuinely educate yourself from first principles..... This means finding a subject you want to learn to understand and starting with the first sources..... and taking it from there.

 

Instead of trying to find a short-cut...... and thinking you can cheat by reading and believing the works of Freemasonic authors with vested interests in perverting the truth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

 

From there at various points we have work at the scholarly level such as John Allegro's book on the origin of Christianity being largely based on Mushroom and Fertility cults.  

 

Absolutely one of the stupidest things I have ever heard.... where is the evidence? 

 

If you genuinely believe that then explain the thesis and reasoning to me please.

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

No dear. James George Frazer's Golden Bough was written in the late 19th Century.

 

Oh ok, I quickly Google, well then he wasn't the beginning of the idea, the beginning of the idea that Christianity is based on Paganism comes from Dupuis in the 17th Century. It would then of gone on and be refined to include the Pagan Christ theory. 

 

But as I said before it actually stretches back to some early Church fathers and even the Council of Nicea where some church elders objected to the inclusion of certain practices and rituals in Christianity which they saw as Pagan origin. So Constantine had them removed and re-voted with compliant Bishops.

 

Then there's the famous letter of one Bishop or officiary to another to say they had profited immensely off the Jesus fiction or myth. Famous letter, I'm sure you've come across it. So there's church precedent for the 'Christ Myth Theory' and I don't wholly subscribe to the idea that Christ was a total fiction. Surely you realize that, and hopefully you'll know that I think Christs teachings (or the one we call Christ) are real spiritual truths and there is some light in the Bible.

 

I know your a Christian Truthspoon but your not a traditional Christian who doesn't have a clue, your no fun and you seem to agree with some of what I say like there are Pagan influences in Christianity (Correct me if I'm wrong and you don't think that) so I am interested to hear what you disagree with, either here or on my Religion thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

 

Absolutely one of the stupidest things I have ever heard.... where is the evidence? 

 

If you genuinely believe that then explain the thesis and reasoning to me please.

 

Can't believe you haven't come across it --

 

Quote

The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross - John Allegro 

Link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sacred_Mushroom_and_the_Cross

 

I have a copy. It was slated at publication, his career ruined, but over the years since then, several scholars have reviewed it and come out and said its not so outlandish as they decried in the early days when it was first published, and the major critic of the book has since admitted he didn't actually read it before condemning it, it just sounded outlandish and the church were vocal against it so he went along with it and condemned it to. 

 

The publishers themselves have since renounced the work and distanced themselves from it. But academia has changed its stance towards it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

Oh ok, I quickly Google, well then he wasn't the beginning of the idea, the beginning of the idea that Christianity is based on Paganism comes from Dupuis in the 17th Century. It would then of gone on and be refined to include the Pagan Christ theory. 

 

But as I said before it actually stretches back to some early Church fathers and even the Council of Nicea where some church elders objected to the inclusion of certain practices and rituals in Christianity which they saw as Pagan origin. So Constantine had them removed and re-voted with compliant Bishops.

 

Then there's the famous letter of one Bishop or officiary to another to say they had profited immensely off the Jesus fiction or myth. Famous letter, I'm sure you've come across it. So there's church precedent for the 'Christ Myth Theory' and I don't wholly subscribe to the idea that Christ was a total fiction. Surely you realize that, and hopefully you'll know that I think Christs teachings (or the one we call Christ) are real spiritual truths and there is some light in the Bible.

 

I know your a Christian Truthspoon but your not a traditional Christian who doesn't have a clue, your no fun and you seem to agree with some of what I say like there are Pagan influences in Christianity (Correct me if I'm wrong and you don't think that) so I am interested to hear what you disagree with, either here or on my Religion thread.

 

Dupuis was an 18th century writer.

 

I'm not just a Christian.

 

I'm also a writer, a historian.... but above all a human being.

 

If anything I discovered from history disproved Jesus' existence then naturally I would examine it to find the truth.

 

I have done so and found there is simply nothing but 18th century Freemasonic fraud. 

 

So who is this Bishop of yours who said 'we have profited by the myth of Christ'?

 

Do you know his name? Did he really exist or has he just been invented like so much else to perpetuate Freemasonic deception?

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

Can't believe you haven't come across it --

 

 

I have a copy. It was slated at publication, his career ruined, but over the years since then, several scholars have reviewed it and come out and said its not so outlandish as they decried in the early days when it was first published, and the major critic of the book has since admitted he didn't actually read it before condemning it, it just sounded outlandish and the church were vocal against it so he went along with it and condemned it to. 

 

The publishers themselves have since renounced the work and distanced themselves from it. But academia has changed its stance towards it.

 

 

 

 

Just outline the thesis please and explain the reasoning behind it.

 

I have heard of it but for me it is obvious nonsense. I do not waste my time with nonsense. There is too much interesting stuff to investigate.

 

So, let me know why Jesus is a mushroom please....

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

 

Then there's the famous letter of one Bishop or officiary to another to say they had profited immensely off the Jesus fiction or myth. Famous letter, I'm sure you've come across it. So there's church precedent for the 'Christ Myth Theory' and I don't wholly subscribe to the idea that Christ was a total fiction. Surely you realize that, and hopefully you'll know that I think Christs teachings (or the one we call Christ) are real spiritual truths and there is some light in the Bible.

 

Let me help you:

https://www.catholic.com/qa/did-pope-leo-x-say-it-has-served-us-well-this-myth-of-christ

 

Question:

Non-Catholics have told me that Pope Leo X said, "It has served us well, this myth of Christ." Is this true?

Answer:

Although the quote is commonly attributed without source documentation to Pope Leo X, it is believed to have originated in a satirical piece titled “The Pageant of the Popes” by a Protestant controversialist named John Bale (1495–1563). Bale wrote: “For on a time when a Cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuous answer saying: ‘All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie.’”

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

 

I know your a Christian Truthspoon but your not a traditional Christian who doesn't have a clue, your no fun and you seem to agree with some of what I say like there are Pagan influences in Christianity (Correct me if I'm wrong and you don't think that) so I am interested to hear what you disagree with, either here or on my Religion thread.

 

The truth is more fun and more exciting than you could ever believe my friend.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

Just outline the thesis please and explain the reasoning behind it.

 

I have heard of it but for me it is obvious nonsense. I do not waste my time with nonsense. There is too much interesting stuff to investigate.

 

So, let me know why Jesus is a mushroom please....

 

I'd love to quote but I can't, I approached the publishers and I only got permission to quote a few paragraphs and that would not be enough to tell the story.

 

The thesis goes like this, there is evidence of 'word play' in the Bible and etymology on these words tracing them  back to the Sumerian root shows that encoded into the names in Christian Bible is word play on Magic Mushrooms and Fertility cults.

 

One example is the verse, 'Peter on this rock i will build my church' well Peter 'PETRA' is similar to Rock 'PETROS' wich signifies word play in action and both words are similar to the word for Mushroom 'PITRA'

 

As I say, when it came out it was slated, a leading Mycologist condemned the work as did many other scholars and the church. But since then the Mycologist has admitted to not reading the book and other scholars have since reviewed the work and have come out in support of it. So who should I believe? The hype created by a man who knew nothing about it and never read it or the scholars who have reviewed it and are supportive of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

 

Let me help you:

https://www.catholic.com/qa/did-pope-leo-x-say-it-has-served-us-well-this-myth-of-christ

 

Question:

Non-Catholics have told me that Pope Leo X said, "It has served us well, this myth of Christ." Is this true?

Answer:

Although the quote is commonly attributed without source documentation to Pope Leo X, it is believed to have originated in a satirical piece titled “The Pageant of the Popes” by a Protestant controversialist named John Bale (1495–1563). Bale wrote: “For on a time when a Cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuous answer saying: ‘All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie.’”

 

 

 

Why thank you - thats one crossed off the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pi3141 said:

 

I'd love to quote but I can't, I approached the publishers and I only got permission to quote a few paragraphs and that would not be enough to tell the story.

 

The thesis goes like this, there is evidence of 'word play' in the Bible and etymology on these words tracing them  back to the Sumerian root shows that encoded into the names in Christian Bible is word play on Magic Mushrooms and Fertility cults.

 

One example is the verse, 'Peter on this rock i will build my church' well Peter 'PETRA' is similar to Rock 'PETROS' wich signifies word play in action and both words are similar to the word for Mushroom 'PITRA'

 

 

It's nonsense. Cross it off your list and stop wasting your time.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, pi3141 said:

 

I agree! 😀

 

(so spill it!!)

 

It doesn't quite work like that..... 

 

There are things I can tell you in a sentence that are amazing..... but to tell you about everything I know in a pithy couple of sentences wouldn't be doing justice. That's why I write books.

 

But perhaps one of the most interesting things that I would consider worthy of your time and attention is the nature of light.... and that you should try to connect and 'build a relationship' with LIGHT and the Sun.

 

You will find God is in the light and Light is our passport out of this dimension.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...