Jump to content

Christianity Represents Ancient Egyptian Knoweldge


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

Koran

 

I think the Quran may be in total agreement with the Bible actually, however different Quran translations have different meanings.  I haven't been able to find side by side English alternative translations of the Quran, however on the subject of the Crucifixion Wikipedia has two translations of the event in the Quran:

 

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-

— Qur'an, surah 4 (An-Nisa) ayat 157–158[3]

 

And for their saying, “We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of God.” In fact, they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them as if they did. Indeed, those who differ about him are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it, except the following of assumptions. Certainly, they did not kill him. Rather, God raised him up to Himself. God is Mighty and Wise.

- Quran 4:157-158

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_Jesus'_death

 

 

 

In the 2nd translation it simply said that they (the Jews) thought they killed Him and were happy to boast about it, but in fact they did not kill him because God raised him up ... in other words he was resurrected.  This is in complete agreement with the Bible.

In the 1st translation ... it seems to suggest that an imposter may have been placed on the cross - however if that was so why would God have raised him up to Heaven?  So only the 2nd translation makes sense.

 

It says in both translations that they did not crucify him.  Perhaps you think this means that they did not place him on a cross.
However looking in the dictionary the 1st meaning for the verb crucify is "to put to death by nailing or binding the hands and feet to a cross."

And so crucify means putting to the death ... as the author in the Quran says they did not put him to death then they did not crucify him.

That doesn't mean that he was not placed on the cross.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2020 at 7:25 AM, rideforever said:

 

The interesting thing is that education is quite difficult and requires a great deal, because the teacher imparts a kind of spirit or "light" to the student ... it is something like a transmission, a guild or a lineage.  That is real teaching.

And not just anybody can teach like that.

So society should in many ways act like a series of guilds or lineages in all spheres of human existence from the trades to politics and education.

There is no free way of teaching ... you have to have a lineage of teachers who aim higher, there is no mass production.  With mass production of staff following guidelines and rules ... the most important thing is never transmitted, it is "empty calories", empty education.

It is also much easier to educate the trades in this way as they are mostly physical/emotional.  But the higher knowledges like politics requires unusual people who can use their minds but in a true way that is related to reality.  Often the higher knowledges end up in the domain of mind-heavy people and divorced from reality (as we all know by now).

The higher knowledges must be like flowers on the solid body of the underlying basic physical/emotional knowledge.

 

 

 

All I can say is, I would not trade my time in the Navy learning particle physics and nuclear power, nor my time in college learning electrical engineering, computer science, astrophysics and anthropology for anything.   It's not just about words written in books, it's about how forcing yourself to learn all of these new things builds your brain in ways sitting cross-legged in an ashram never will.  To be a balanced person, I believe we need both.  We need the academic learning side and the spiritual side because that is who we are and how we want to be.  There's a very few type of people who do not need schooling, because they're such self-motivators that they have the discipline to learn all of that on their own, but most people, including myself are not like that, we need a teacher and someone to push us.   It's not unlike using your muscles (or your brain) beyond normal which builds them, and how it's so much easier when you have someone there pushing you and motivating you.

 

I remember way back from 1st grade through college the teachers who were really great and left a positive mark on me, and I remember the ones who were the pits.  I have always chosen to build on what the great ones left in me, and to overcome what the bad ones left in me.

 

Think about all of the people of the world who have stopped or given up in life learning anything new, either academic or spiritual, and look at how these people live their lives.  It's not a good place to be in, and yet this is where most people are.

 

There's also this prevailing excuse going around that college is bad because it's all indoctrination, so no one needs college.  That's not really true as a blanket statement, and believing that is throwing the baby out with the bath water.   The trick is being able to sit there in class and disseminate the good from the bad.  Personally, because I was in Engineering, I had very few classes that I thought there was any left wing bullshit being spewed out.   It's the people in Arts & Science taking classes in anything related to Sociology or Environmental Science that are getting propaganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rideforever said:

 

I think the Quran may be in total agreement with the Bible actually, however different Quran translations have different meanings.  I haven't been able to find side by side English alternative translations of the Quran, however on the subject of the Crucifixion Wikipedia has two translations of the event in the Quran:

 

It says in both translations that they did not crucify him.  Perhaps you think this means that they did not place him on a cross.
However looking in the dictionary the 1st meaning for the verb crucify is "to put to death by nailing or binding the hands and feet to a cross."

And so crucify means putting to the death ... as the author in the Quran says they did not put him to death then they did not crucify him.

That doesn't mean that he was not placed on the cross.

 

I'm not sure I follow what your trying to say in that post. I think I do, but I don't want to put words in your mouth so I'll ask, what are you trying to say?

 

Is it that because he didn't die he wasn't technically crucified?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pi3141 said:

Is it that because he didn't die he wasn't technically crucified?

 

Yes the Quran says that Jesus did not die but was resurrected by God.  "God raised him up to Himself".

So the Romans executed many people by crucifixion they hammered them to a cross and they died, that is crucifixion.

But Jesus did not die, he was resurrected.

So the Quran is saying that Jesus died in the flesh and was resurrected, the Jews were dancing around bragging  they killed him but in fact Jesus was resurrected.

 

Yes he was not "technically" crucified, because crucifixion is a means of execution ... it's not the cross but the dying that is important.  But Jesus did not die.

In the dictionary the first meaning for crucify is to die ... the 2nd is to go through a tough trial of some sort.

So the Quran is using the first meaning.

 

Edited by rideforever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, rideforever said:

 

Yes the Quran says that Jesus did not die but was resurrected by God.  "God raised him up to Himself".

So the Romans executed many people by crucifixion they hammered them to a cross and they died, that is crucifixion.

But Jesus did not die, he was resurrected.

So the Quran is saying that Jesus died in the flesh and was resurrected, the Jews were dancing around bragging  they killed him but in fact Jesus was resurrected.

 

Yes he was not "technically" crucified, because crucifixion is a means of execution ... it's not the cross but the dying that is important.  But Jesus did not die.

In the dictionary the first meaning for crucify is to die ... the 2nd is to go through a tough trial of some sort.

So the Quran is using the first meaning.

 

 

Ok, thats what I thought you were saying. Your using word gymnastics to justify your position.


Both those verses clearly state 'they did not crucify him' which is perfectly clear in its message - Jesus was not the one put up on the cross. All the Muslims I have spoken with about this are clear, Jesus was not put on the cross, rather someone who looked like him went up. The man that was nailed to the cross died. Some have speculated that man my have been Judas because Judas looked like Jesus.

 

According to the Bible - Jesus died for our sins, he died on the cross to wash away our sin. The message is not the same if he didn't die. If he didn't die there could not have been a miraculous resurrection.

.

If he didn't die on the cross then not only are you going down the 'Holy Blood Holy Grail' line of thought that it was a staged event, which is in keeping with the Islamic view (nothing wrong with that), but also you appear to be denying what Christians believe - that he died on the cross for our sins. This belief is central to Christianity.

 

I think both those quotes are clear, according to the Muslim's, Jesus was not nailed to the cross and he did not die on the cross.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

Your using word gymnastics to justify your position.

 

No I don't think so.
The word crucify really means to put to death.
And the Quran says he was not put to death, but was resurrected to God ... well clearly he died in the body by some means ...according to the Quran, because it says he was raised to God therefore Jesus did die in the body.  He may have died on a  cross, it doesn't say exactly.

The idea that Jesus "died for our sins" ... I have many questions about.   I do not believe that therefore everyone is just great.  No I don't think that's the case.  Jesus himself said that most people enter destruction.  But one interpretation could be that Jesus courage lead to the path of Christianity and so if you follow Christianity you have him to thank.  Another interpretation is that emotional blackmail is required because people understand nothing else.

 

Edited by rideforever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 6/19/2020 at 6:29 PM, rideforever said:

 

Fk me, it has zero to do with the very fashionable "Buddhism".

Buddhism's whole philosophy is that you don't exist.

And Buddhism is in extreme degeneration as the degenerates of the West try to turn it into a new church.

 

> All Christ is telling you is that you do exist, there is almost zero relationship with Buddhism.

Taoism is close to Christianity even though it is Chinese.

 

But perhaps as for the origins it might be worth looking at Persia which has an ancient religion, or possibly pre-ancient Egyptian or Ethipoian material but I don't know it.  For instance the Ankh symbol 3000BC.

 

I think its more their philosophy that you dont exist as a seperate being which is unchangeable. This is more directed at the personality, which changes and does not survive, rather than the inner being

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2020 at 11:16 AM, pi3141 said:

 

Ok, thats what I thought you were saying. Your using word gymnastics to justify your position.


Both those verses clearly state 'they did not crucify him' which is perfectly clear in its message - Jesus was not the one put up on the cross. All the Muslims I have spoken with about this are clear, Jesus was not put on the cross, rather someone who looked like him went up. The man that was nailed to the cross died. Some have speculated that man my have been Judas because Judas looked like Jesus.

 

According to the Bible - Jesus died for our sins, he died on the cross to wash away our sin. The message is not the same if he didn't die. If he didn't die there could not have been a miraculous resurrection.

.

If he didn't die on the cross then not only are you going down the 'Holy Blood Holy Grail' line of thought that it was a staged event, which is in keeping with the Islamic view (nothing wrong with that), but also you appear to be denying what Christians believe - that he died on the cross for our sins. This belief is central to Christianity.

 

I think both those quotes are clear, according to the Muslim's, Jesus was not nailed to the cross and he did not die on the cross.

In the original gospel of John the book ended when the tomb was found open. It was only at a later date was the xtra parts about resurrection, ect were added. Its Paul who pushed Jesus died for our sins. Jesus said his mission was the redemption of Israel, to turn sinners back to God. Paul was writing the manual on the new Roman religion that they could export to subtly control other countries when military power failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MarpatV2 said:

In the original gospel of John the book ended when the tomb was found open. It was only at a later date was the xtra parts about resurrection, ect were added. Its Paul who pushed Jesus died for our sins. Jesus said his mission was the redemption of Israel, to turn sinners back to God. Paul was writing the manual on the new Roman religion that they could export to subtly control other countries when military power failed.

 

Yes agreed. The resurrection was added later. I think I'm correct in saying the resurrection doesn't appear in the Greek bible. Sure I've seen that somewhere.

 

And yes it certainly seems like the religion was designed to subdue people. Gets a bit into the Jewish conspiracy theory that Christianity was designed by the Jews to defeat the Romans who obviously was a greater milatary force.

I'm not sure about that although Jesus or the man we call Jesus was supposedly a Jewish Rabbi so that kind of makes it true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2020 at 6:26 PM, pi3141 said:

 

Yes the video I linked said Jesus went to India and learnt Buddhism.

 

Then there's the tomb in Kashmir said to be Jesus, but there's a problem with that. The tomb depicts a man with crucifixion wounds and the Muslims claim it is the tomb of Jesus. However in the Koran it says Jesus was not crucified and instead a 'likeness' was put up instead of him. Therefore if Jesus did not go up on the cross then he would not have crucifixion wounds, hence either the Koran is wrong or the man buried in Kashmir said to be Jesus is not. They can't have it both ways, there are questions that need answering.

 

Listen, the truth is most of what the Muslims believe all comes second hand from the Jews......

 

In fact Islam was created by Jews to destroy Christianity.......and in reward Mohammed expected to be accepted as the Jewish Messiah.....but the Jews of Medina rebelled and would not recognise him....so he turned against the Jews....

 

The bloodline of Mohammed is the Beni Hashem, which is a Jewish Arab bloodline and is the same bloodline which is allowed to rule countries like Morocco and Jordan under control of a Jewish Muslim bloodline.

 

I've looked into it because once upon a time I didn't know any better. Then I did the research and learned the full truth about Islam and why it was created and who created it.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pi3141 said:

 

Yes agreed. The resurrection was added later. I think I'm correct in saying the resurrection doesn't appear in the Greek bible. Sure I've seen that somewhere.

 

And yes it certainly seems like the religion was designed to subdue people. Gets a bit into the Jewish conspiracy theory that Christianity was designed by the Jews to defeat the Romans who obviously was a greater milatary force.

I'm not sure about that although Jesus or the man we call Jesus was supposedly a Jewish Rabbi so that kind of makes it true.

He could well have existed. Some think he had an actual claim to the throne, which would have been a cause for concern for the Romans because he could launch a large rebellion, which in itself could have been enough to kill him.

The bible seems to be written to shift all blame from the Romans to the jews, which is ideal if its church is centred in Rome. Also, there is no way Romans are just going to become jews. Christianity then fills the gap, it offers the same things as 'pagan' religions before it, has a veneration for the sun, etc. Its written as to give sole power to the church of Rome through Peter, who then control all access to 'paradise'. The messages of love and forgiveness would be ideal for a nation that has brutalised so many and is about to be on the receiving end. They can send missionaries out with a new religion that preaches all of the things Rome didnt offer and hope it softens people who would like revenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2020 at 8:12 PM, rideforever said:

 

Yes the Quran says that Jesus did not die but was resurrected by God.  "God raised him up to Himself".

So the Romans executed many people by crucifixion they hammered them to a cross and they died, that is crucifixion.

But Jesus did not die, he was resurrected.

So the Quran is saying that Jesus died in the flesh and was resurrected, the Jews were dancing around bragging  they killed him but in fact Jesus was resurrected.

 

Yes he was not "technically" crucified, because crucifixion is a means of execution ... it's not the cross but the dying that is important.  But Jesus did not die.

In the dictionary the first meaning for crucify is to die ... the 2nd is to go through a tough trial of some sort.

So the Quran is using the first meaning.

 

Are you forgetting that he was actually killed by a Roman shoving a spear into him? i think the jews bragging that they killed him is maybe your fantasy. Do you think all jews would have been happy or just certain ones? many would have been his followers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MarpatV2 said:

Are you forgetting that he was actually killed by a Roman shoving a spear into him? i think the jews bragging that they killed him is maybe your fantasy. Do you think all jews would have been happy or just certain ones? many would have been his followers.

 

I am on your side.
Reread the earlier posts on this subject ^
 

Edited by rideforever
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember you Marpat..... you're the Crowley-ite Middle-East Defence contractor. Spent your time in Iraq killing Arabs for Uncle Netanyahu.

 

Know your enemy people.

 

He is here among us.

 

Marpat has a long long history on the old Icke Forums.....

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rideforever said:

 

I am on your side.
Reread the earlier posts on this subject ^
 

 

This shows a lack of judgement on your part.

 

This man is the snake from the garden of Eden.

 

He is drawing you into the abyss. I suggest you don't fall in.

 

The abyss of 'Jews are good' which will eventually become 'we must kill more Muslims and invade their countries'.

 

Look up Marpat.... It's the camouflage of the American marines in Iraq.

 

 

 

 

 

Gotta wake up people.........see how easy it is to be caught in the devil's spell?

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, rideforever said:

@Truthspoon

Are you a practicing Christian?  Do you go to church and take Communion?  Do you pray to God?

 

 

 

I'm a Christian in that I believe Jesus embodied the spirit of God more than any other human being and believe that he has power over Satan and the demonic Archons and can protect us from their malign influence in this world and the next.

 

I don't go to church except as a curious observer of their funny rituals.

 

In fact I am a Quaker and I became a member a couple of years ago....... I have always believed, as do the Quakers, that we do not need priests or intermediaries between God and man.

 

I believe this was the whole point of Jesus' ministry and is precisely why the Church executed anyone who tried to actually print the words of Jesus in their own language......

 

The church knew that the only way they could keep their position as intermediary was by keeping people away from the words of Jesus and replacing it all with silly ritual and pagan sun worship.

 

I don't mind a bit of sun worship myself....... but I think it is disingenuous to call it Christianity.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Truthspoon said:

I've looked into it because once upon a time I didn't know any better. Then I did the research and learned the full truth about Islam and why it was created and who created it.

 

I'd be interested to hear more, perhaps start a thread on it. I've read a few bits about Islam. The stories of Mohammed (pbuh) meeting an entity in a cave to be dictated the Koran and that entity trying to kill him and also that it was given to them from the Knights Templars.

 

I've no doubt that Islam stems from the same black magicians that gave us Christianity and Judaism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

 

I'm a Christian in that I believe Jesus embodied the spirit of God more than any other human being and believe that he has power over Satan and the demonic Archons and can protect us from their malign influence in this world and the next.

 

I don't go to church except as a curious observer of their funny rituals.

 

In fact I am a Quaker and I became a member a couple of years ago....... I have always believed, as do the Quakers, that we do not need priests or intermediaries between God and man.

 

I believe this was the whole point of Jesus' ministry and is precisely why the Church executed anyone who tried to actually print the words of Jesus in their own language......

 

The church knew that the only way they could keep their position as intermediary was by keeping people away from the words of Jesus and replacing it all with silly ritual and pagan sun worship.

 

I don't mind a bit of sun worship myself....... but I think it is disingenuous to call it Christianity.

 

See I like most of your posts Truthspoon, much I agree with here.

 

I want to go to my local Quakers group, have been meaning to go for years, their philosophy greatly interests me.

 

Also we got a Spiritualist church in the area and I would like to go and see them. My dad was a spiritualist so it holds a lot of interest to me.

 

Not long read Tolstoy on the reccomendation of another member and Tolstoy notes the Quackers have the correct interpretation of 'resist not evil' 

 

I especially agree with your last comment that Christianity is dressed up Pagan Sun worship. I don't mind it either, its fascinating and illustrates how higher knowledge is encoded into the Bible, that imeadiately makes it more interesting. Shame they can't be honest about it but I suspect most in the church don't know themselves. Yet there are signs everywhere - I find it funny that my local vicars house is called 'Sunrise Cottage' lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Truthspoon said:

the whole point of Jesus'

 

Well I suppose Jesus inspired many things.

But ..

The church exists because it was believed to emulate his exact teachings to his students.  For instance he hand selected 12 of them for transmission and to the crowd he gave parables (basic instructions).  To the 12 he guided them carefully and many of them so it is recorded became powerful in their own right.

Particularly the Last Supper is a transmission to his students and this is recreated in the church, by taking Communion, the body and blood of Christ.

And Jesus sent out his close students to teach the world, hence the priests.

Also importantly Jesus said that he did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it ... fulfill means to actually take it seriously and make it manifest ... so he is certainly not someone who believes in an unstructured do what you want affair.  None of these points show Jesus saying do whatever you want.

The church as it should be proper ... is simply a place where Jesus's teaching is done, and the result of that teaching is done, it is a place of work.

 

Of course you can say that it has become corrupt in many ways.

But if you live in a dingy swamp ... saying that things are corrupt is not really the point.

The point is that you can uncorrupt them.

 

It is for all the above reasons that I don't feel a lot of respect for the airy fairy Christianity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, rideforever said:

 

   None of these points show Jesus saying do whatever you want.

 

 

I didn't for one second suggest this.

 

But look at the Church.....haven't they done just what they wanted?

 

Has the church really embodied the mission of Jesus? Or has it done the opposite?

 

Is it not more probable that the Church was created to subvert Jesus' message and precisely thwart the real Christian message?

 

I'm not into self promotion but I have written about these things and I only quote from my own books because it is a convenient way to keep a hold of the facts which are pertinent to this debate:

 

https://www.truthspoon.com/2019/11/the-neoplatonic-anti-truth.html

 

Up to a 34 million people were Christians which was over half of the population of the Roman Empire......but that was REPLACED under Constantine....by CHURCHIANITY.

 

Quote

 

Constantine in 312, seems to have been instrumental in the creation of what we understand as the Catholic church, namely that of a pagan institution practicing pagan rites while disguising itself as Christian. Christianity in the ancient world had become such a force that it was a case for the Roman authorities, of, if you can’t beat them, join them.

Constantine however found that half of the Christians in the Empire, would not subscribe to the official Roman Government version of the faith, he therefore found it necessary to create ecumenical councils to create a legalistic framework for official Christian doctrine and used the Roman military to eliminate Christian cults which strayed from the official government religion. This would set the way for the various inquisitions and Crusades and Constantine more than any other person, can be said to be responsible for the development of Christianity from a charitable organization dedicated to helping and feeding the poor and providing a spiritual message of salvation to all, to what the church later became, the oligarchical tyranny which practiced torture and slaughter to maintain political control over millions of people.

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Truthspoon said:

Is it not more probable that the Church was created to subvert Jesus' message

 

Yes, of course ... but you see we live in a godforsaken shithole of a planet with billions deranged miserable apes roaming the planet alternately destroying each other and themselves.

It's not a very nice story is it.

Saying something is corrupt is not the point.

The point is do people wish to try and be uncorrupt.

Nothing is for free ... wafting past a church and thinking you are above it and free of it ... it's not really the point.

The only thing that waits mankind at the end of his journey is a grave, and not only that the grave waits for you before you die ... given how people live ... they are born in a grave and die in a grave.

It is easier not to try.

Much easier.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, rideforever said:

 

 

Nothing is for free ... wafting past a church and thinking you are above it and free of it ... it's not really the point.

 

 

 

Please don't do that. There's no need to put words into my mouth.

 

I am merely pointing out certain facts of history.

 

I don't have a particularly emotional investment except that whatever is true I know should be followed and practised. Safest and wisest course. It means you don't need to get too emotional or slip into delusion.... I think perhaps you should just recognise the truth of what I am saying and maybe change your world view to suit it. It will be better for you all round, everything else will fit into place. 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Truthspoon said:

Please don't do that. There's no need to put words into my mouth.

 

Isn't that what you are saying ... that you don't do any Christian practices?
Why are you defending Christianity then?

Or .. what specific practices do you do ?

 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...