Im not here to preach, but I do have thoughts on the subject. I’ll probably add some as time goes on, but what are your thoughts? I see a wide array across the different forums here, and I wonder if open discussion can bring us all any closer to Truth, Love, Beauty, Peace, and everything else our souls desire/require.
Please, speak as generally or as autistically hyper-focused as you want
You hit the nail on the head in that we should all be in pursuit of the Truth, the Love of which draws us towards it, and the understanding of which inevitably manifests in Beauty and Peace.
Christianity, then, is merely one available tool among many which may serve to bring us closer to the Truth. Paralleling this, and as Jesus himself said, "The Sabbath was created for Man, not Man for the Sabbath."
However, this vision collides with the Truth itself, which brings unwelcome news....
The vast majority of the human race places no value on the Truth. They fear it because of the anxiety and discomfort it brings, and thus they hate it. Instead, they construct their own version of "Truth" based on that which makes them comfortable, a Truth where they are Right and Good, and all that they think and say and do is justified.
Where virtually all Christians go wrong is at a paradigmatic level: they absolutely take the Truth as coming from the Bible, rather than recognizing that the Truth is in the Universe and the Bible is some tiny part of that Universe. Then whatever is in the Bible is interpreted in its multitudinous ways to suit their desired ends.
They aren't "bad" people--whatever that means--it is merely how their consciousness was constructed. You don't blame your dog for failing to learn arithmetic and placing no value on it. And your dog can live a wonderful life without it.
As to that small fraction of humanity which places an inherent value on the Truth, that is a product both of how their consciousness was constructed and that it was able to develop to that level. Not all do, and indeed perhaps very few.
Additionally, they have an in-built moral compass. In fact, that higher consciousness and the inner sense of morality can be considered simply as characteristics of a single condition.
All the others lack this in-built morality and require an external one to guide their behavior through a system of reward and punishment. That's where organized religion comes in, each of which provides such a moral system.
Boiling down the entire ministry of Jesus reveals that he knew what I just wrote. The Way was a simple set of moral precepts taught through simple parables and simple directives such as the Sermon on the Mount. Reward awaited those who practiced the lessons.
A harmonious society supporting the elevation of the human spirit and geared towards discovery of its destiny can be constructed of such simple elements, but it is plain for all to see how far we are from that.
Everyone may now return to arguing about chapter and verse, which is where comfort lies.
Really great, insightful response - thanks for sharing it
Hah, seems we may not even get that far!
This is one of the most useful videos i’ve ever seen. It tells every single division, sect, denomination, split, etc. since the beginning.
I like Wes Huff’s historical stuff, but he’s too Canadian sometimes. If you watch Matt Ehrett conspiracy vids, you know exactly what i’m talking about… anyway, here’s the vid: NOTE: start at 7m30s if you want to skip the backstory
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8q6FUlay-M8&pp=ygUeYWxsIGNocmlzdGlhbml0eSBkZW5vbWluYXRpb25z
Personally, I’m into the Pentarchy. One of the original 5 churches. Copts split in 300 or something, Greece/Constantinople split in 1080 or around that time, then the Roman Catholics were like, “nope it was just us the whole time, peter has the keys, we were the only real church ever.only us. Always has been”
Romans gonna Roman, i guess. I suppose all the councils were just for funsies.
Being that sects are man-made, you can probably find error in any of them if you dig enough. So long as you earnestly love the Lord, repent your sins, and make an honest effort to avoid sinful behavior you're probably gonna make it.
True, we must remember the mercy to the thief: 42 And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.”
I do believe in the sacraments, and they do have power to heal and aid the soul— but I cannot conceive of God’s mercy and righteous judgment. That’s why I am human, and he is God.
""B b but the atheists TOLD me that men made them up! WAAAA!!!"
Huh?
That's a mighty Community Roundtable, if you ask me...
You managed to invoke the bright minds to think in a single direction! Commendable!
And you're not even a mod to enforce that...
================
To answer your question in short: The Bible is the True guide.
If any religion, or denomination is against the Bible, then it is wrong. For example, Catholicism is against the Bible, as they worship Mary... Why would anyone think the mother of Jesus is the one to answer prayers, while God and Jesus are confirmed to be the ones that answer prayer?
That, and more, in documentaries that prove it...
Bottom line, if we want to understand the True Word of God, we need to investigate it. After Jesus showed us the way, the appostles were the ones to debate whether we need to be circumcised or not... They chosed not... Do you know why?
Through a debate. Great minds united to figure out the truth even at the cost of their own ego... So that is the cost of truth - ego.
Very interesting thought…. We’ve all heard of “ego death”, (but probably, mostly as linked to psychedelic drugs) - the thought that when we let our ego die, Truth comes knocking to fill the void, the Truth that Jesus came to share with us, kind of ties together a few “seemingly disconnected” threads in a way that makes a lot of sense.
Hear here!
Well, I know this example from my research (never actually tried psychedelics myself) but what they feel is intense love towards nature and intense emotions that most commonly makes them cry.
I think that would be a new sense of purpose towards loving nature, not exactly "ego death". A girl talked about being very focused on hugging a specific tree, which practically is the whole religion of northern Indians (and by Indians, I mean "How, white man." not "do not redeem" Indians...)
In my theory, those drugs let a demon possess the person, so they feel intense feelings to worship trees. Just to be clear, that's 100% not what I meant. I meant simple humility.
Just want to be really clear on this because I researched psychedelics and I don't recommend them to anyone. One person shared with me that he felt that "he was chased by demons" - his own words... And he will never try those drugs again.
Hmm
Here’s what comes up when I type “define ego death”
I don’t really see where you’re coming from with your definition. But, given the background you share, perhaps it’s simply our different experiences with this word coloring our interpretations. I personally have had nothing but positive experiences the handful of times (over a decade in the past now) I used various psychelidics. They were powerful ways to see and understand things from entirely new perspectives - in my experience at least, and “ego death” was a part of that
Ok, I will try to explain the difference:
Ego-death can lead to one of two possible outcomes:
Humility - helping other humans, who also fight their own ego occasionally. Being immune to insults, while trying to correctly see their own problem, so they know that insults don't work, and they might see a helping person instead of an insulting one. Works with very few, but works.
Being one with dirt and tree, which is not correct, imo. Dirt and tree do not have free will, you can't be the same value as them. You can be made from them, but so is the wooden whistle, and the wooden wheel, yet we use them for different purposes.
So our misunderstanding comes from what comes after the ego death. Is it humility? Or being one with everything around you?
I have investigated a lot of cases, where psychedelics lead to "oneness with all", not true humility. Christianity leads to true humility. And you are forbidden from taking any drugs to experience true Christianity. Do you see my point now? Both ways exclude the other from themselves... So only one is correct.
Let's transfer this in effort. How much effort does it take to digest a mushroom, or whatever... in comparison to true Christian ways? What is harder?
Wouldn't the harder thing made the best outcome? Or the easy one can also do it?
That being said, can you share what psychedelics you've used and what was the outcome? I am very interested in this topic, and I want to learn more. And please use as much details as possible, even if you think "I don't have to mention that" - every detail would help me understand more, so please share them!
I can tell you this - i grew up in an atheist family, and wouldn’t have given spirituality - and eventually, what I think of as Christianity but you may not - a second thought in my early adulthood had it not been for my experiences with psychedelics
I’ll give you an actual response when I get a minute to think on one lol
It's ok, I prefer a longer proper reply than a rushed one. I can wait, no problem.
Whatever is your experience, I would like to hear more of it. And if I am wrong about my whole world, then I would appreciate your full details on your position.
I'm here to learn the truth, and it doesn't matter if I don't like the truth... It matters only how much of the truth is facts, and how much is theory.
And I have only a theory on psychedelics... It is based on records of other people's experience and the common pattern, but if you have something ground-breaking, I will always consider that.
Sorry that you grew up in atheist family. My family was vary... slightly Christian. But I grew up as an atheist and mocked atheists along the way. Afterwards I have seen that the evil people are satanists and they hate Jesus, so that led me to believe that Christianity is the way. I read some from the Bible and it shows that's the only prophecy book that exists currently. The only one that's correct. I kept digging and if you want to know the end of my research, I can give you some documentaries, so you can prove to yourself that Christianity is the only way out of this satanic madness.
God's word is gospel, but the way it comes to you through the holy spirit, you must listen to it to be pointed towards the Way.
I don't know if you can use auto translate on this, but here is a recent Biglino video on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-49-SFyaT0
it's in italian
Love Biglino. He showed me how the Bible could be “correct” about something while 99% of Christians interpret it “incorrectly” - haven’t caught a new video of his in years tho so thanks for the link
Np.
Wouldn't usually post italian links there but since now youtube has AI translation might aswell do so. That's his official channel if sometimes you want more.
All interpretations of Christianity fall into two categories, internal and external, depending on whether they accept an Anointed or not ("anointed" being the root meaning of "Christianity").
As Francis Schaeffer noted, all debate between these two over which is "right" focuses on recognizing that people are always moving in one of two directions on the spectrum between them, either toward theism or toward nihilism.
It appears that the nihilism and external side fails basic tests of logic (because nihilism entails that logic is nothing as much as it entails that logic is something); and it also appears that motion toward the theism and internal side is also always challenging due to moral questions for each individual. Yet it's safe to propose that theism is the "right" interpretation even as there may then be further debate about who God "anoints" as representative. You know I've found this very defensible.
This is expressed briefly: He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. The disposition of rewards is the same as the disposition of anointing.
So for the purposes of c/Conspiracies I propose that the Truth, the Way, and ultimately all Christianity is encapsulated in various isomorphic statements of rejection of nihilism and acceptance of a transcendent greatness harmonizing Self and Other. From that, anything can be built, and often is built more wrongly than rightly. But no specific formula is required for this essential concept to be recognized, and no axiom can be proposed universally because the inverse axiom of nihilism can always be offered as an alternative. I often describe this as the responsibility for steering me right falling upon someone other than me, even as the responsibility for seeking to be steered right, to never sway for an instant, is always my own. There are many other core truths that have been accepted by a permanent informal body known as Christianity, a number of which appear in classic formulas, all of which build upon an assumption that the received words of God over the ages are all truth; beginning on the foundation of theism these can all be worked out, but that is done among those who take theism seriously enough to seek structure and relationship among theists.
It needs saying that the person who professes theism but who rejects or judges the concept of Jesus is usually in a conflict that can be resolved by testing motion in either direction of the spectrum: because the concept of Jesus is fully consistent with the concept of theism, and arguments that it is not usually fall apart rapidly upon analysis. As the Python troupe said, we can't make fun of Jesus himself, that's straight out, but we can make fun of literally everything that surrounded him.
It also needs saying that, if you're asking about denominations, they shouldn't be regarded as having "right" interpretations in the sense that others are wrong. Denominations should be about different cultural emphases and practices among the same core right interpretation, and when this fails to happen there is evidence there may be incomplete agreement on the core, which can be analyzed. But you also know I believe in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God such that the "right" interpretation described above as theism will guide all truth-seekers into perfect unity of knowledge on any point.
Well put, by my reckoning
I think technically following Jesus Christ is the Way of the Truth.
He is God in human flesh to be with His creation, He's the only one that really knows what's true and real.
Any way to "sticky" this at the top of the Hot page for a while? And maybe block FWOChoice from the post?
Shameless campaigning: I'm asking for a vote on reactivating the power to do such things.
Jesus’ message was nothing even remotely close to what Christianity teaches today.
What do you think the modern church gets most wrong?
“Christianity” is tough to define since so many sects/denominations consider themselves followers of the “Christ”
Regardless tho, Jesus’ core message was of “repentance” and having a direct relationship with our “Father” in heaven.
The core message of “Christianity” is one of “ritual torture and sacrifice” for “atonement” whereby we are saved by “grace” through “faith”… ALL OF WHICH was never taught by Jesus himself, but instead Saul the spy.
Again, not a big deal, but if you simply read Jesus’ teachings, skip all the mysticism and dogmatic bullshit, you’d see that Jesus eschewed the teachings of the religious norms of the time aka ritual torture and sacrifice of animals (and humans) for atonement, using an intermediary to connect with God, etc etc
Look into the “Jefferson Bible”, an interesting perspective from Thomas Jefferson himself - pretty cool piece of history too
Define "Christianity" first. Your terms are too vague. The term is thrown about loosely.
Lol the only thing he interacts with is the chatbot.
Funny you should say that, atleast he managed to respond to the prompt
religion as we know it is retardism. believing in ghosts. its all distractions from the reality.
the real message of jesus is a warning of jews. it documents how the jews cant be integrated. because they are parasites. and why marriage is allowed only between white people.
because we are too blind and deceived by jews, history repeats and we will be genocided by jews, just like the tribes before us were genocided.all your sons will be crucified like jesus by the immigrant parasites.
this is the universal reality since jewish niggers exists
Right/reg - "to move in a straight line". Right was forwarding before one comes into being.
Aka being within (inter) traffic (preta/per) of action (tion)...the issue is trafficking artificial "rights" among one another, while ignoring natural "right" aka the one and only way of life.
Way implies all generating each anointed one within...a process one ignores when holding onto truth.
Not yours unless choosing to take possession of, at which point one becomes possessed by thoughts others can inject.
All brought each one apart from one another to allow analysis...others try to bring us (united states) together to distort analysis by synthesis.
Desire implies want; require implies need...wanted temptation needs to be resisted.
General aka "generating all" implies all sound generating each instrument within...speaking as implies the articulation of sound into words aka spell-craft.
https://gifer.com/en/DNj
I think All did that to allow choice - generally speaking, and [specifically, ultimately, and fundamentally,] the choice between seeking, or rejecting, re-union
Living naturally, these rightly align - would you agree? The issue for us, millenia removed from nature, seems to be this process of analysis you mention, and ultimately a choice (or perhaps more accurately, procession of choices from inception to death) to be made, no?
Hey, autists rise up - I think these existential questions are made painfully… important for them/us/you/me and the like. I see it as a broad pattern of behaviors - The kids who physically can’t function are something different, and I think it’s a crazy conspiracy that the two have been conflated, 50 years ago perhaps we’d be talking about “hermits” and “retards”… idk, that’s the shitty (?) part about using language to communicate, not only is “it” ever-shifting, but everyone has their own personal definitions for words. We choose to struggle to communicate, because, I believe, we recognize the alternative as far worse
Allow aka "all lowering" each one within. Dis-al-low implies the division of each one lowered within all.
Allow and disallow are not in conflict with one another...others suggest allow vs disallow to tempt ones choice into a conflict against one another.
a) Seeking implies suggested outcome...finding/found/foundation implies perceivable origin. "seek an ye shall find" tempts one to ignore that only within foundation can one seek outcomes.
It's also seeking which tempts one to ignore singularity (foundation) for plurality (outcomes aka all the stuff one has and hasn't found yet).
b) Re (to respond) ject (to throw)...being implies thrown (inception towards death) response (life).
c) Reunion implies each ones (uni) response (re) within action (ion)...not the coming together with one another as suggested by others as for example reunion celebrations.
Where's the self reflection in reuniting with others?
These implies plural...ones want within oneness of need implies singularity. It's your plural view, which contradicts alignment aka thinking straight. Instead you think circular (agree vs disagree) aka versus/vers - "to turn".
How could a turn be rightly aligned? Using implication (if/then) instead of reason (vs) realigns oneself to all, because it prevents one from turning against one another.
Millennia implies measurement taken aka a synthesis. Nature cannot be taken from...it moves (inception towards death) response (life) apart during an analytical process.
One cannot perceive a millennia...it's a suggested span (distance between two objects).
Since when is choice an aim (ultimate)? It's the response to being directed. Others utilize suggestions to tempt ones choice to aim consent at it.
Consent implies shooting blanks...it makes choice infertile by inverting it into chance.
One process (inception towards death) for each ones potential choice (life) within..."choices" implies ones choice consenting to suggested pluralism aka potential taking into possession.
How does one express potential when possession represses?
Question (a quest towards outcome) and answers (from others) tempt one to ignore solution (being dissolved within action). The pain represents the ignorance one feels when gaining answers to questions. No pain; no gain.
Suggested answers amount to nothing/nihilo (ones denial of perceivable) and any quest moves life towards death.
Aren't them, us, you and me different from one another? If one consent to the suggested labels them, us, you, and me, then does that shape alike consensus?
How many define self as them, us, you or me? How come that only oneself can see through that deception?
How could one (potential) within all (process) be me/mine (possession)?
Aka isolating the ones (jew) who don't fit the sum (gentiles)...nature isolates; artifice summates.
a) Definition aka deaf phonetician (deaf to sound) implies each ones choice to hold onto words, while ignoring that sound moves, and cannot be held onto. This ignorance permits others to shapeshift letters into words.
Letter implies one who LETS another shape words...
Shift implies each shifting choice within linear progression of all balance...the issue is shifting to hold onto one side over the other, while ignoring the process of separation.
b) Ones "parts with shit" during a process unless shaping a temporary congestion like as if by holding onto words that continue to lose their definitions.
Analysis sets apart; synthesis holds together...that's why others throw shit if one takes their definitions apart. It's like not wanting to let go, but simultaneously having too much already and so the projection begins.
TO implies towards aka to (inception towards death) ward (life)...living implies as warden within process of dying.
COM (together) contradicts UNI (apart from one another)...what could one communicate to another one, that all hasn't already set apart from one another?
Notice together (intercourse) apart (off-spring) implying a choice of needing let go during the temptation of wanting to hold onto. That's implies analysis of natural comm-unic-ation...it doesn't require me to communicate it to you as a synthesis, yet only oneself can discern the distinction between analysis (perception within perceivable) and synthesis (consenting to suggested).
Ones choice to posses self (I); hold onto (believe) and join others (we) increases ones struggle to sustain self apart from one another within all.
Letting go of COM (I; believe; we) allows UNION aka ones discernment about being a unit (uni) within all (ion).
If one joins we, then how could one alternate from one another? Recognize that contradiction....
If you had to say something of value, you would've made a post.
But your account is active to comment for 4 years, and you posted nothing...
So clearly, not even you believe in what you type... So stay quiet.
Station identification, the user you speak to has explained, in so many words, that he doesn't post because it's initiating, but he does comment because it's interaction. Finding the contradiction(s) in his walls of text is quite the labyrinth, and I perhaps defaulted on my attempt. When speaking about him I'm reminded to watch words carefully, but for now I'll just use what words flow, and see what happens about it if anything.
It's a topic about contribution.
If a user cannot contribute with a post, but brings these nonsensical comments, then they should be out of here, until they learn to communicate properly and contribute.
If you're going to defend the most obvious AI chatbot in here, then I suggest you bring your big guns, because I'm definitely bringing mine.
I'm sure there are users where you could get a good consensus going for action against them. And that's the risk of politicizing and of using rules without transparency and circumspection. I don't have an immediate vision about how to deal with the divisiveness that exists in a way that fully convinces me. I do know that the mod team should respect, and use their position to analyze and report, the community consensus; but that also requires being aware of the rights of the minority, the ordinary procedures of forum discipline, and in particular the risk of process being manipulated. In particular, the user you mention does have much to say that relates meaningfully to conspiracy theory, despite the locution being repellant, the position having a nuanced nihilist leaning, and the contribution being erratic (botlike before bots were popular). The comment also does meaningfully interact with the OP on a deep level. (I don't defend, but I do explain what I know.) If the community wants to make a case for a boundary line such as illogic or dilatoriness, that can develop through consensus.
All that shows me is that you're afraid to take a stand because you don't understand the subject.
If you were a mod, then a user, who never posted in 4 years, is easy task. And you're not that person.
You have:
About SwampRangers 13114 post score
And you are willing to be equal to:
About free-will-of-choice 0 post score (in 4 years years, same as you)
How would you recognize a shill?
Is any confusing comment worthy to be here, just because you don't understand it?
If you're truly trying to help people understand something, why wouldn't you post ever?
And if you're too soft on shills, then why would anyone need you in a conspiracy forum? The shills will mock us, if you're the mod and allow this...
If you stay with your beliefs and allow mods like this, then there's no value in you being a mod, is there?
Our enemy are the shills. And if you can't think of ways to defend this community from them, then what is your real goal?
Why didn't you stay silent and posted nothing in 4 years? Then I would've believed you... But you didn't.
If you truly defend this user, then delete all your posts so your score comes to 0. Then we'll talk.
I bet you can't do it. And the reason you can't is why this user is a shill... How are you blind to this?
Raping children. Nothing else matters to them.
There is absolutely nothing to back that stupid statement.
Btw, if your worldview is true, that being a bad thing is a meaningless opinion of physics-controlled matter, rather than being a violation of Divine Law.
In fact, opinions cannot exist if the physical is all there is. How can matter have opinions? Where is the magical line at which matter magically gets opinions? No, souls are needed.