I just replied to him from that post, 3 months ago:
ok so this was 3 months ago, when you were getting all worked up, mentioning these videos.
Masonry's Satanic Doctrine - From Their Own Books (Original Classic) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRl-ITShKhY
The New Age Fully Exposed (UPDATED) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAQyVF7gjz0
Gods of the New Age (Original Classic) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tix1t6wUU9A
The New Age's Antichrist Connection - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrtdI0CF_28
New Age Satanism Exposed - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sjt3MTNqr4k
Aquarius: The Age of Evil (Original Classic) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00WBV-i-zRM
I'm there, calm down.. give me some time here. I put each of them on the bookmarks bar. And during meals I'd gradually check them out. Note the time in the bookmark and resume next meal.
Well.. 3 months later I'm starting to check out the last one here.. These videos were as informative about what's going on with the cabal running the world, as how you were getting all worked-up about it. Once you check out all these half dozen videos, it helps you put together lots of puzzle pieces you've been researching over the years, that you didn't understand what these cabal guys are up to.
Before this I'd have researched about some of these characters but didn't really put it all together. The new age movement there.. that's the freemason, luciferian agenda.
I looked into Manly P. Hall's stuff.. and he was talking about these things. I had heard about Blavatsky.. and Alice Bailey. How Lucifer publishing, Lucis trust, was involved with the united nations. You get guys like Aleister Crowley.. what kinds of things was he into. On and on with all these guys. How about that Freemason guy there.. Pike.
I didn't really think about these eastern religions. The religions in India. The meditating. Even the Muslims.. what was going on BEFORE Mohammed.. when they'd sacrifice stuff. Where they had this black cube. Those guys are bad too. The Jews with the ark of the covenant.. sacrificing stuff.. splashing blood on it. They're bad too. Any sacrificing there.. that's bad.
How about people who wonder, how come the immigration keeps going on, even though people here can't get a job. That's to mix in all these religions so the catholic people are minority.
Jack up inflation so those left can't afford to have kids. So, sooner than later, they'll be "out".
Then you come in with this new world order there. It's all the Luciferian agenda. And they disguise it as this New age movement with the meditating.
What do you think about all this stuff in these half dozen videos you were getting all worked up about, 3 months ago. And I was there, calm down.. give me some time. I also had other things I might have to check out before I could get around to these.
But on the last one. 12 minutes.. 2 hours long. I don't like the way these guys stretch 4:3 aspect ratio videos.. they should leave it how it was instead of stretching people's bodies and heads. Whatever.. checking out the videos. You learn a lot about what's going on out there and some "why".
I don't know if you're talking about me but we got to argument what you thought I was some new age researcher cultist. I've never looked into a new age but you labeled me a new age Hindu or something. Because my ideas reminded you of some research you did on those topics.
I still stand then all religions are dogmatic psy ops, instilled in our societies to cause divide and confusion so we don't ever figure out what we really are or where we came from
What is the url to the post you posted that are referring to?
Here https://media.conspiracies.win/post/D59UV5xRAzpg.jpeg
I appreciate your sharing this, so it sort of answers the questions I just posed. And we've probably discussed halotropic breathing before, so I apologize for forgetting.
If Jesus didn't historically exist, it would take such an incredible person or group of people to have created and sustained that narrative of a spotless man walking among us and dying for our sins that there is still something to their message. The narrative of Jesus has no precedent or parallel in history. We might by the numbers consider it the biggest "psyop" in history, but then it might be the biggest because it's actually totally true, and/or the narrative is actually closest to the truth of every other narrative out there. The question isn't settled by the scoffing of nitpickers against the Bible or by the perfidy of many Jews, it's settled by what system has the truth and the best explanation for life. So I prefer when you say "makes more sense that he is hoax" because that's keeping the open mind about it.
I do mod a few odd communities here including c/FlatEarth. So for now let's leave that on the level of "makes more sense" rather than a flat assertion.
We have godlike powers and we are called gods. But there's always Other for us, and there isn't with capital-G God. So to use that formulation, knowing what Christianity interprets it as, isn't the whole of the truth. It may have great shock value, but when you come down to it you don't actually mean you have every attribute that should be attributed to God, and every responsibility. You mean connection. So that's an example where we could grow into truth more adequately.
Another point where too simplistic a view gets us in trouble. If there is no wrong, then it's not wrong to say "there is wrong". Contradictions allow everything and then nothing can be known for sure. What I think you mean is that most external codes of right and wrong go too far. You do admit one rule "reflect my best self", which might actually work if you keep on with it. The connection (identification) of man with God means that there's a sense in which God is our second self and is what we are to reflect. But then you come back to the Jesus narrative being the best record ever of someone reflecting his best self. So when you grow in that rule it always comes back around to the icky Hebrew stories.
So I really appreciate the link. Think on these things.
Sounds like you get it! The priest-craft of the various religions spiritually enslave people, keeping them from experiencing higher reality. Spiritual growth isn't about a belief in whether this or that historically happened, but about becoming one with the Inner Light within us. It is beyond the comprehension of those accustomed to basing their morality on what God allegedly said according to a book that there is no right and wrong in life, and everything is a learning opportunity.
Then it's not wrong to say there is wrong. That way lies contradiction and loss of all meaning.
There is nothing wrong and nothing right. Nothing matters. You can choose you highest path, or not. Be a scum bag, but you still go back to same source as everyone else. There are no consequences after life, just during life
But people, including you, don't act that way. You act like saying some things are good for you and saying other things are bad for you. Let's test that. If nothing matters, then it won't hurt you to say "Jesus Christ is Lord", just type it out right here. But if you aren't able to do that, then something does matter to you, doesn't it? And you should be able to say what it is that does matter.
Jesus Christ is lord. No problem.
It's like saying the earth is a globe. Sometimes you just need to fit in because the consequences of standing out as a Jesus hater or globe denier are too harsh among the programmed peers populating this society.
I don't go around telling people Jesus is fake. No way. Too many people I love and respect are in that deception, and Im not gonna be able to explain to them what is true or not, they are programmed. Cognitive dissonance. I can't break through that. And it's ok, I keep my knowledge to myself and allow them to live in deception.
Here, as an anonymous troll, I can express my knowledge and finding to strangers and pass that energy to help people be aware through me so I don't hold onto it in my real life.
I selfishly share truth here where it's totally unappreciated as apposed to with the people in my life where it's completely unwelcome. Truth is more than people can handle. And in the end, it doesn't even matter to anyone but yourself.
So go praise Jesus, I'm happy it works for you. For me, my modality is based on logic and reason, too strong for faith to work on me. I have tried. Years of Jesus loving church and camps and concerts, but I was lying to myself. Once I learned how Christianity was built, I saw it for the scam it is
The elites have a similar mindset as you do I'm sure.
We can both be aware that religions are traps for the slaves but doesn't mean I will choose to abuse power, rape nations, etc.
The concepts of right and wrong don't have any meaning beyond that which people give them.
Is that right?
To me yes. Prove it wrong if you think I'm wrong.
What?
Thanks for describing what non-Christian worldviews do. One particular one, athiesm, does this a bunch.
However there is a historical aspect.
It is about growing in Christ and reflecting on His Words.
It's about having a Relationship with God.
When a person is born it (if it exists) should be spread throughout the body.
Run on sentence. Rephrase this, please.
Religious clergy.
That's what Christianity does too.
Didn't historically happen, and even if it did it wouldn't practically affect a person. What changes is you based on your thoughts, words, and actions. God's word lives within you and throughout all Creation, not on paper. Christians who feel changed after something like Christian baptism, or saying a come to Jesus prayer, created that feeling within themselves (no Jesus-God involved). It's like how Christmas can have a magical feel to it to children. That feeling may fade as an adult, but if you put forth effort that warm fuzzy feeling can be achieved again. And, that mindset can be had every day of the year.
We each are God in a divided state. To find God, you must find yourself first.
The resurrection is a spiritual birth while we are still in the body
Reworded: People, like Christians, who base their morality on what God supposedly said in a book, like a Bible, are not capable of grasping that there are no right or wrong choices in life. Every choice plays it's part in evolving us towards the end goal. Every experience in life is a learning opportunity.
"Didn't historically happen" you say.
Tiberius Caesar's historians recorded Pontius Pilate's rule in Judea. Flavius Josephus documents James the brother of Jesus being stoned. Tacitus mentions 'Christus' suffering under Pilate. Even your precious science confirms the Shroud of Turin contains actual crucified man's blood with AB antigens common among Semites. You want evidence? History's drowning in it. The Damascus Road event. 500 eyewitnesses saw the resurrected Christ, many martyred refusing to recant. Archaeological digs keep confirming Luke's minute details: the Pool of Siloam, Pilate's ring found in 1968, Caiaphas' ossuary.
Acts 26:26. First-century Jerusalem wasn't some backwater where you could fabricate miracles unnoticed. The Sanhedrin had every motive to disprove the resurrection yet couldn't produce the body. Roman guards don't abandon posts for hallucinations, and grieving fishermen don't suddenly turn into fearless evangelists over a shared delusion. Ever handled a denarius minted under Tiberius? That's empirical evidence staring you in the face, the very coin Christ referenced when saying 'render unto Caesar.' Archaeology keeps vindicating Luke's precision: the Pavement where Jesus stood before Pilate unearthed in 1871, the Nazareth decree threatening grave robbers from Caesar's era. Your 'no evidence' claim evaporates under scrutiny like morning fog. Why do you accept Tacitus reporting Nero's persecution of Christians but reject his Annals 15.44 confirming Christ's execution? You trust Pliny the Younger's letters about Christians worshipping Christ as God yet dismiss their historicity. The same methods verifying Alexander the Great's existence. Multiple independent sources, enemy attestation, eyewitness accounts, all apply to Jesus. Consider the conversion of Paul the Pharisee who persecuted Christians until Damascus Road. His transformation defies psychological precedent as no zealot abandons prestige to embrace a movement they once slaughtered without overwhelming evidence. His undisputed epistles predate the Gospels, referencing Jesus' resurrection as historical fact while hundreds of eyewitnesses still lived.
You demand 'evidence' while ignoring historiography's basics. The New Testament has more manuscript evidence than Caesar's Gallic Wars. 5,800 Greek manuscripts versus ten for Caesar, some copied centuries later. Yet you believe in Caesar. Hypocrisy much? The John Rylands fragment dates within decades of the original gospel, closer to events than Tacitus' Nero accounts you accept. Your selective skepticism is intellectual dishonesty masquerading as rigor. John 21 records the resurrected Jesus preparing meals, tactile, olfactory proof. Women were first witnesses despite their legal testimony being inadmissible in Jewish courts. The empty tomb narrative persists in early creedal formulas predating the Gospels. 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 quotes oral traditions dating within five years of the crucifixion. Your 'no evidence' stance crumbles under its own weight.
Wen was the last time you interviewed an ancient historian who met Alexander the Great? Yet you accept his existence based on Arrian and Plutarch writing centuries later. Why then reject Josephus' first-century reference to Jesus as 'a wise man who performed surprising deeds'? The difference isn't methodology, it's presupposition. You'll believe twelve men conspired to die for a lie they invented, but reject twelve men dying for a truth they witnessed. That's not skepticism, but psychological implausibility dressed as intellectual superiority.
I doubt you believe in all of Islam's claims to miracles and what they say about God just because they mention historical places and potentially historical exploits. I doubt you believe in all of the claims made by Joseph Smith. In his case, there were alleged eye witnesses that saw his golden plates. Upon investigation, nobody saw them physically. It was either seeing them in the mind's eye or some kind of plates, but not verification of what was on them by any means. While you can point out that throughout the Bible there are historical places in it, and also that it may reflect some actual historical events, it doesn't mean that the specific claims made by the texts or people involved in the texts were accurate.
When it comes to 500 witnesses, there is only a claim and nothing to back it. Anonymous sources with unverified claims. If you sincerely believe the Shroud of Turin is real, that tells me all I need to know about you. They've found an actual burial shroud from that time frame and the manner of how they'd wrap people up was completely different. Many religions have their martyrs who refuse to recant the beliefs of their religion. Paul's alleged conversion only comes from him. In Acts the story changes each time. Luke 24 presents the ascension of Jesus as happening on the same day of the resurrection. In Acts 1, the ascension is portrayed as 40 days later. That's symbolic play on the number 40, and 12 guys all speaking in tongues is symbolic. Talking snakes, talking donkeys, and many other stuff are obviously not to be taken literally.
The Gospels crucifixion and resurrection accounts differ in such a way that makes them non-compatible with each other. The differences don't add more credibility. Your stuff about the Sanhedrin not being able to find a body and Roman guards abandoning their posts presupposes that a man named Jesus was crucified and buried in the manner stated across those texts. Texts that were not written down at the time, but decades later. Claims that did not go over well with Jewish people, and could only gain popularity in people of a different culture and society. Those like James, were not Christians like you think they were. They were Ebionites, and the Christians rejected the Ebionites as heretics because they believed very different than they did. Instead of realizing they had been hoodwinked, they assumed the Ebionites got everything wrong.
The Josephus account is a forgery (https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/7437), and the Tacitus account was written almost a hundred years after the alleged events. Even with mass media many people still believe the fictional story about Washington chopping down a cherry tree. Imagine how easy it would be to pass off events that didn't happen as fact two thousand years ago. If enough people say it and believe it, wouldn't be surprising that someone a century later may believe the event happened.
When it comes to stories about Alexander the great, people don't believe everything said about him. I don't believe he descended into the ocean in a diving bell with griffins or had a mermaid sister. He did have a sister, but claims arising she was a mermaid were fabrications. There's a difference between believing that a man named Jesus was crucified by the Romans versus believing that he was a God-man. The symbolic nature of the Gospels can easily be seen in Matthew 1. Three sets of 14 generations, that wouldn't be historically accurate. That's symbolism. The Gospel of John placing the cleansing of the temple at the beginning of the ministry...blatant changing of the narrative. Include that with a Jesus with a different portrayed persona than the other Gospels, and it's symbolic. A virgin birth, symbolic.
The texts in the Bible are in line with the mythological accounts of what people did back then. The dying and resurrecting savior motif was nothing new.
https://openBible.info/topics/freedom
The OPPOSITE.
Nor do 90%+ of any other historical facts.
How so? You're starting to admit to General Revelation. Now go full Christian from here on out.
Both. You really think God would limit Himself to vague ephemeral unreliable human feelz and tuck Himself away in people? No no no.
If that were so then athiests and agnostics would do that with regularity, too. Also the nature of the change is vastly different, so wrong again.
That's only one component. Thanks for admitting you don't really understand a Relationship with God.
If humanity made up a religion, it would be that one. Because humans are prideful narcissists.
Of what?
It's false. We can grasp it. That belief is, however, an incorrect one. The cabal loves "No gods no masters" beliefs like yours because that very belief power all their evil tyrannical choices, and lets them feel relaxed whilst doing so.
Yep
In the parable of the Prodigal Son, the father doesn't intervene with his son leaving and dwelling in the far country. When the son made the journey back to the father that's the only time the father intervened. "So he set out and came to [m]his father. But when he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion for him, and ran and [n]embraced him and kissed him.". The Deistic perspective that God put everything in order and doesn't intervene is the one that follows the setup of the parable of the Prodigal Son. The Theistic perspective that God is actively and directly involved in our lives would be like the father going to the far country and directly intervening in the prodigal son's life and getting him out of the misery. The son had to lift himself up out of the misery and go home with no help from the father. That's why atheists don't see God, and theists can sense there is a God. Only when we go home do we ever meet God.
All that a cabal seeking to assert tyrannical authority over religious people who believe the word of God is found in texts is to control the production and translation of those texts. They do that, and suddenly they can pass off anything they want as either God says or that it's God-inspired, and people will eat it up. Plus, all you have to do is become the religious authorities that reserve the sole power of interpretation over the sacred texts of the religion, and you have instant power over people. If people go to the texts for God's truth, you've written that God wants them to obey you, and that they can't trust themselves. Passages like Romans 13:1-2, and 1 Peter 2:14-15,17-18 look pretty obviously inserted by a tyrannical cabal to give themselves as an alleged God-inspired authority that has to be followed.
Romans 13:1-2 NASB: "Every [a]person is to be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except [b]from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore [c]whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves."
1 Peter 2:14-15,17-18: "13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent [q]by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right...17 Honor all people, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the [u]king.18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are [v]harsh."
In Deuteronomy 28, the same thing can be seen. The first half promises all kinds of materialistic health and wealth for obeying what God allegedly wants. The second half has God promising that if people don't obey what it allegedly said, then it's going to rejoice over bringing destruction upon them, including forcing them to cannibalize their young. That's how a cabal of tyrants gets people to obey them.
Deuteronomy 28:58-59,63 NASB: "58 “If you are not careful to [ay]follow all the words of this Law that are written in this book, to [az]fear this honored and awesome name, [ba]the Lord your God, 59 then the Lord will bring extraordinary plagues on you and [bb]your descendants, [bc]severe and lasting plagues, and miserable and chronic sicknesses...63 And it will come about that, just as the Lord rejoiced over you to be good to you, and make you numerous, so will the Lord rejoice over you to wipe you out and destroy you;"
Awesome. That's it
What part was "awesome"?
This sums it up on one sentence
Would you like to figure it out? Would you like to propose methods by which you could, or to join with others of us who would like to figure it out more?
I'm no delusional and won't believe in man made dogma that tell me, requiring me to have faith...if that's what you mean
No, I wouldn't want anyone to be required to a faith conclusion, that should only be a conclusion that you are driven to by the facts and the logic of the world, if it's the true conclusion.
Either you do want to figure it out, in which case you freely agree to pursue Truth at all costs, whatever it takes; or you're not that interested in wanting to figure it out and you're more interested in perpetuating your own walls of (dogmatic) judgments that protect you from having to take the real responsibility of figuring it out.
That's why I ask: Would you like to figure it out? Would you like to propose methods by which you could, or to join with others of us who would like to figure it out more?
When your commitment is to Truth wherever it leads, you have no fear of delusion or dogma overtaking you because Truth will guide you. You're free to build with anyone open-mindedly because the worst that can happen is that you discover more Truth and laugh off the less complete picture you used to have. The person who pursues Truth alone is free to join with any who will consider the same pursuit. That's why I offer: if I'm wrong, I want to know, and who better to ask than those who disagree with me?
Somethings aren't possible to know. I already value awareness, or truth, as you put it.
Great! There's a sense in which it's impossible for a mere human to know everything, but I've also concluded that it's possible for a mere human to sufficiently know any particular thing he sets himself upon knowing, within a sufficient time.
Do you want to figure out what you really are or where you came from? Do you want to know the realities of the zygote substrate that was first defined as "you" and what it hosts? Because it seems, especially on Conspiracies, that we need good understanding of it to be able to sift through the rest. And pursuit of truth or even of mindfulness is sufficient to give foundational principles that can be shared with others that are objective enough to build data about the cosmos. Self-knowledge and other-knowledge are always yoked.
c/Porno!
And the truth is, you're the owner of c/Satanism.
u/smithw1984
Plenty of things to rebut!
OP's trying to quote this: https://conspiracies.win/p/19BtZIFBtp/x/c/4eVMLmBxssn