*************
M*W: Was Jesus the only savior of the world?
http://www.wilsonwebdesign.com/religion/others.html
M*W: Was Jesus the only savior of the world?
http://www.wilsonwebdesign.com/religion/others.html
How many saviors does it take to save the world?
- Thread starter Medicine*Woman
- Start date
Leo Volont
Registered Senior Member
Medicine Woman said:
The Catholic Church has long recognized in practice that God is still very much annoyed with Humanity because of Sin. It is clearly obvious to anybody paying attention that Christ's Sacrifice was not entirely sufficient to cover for All of Humanity or for All Ages.
There have been a great many Victim Souls and Stigmatics who have taken upon themselves the intent to Pay for the Sins of the World. Every little old Catholic Lady who prays the Rosary daily is in part doing Penance for the Sins of the World.
Is it all sufficient? Well, no.
We need to remember that Christ Himself did not preach that His own Death would become an excuse for everybody to sin as much as they liked. That was a Doctrine formulated by Paul and which was argued against by every Real Apostle who left a published letter. They all refuted Paul.
So what we are Really looking at is a Universe in which God is probably still very much annoyed that Humanity murdered that Man whom He had sent to be the Messianic King of Kings. So God has been steadily imposing Suffering on the World to serve as Penance, and the Catholic Church has established something of an Elite Corp of Victim Souls to take on much more than their own share of that Suffering.
But it all won't be enough until people stop behaving selfishly, like barbarians and predators. We will have Heaven on Earth as soon as people begin to act like Angels.
Leo Volont: The Catholic Church has long recognized in practice that God is still very much annoyed with Humanity because of Sin. It is clearly obvious to anybody paying attention that Christ's Sacrifice was not entirely sufficient to cover for All of Humanity or for All Ages.
*************
M*W: Yes, Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection doesn't seemed to have had much positive impact on a world filled with sinners. In fact, the crucifixion and resurrection was Paul's thesis -- not Jesus'.
*************
Leo Volont: There have been a great many Victim Souls and Stigmatics who have taken upon themselves the intent to Pay for the Sins of the World. Every little old Catholic Lady who prays the Rosary daily is in part doing Penance for the Sins of the World. Is it all sufficient? Well, no.
*************
M*W: How could it be sufficient when only 25% of the world's population claims to be christian and it's declining as we speak. What about the other 75% of the non-christian world? If christianity is the only true religion, why would it be declining? That doesn't make sense to me. I believe the reason for this is that the world has tired of the false doctrine of Paul. The truth about Paul is being revealed -- finally. I've read recently where some of the worlds' most devoted religious researchers, Crossan, et al., are claiming the need to move away from the dogmas of the virgin birth and resurrection. The masses simply don't believe in them anymore, and it's turning them away from their faith. What I'm learning about today's christians is the "cha-ching" factor. Christianity is losing its faithful and the coffers are being crucified.
*************
Leo Volont: We need to remember that Christ Himself did not preach that His own Death would become an excuse for everybody to sin as much as they liked. That was a Doctrine formulated by Paul and which was argued against by every Real Apostle who left a published letter. They all refuted Paul.
*************
M*W: The Gnostic Gospels also refute Paul. Interestingly, the Gnostic Gospels (or at least some of them) were written after Paul was beheaded in Rome -- some 35 years after the alleged crucifixion that Paul did not witness, nor the resurrection that Paul did not witness. Yet, in the Gnostic Gospels Jesus is quoted as directly speaking to certain followers such as MM, Philip and Thomas, AFTER the crucifixion in or around 33AD. This clearly tells us that Jesus lived AFTER the crucifixion to speak to his followers in person in the flesh. These gnostic writers all refuted Paul, yet, Paul claimed to have received his instructions directly from Jesus. We now know that this was a lie.
*************
Leo Volont: So what we are Really looking at is a Universe in which God is probably still very much annoyed that Humanity murdered that Man whom He had sent to be the Messianic King of Kings. So God has been steadily imposing Suffering on the World to serve as Penance, and the Catholic Church has established something of an Elite Corp of Victim Souls to take on much more than their own share of that Suffering.
*************
M*W: God has yet to be proven to exist. Maybe he does. Maybe he doesn't. I think not. The crucifixion and resurrection were created by Paul from earlier dying demigod saviors of myth. That is not who Jesus was. Jesus was a rabbi and he was enlightened. He may have been the master of spiritual enlightenment, but he was no dying demigod savior of Paul's myth.
*************
Leo Volont: But it all won't be enough until people stop behaving selfishly, like barbarians and predators. We will have Heaven on Earth as soon as people begin to act like Angels.
*************
M*W: Humans are not hard-wired to be angels, and fortunately, we've evolved far enough away from most of our early barbaric and predatory natures, although they still exist in our will to survive. Humans may never become angels, but the new paradigm will lead us to become more god-like in nature, more creative and recreative souls that are truly altruistic.
*************
M*W: Yes, Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection doesn't seemed to have had much positive impact on a world filled with sinners. In fact, the crucifixion and resurrection was Paul's thesis -- not Jesus'.
*************
Leo Volont: There have been a great many Victim Souls and Stigmatics who have taken upon themselves the intent to Pay for the Sins of the World. Every little old Catholic Lady who prays the Rosary daily is in part doing Penance for the Sins of the World. Is it all sufficient? Well, no.
*************
M*W: How could it be sufficient when only 25% of the world's population claims to be christian and it's declining as we speak. What about the other 75% of the non-christian world? If christianity is the only true religion, why would it be declining? That doesn't make sense to me. I believe the reason for this is that the world has tired of the false doctrine of Paul. The truth about Paul is being revealed -- finally. I've read recently where some of the worlds' most devoted religious researchers, Crossan, et al., are claiming the need to move away from the dogmas of the virgin birth and resurrection. The masses simply don't believe in them anymore, and it's turning them away from their faith. What I'm learning about today's christians is the "cha-ching" factor. Christianity is losing its faithful and the coffers are being crucified.
*************
Leo Volont: We need to remember that Christ Himself did not preach that His own Death would become an excuse for everybody to sin as much as they liked. That was a Doctrine formulated by Paul and which was argued against by every Real Apostle who left a published letter. They all refuted Paul.
*************
M*W: The Gnostic Gospels also refute Paul. Interestingly, the Gnostic Gospels (or at least some of them) were written after Paul was beheaded in Rome -- some 35 years after the alleged crucifixion that Paul did not witness, nor the resurrection that Paul did not witness. Yet, in the Gnostic Gospels Jesus is quoted as directly speaking to certain followers such as MM, Philip and Thomas, AFTER the crucifixion in or around 33AD. This clearly tells us that Jesus lived AFTER the crucifixion to speak to his followers in person in the flesh. These gnostic writers all refuted Paul, yet, Paul claimed to have received his instructions directly from Jesus. We now know that this was a lie.
*************
Leo Volont: So what we are Really looking at is a Universe in which God is probably still very much annoyed that Humanity murdered that Man whom He had sent to be the Messianic King of Kings. So God has been steadily imposing Suffering on the World to serve as Penance, and the Catholic Church has established something of an Elite Corp of Victim Souls to take on much more than their own share of that Suffering.
*************
M*W: God has yet to be proven to exist. Maybe he does. Maybe he doesn't. I think not. The crucifixion and resurrection were created by Paul from earlier dying demigod saviors of myth. That is not who Jesus was. Jesus was a rabbi and he was enlightened. He may have been the master of spiritual enlightenment, but he was no dying demigod savior of Paul's myth.
*************
Leo Volont: But it all won't be enough until people stop behaving selfishly, like barbarians and predators. We will have Heaven on Earth as soon as people begin to act like Angels.
*************
M*W: Humans are not hard-wired to be angels, and fortunately, we've evolved far enough away from most of our early barbaric and predatory natures, although they still exist in our will to survive. Humans may never become angels, but the new paradigm will lead us to become more god-like in nature, more creative and recreative souls that are truly altruistic.
Leo Volont
Registered Senior Member
Medicine Woman said:
I thought your problem was with Paul. but now you are taking on the Virgin Mary. But without the Virgin Mary there would be NO DIVINE REVELATION. If all you want is committees sitting around tables trying to formulate Ethical Philosophies that would mean nothing to nobody, then fine. But Religion needs to have a Supernatural Element, and the last time I looked around the LAST and ONLY Divine Revelation left in the World Today are the Appearances of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
You think noboby believes in the Blessed Virgin Mary? The Paulist Bishops do not think so, and they wish they could. The Paulist Bishops are rather in a bind these days. The Catholics who would have supported them, the Bishops, have all quit the Church and become Protestants. The last remaining Catholics are all devout Marians. It is awkward for the Catholic Church -- the Leaders do not support the beliefs of the Laity, and the Laity are provoked by their Leadership. But as conniving and worldly as the Bishops are, they recognize in Marianism a compelling and powerful Religion, which must be frustrating for them, since it is not Catholicism as they wish it would be.
Essentially, without the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Virgin Birth, Christ is an ordinary Saint. As Son of a Pure Virgin -- making Christ the Second Adam -- Christ becomes worthy of a Religion -- worthy of being a Nucleus for other Saints. Catholic History has had any number of Christ-Like Saints, some even more powerful than Christ, if all you do is count up the quantity and quality of the Miracles, but it is the Blessed Virgin that makes the Religion All ONE. And you would take that away because a few fat intellectuals on your silly committee don't quite believe it?
And let me remind you, that Marians do not believe in Mary and the Virgin Birth because of anything the Church says, or that the Bible says. We believe because that is the Message of repeated Apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Marianism is the Last Living Religion on Earth. Other Religions may have their saints, and that is a good thing, as far as it goes, but only Marian Catholicism still has an Active Revelation and a Current Connection to Heaven and to God -- the Apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
I've seen Her myself.
Leo Volont: I thought your problem was with Paul. but now you are taking on the Virgin Mary. But without the Virgin Mary there would be NO DIVINE REVELATION. If all you want is committees sitting around tables trying to formulate Ethical Philosophies that would mean nothing to nobody, then fine. But Religion needs to have a Supernatural Element, and the last time I looked around the LAST and ONLY Divine Revelation left in the World Today are the Appearances of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
*************
M*W: Yes, I do have a problem with Paul and everything he may have written. I don't recall saying anything about the BVM, myself, although I have also researched and spoken much about MM. The comment I made about the current religious researchers is that THEY have said that in order to beef up christian membership, they may have to do away with the virgin birth and resurrection. I did NOT say this myself. Personally, I really don't care what christian researchers think.
*************
Leo Volont: You think noboby believes in the Blessed Virgin Mary? The Paulist Bishops do not think so, and they wish they could. The Paulist Bishops are rather in a bind these days. The Catholics who would have supported them, the Bishops, have all quit the Church and become Protestants. The last remaining Catholics are all devout Marians. It is awkward for the Catholic Church -- the Leaders do not support the beliefs of the Laity, and the Laity are provoked by their Leadership. But as conniving and worldly as the Bishops are, they recognize in Marianism a compelling and powerful Religion, which must be frustrating for them, since it is not Catholicism as they wish it would be.
*************
M*W: Again, I have not taken a stance on the BVM, but for the record, I don't believe in the virgin birth, and I don't believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary. Most people, non-catholics still believe Jesus to be the Immaculate Conception, but this is inaccurate, as I am sure you well know. However, although I am no longer a christian nor catholic, I don't recognize any truth in any of the protestant doctrines.
*************
Leo Volont: Essentially, without the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Virgin Birth, Christ is an ordinary Saint. As Son of a Pure Virgin -- making Christ the Second Adam -- Christ becomes worthy of a Religion -- worthy of being a Nucleus for other Saints. Catholic History has had any number of Christ-Like Saints, some even more powerful than Christ, if all you do is count up the quantity and quality of the Miracles, but it is the Blessed Virgin that makes the Religion All ONE. And you would take that away because a few fat intellectuals on your silly committee don't quite believe it?
*************
M*W: The catholic church may have a problem if the biblical scientists remove the virgin birth and resurrection from their dogmas. I expect that instead of making a formal proclamation, they will urge church leaders to simply avoid these two beliefs. They feel that it is the outdated dogma that is dwindling church membership. Again, this is not my belief, but I do understand their thoughts about it.
*************
Leo Volont: And let me remind you, that Marians do not believe in Mary and the Virgin Birth because of anything the Church says, or that the Bible says. We believe because that is the Message of repeated Apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Marianism is the Last Living Religion on Earth. Other Religions may have their saints, and that is a good thing, as far as it goes, but only Marian Catholicism still has an Active Revelation and a Current Connection to Heaven and to God -- the Apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
*************
M*W: I've visited several apparition sites in Europe, and when I visited them, I was a dyed-in-the-wool catholic and a believer. In all honesty, I believe apparitions can and do happen, but they are delusions of the mind and they can occur en masse because people WANT to believe they see it -- and they really believe that they can see it. I always felt 'left out' when people I was close to had visions and dreams of Mary and I didn't. The mind is a very strong thing, and delusions can and do seem real to the viewer.
*************
M*W: Yes, I do have a problem with Paul and everything he may have written. I don't recall saying anything about the BVM, myself, although I have also researched and spoken much about MM. The comment I made about the current religious researchers is that THEY have said that in order to beef up christian membership, they may have to do away with the virgin birth and resurrection. I did NOT say this myself. Personally, I really don't care what christian researchers think.
*************
Leo Volont: You think noboby believes in the Blessed Virgin Mary? The Paulist Bishops do not think so, and they wish they could. The Paulist Bishops are rather in a bind these days. The Catholics who would have supported them, the Bishops, have all quit the Church and become Protestants. The last remaining Catholics are all devout Marians. It is awkward for the Catholic Church -- the Leaders do not support the beliefs of the Laity, and the Laity are provoked by their Leadership. But as conniving and worldly as the Bishops are, they recognize in Marianism a compelling and powerful Religion, which must be frustrating for them, since it is not Catholicism as they wish it would be.
*************
M*W: Again, I have not taken a stance on the BVM, but for the record, I don't believe in the virgin birth, and I don't believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary. Most people, non-catholics still believe Jesus to be the Immaculate Conception, but this is inaccurate, as I am sure you well know. However, although I am no longer a christian nor catholic, I don't recognize any truth in any of the protestant doctrines.
*************
Leo Volont: Essentially, without the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Virgin Birth, Christ is an ordinary Saint. As Son of a Pure Virgin -- making Christ the Second Adam -- Christ becomes worthy of a Religion -- worthy of being a Nucleus for other Saints. Catholic History has had any number of Christ-Like Saints, some even more powerful than Christ, if all you do is count up the quantity and quality of the Miracles, but it is the Blessed Virgin that makes the Religion All ONE. And you would take that away because a few fat intellectuals on your silly committee don't quite believe it?
*************
M*W: The catholic church may have a problem if the biblical scientists remove the virgin birth and resurrection from their dogmas. I expect that instead of making a formal proclamation, they will urge church leaders to simply avoid these two beliefs. They feel that it is the outdated dogma that is dwindling church membership. Again, this is not my belief, but I do understand their thoughts about it.
*************
Leo Volont: And let me remind you, that Marians do not believe in Mary and the Virgin Birth because of anything the Church says, or that the Bible says. We believe because that is the Message of repeated Apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Marianism is the Last Living Religion on Earth. Other Religions may have their saints, and that is a good thing, as far as it goes, but only Marian Catholicism still has an Active Revelation and a Current Connection to Heaven and to God -- the Apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
*************
M*W: I've visited several apparition sites in Europe, and when I visited them, I was a dyed-in-the-wool catholic and a believer. In all honesty, I believe apparitions can and do happen, but they are delusions of the mind and they can occur en masse because people WANT to believe they see it -- and they really believe that they can see it. I always felt 'left out' when people I was close to had visions and dreams of Mary and I didn't. The mind is a very strong thing, and delusions can and do seem real to the viewer.
Leo Volont
Registered Senior Member
Medicine Woman said:
No. The meanings attached to the crucifixion and resurrection were created by paul.
You don't seriously propose that Jesus Christ was not crucified, do you?
We can understand how ANYBODY can put his own spin on anything that occurs in the News, which is what Paul did. But there were simply too many witnesses to the goings on in Judea for Paul, or anybody, to simply construct a huge fiction from nothing.
There was no shortage of Real Apostles refuting every lie out of Paul's mouth, and yet nobody disputed the FACT of Christ's Crucifixion.
Leo Volont
Registered Senior Member
Medicine Woman said:
To tailor Divine Revelation, that is, to snip out what one does not approve, out of concern for whether or not it will be popular with the masses, that is tantamount to making a Deal with the Devil. Many Catholics believe that is exactly what transpired with Vatican II -- the Bishops of the Catholic Church decided to emphasize some Doctrines and de-emphasize other Doctrines in order to make itself more appealing to the Protestant World. Well, it all backfired, as such cynical business practices ought to. The Protestants already had their EASY WAY and had no incentive to move. But when the Bishops stopped castigating Protestants and sent out the message that ANY Christian Church was quite acceptable and that Catholic Sacraments were more or less only optional, then what was to be expected but a rampant exodus from the Church.
And that is the Charitable Way of looking at it. The less charitable interpretation is to see the Bishops as Traitorious Free Masons who intentionally sabotaged Church Doctrine in an effort to cause the final collapse of a Church that had already been weakened by hundreds of years of persecution and onslaught.
Besides, as I had pointed out, the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is a Necessary Doctrine for Religion. You quite have no Religion without it. It is wonderful that a roundtable full of Intellectual Atheists should like to get rid of it -- they well know what they are about, but it is not HELPING RELIGION that they intend.
Leo Volont
Registered Senior Member
Medicine Woman said:
This is your way of saying "I will not even believe my own eyes, ears, heart and soul, but will only believe the dictates of those who have conditioned my mind". What would Huxley and Orwell say to such a statement that gives such a clear victory to the Propagandizers of the Modern Secular World, when you would sooner agree with Big Brother and the Brave New World then the very testimony of your own Senses and the Projections of your Own Inner Soul.
You have eviserated yourself.
Leo Volont: To tailor Divine Revelation, that is, to snip out what one does not approve, out of concern for whether or not it will be popular with the masses, that is tantamount to making a Deal with the Devil. Many Catholics believe that is exactly what transpired with Vatican II -- the Bishops of the Catholic Church decided to emphasize some Doctrines and de-emphasize other Doctrines in order to make itself more appealing to the Protestant World. Well, it all backfired, as such cynical business practices ought to. The Protestants already had their EASY WAY and had no incentive to move. But when the Bishops stopped castigating Protestants and sent out the message that ANY Christian Church was quite acceptable and that Catholic Sacraments were more or less only optional, then what was to be expected but a rampant exodus from the Church.
And that is the Charitable Way of looking at it. The less charitable interpretation is to see the Bishops as Traitorious Free Masons who intentionally sabotaged Church Doctrine in an effort to cause the final collapse of a Church that had already been weakened by hundreds of years of persecution and onslaught.
Besides, as I had pointed out, the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is a Necessary Doctrine for Religion. You quite have no Religion without it. It is wonderful that a roundtable full of Intellectual Atheists should like to get rid of it -- they well know what they are about, but it is not HELPING RELIGION that they intend.
*************
M*W: The biblical scholars who want to 'de-emphasize' the virgin birth and resurrection were christian scholars in high offices and not atheists.
And that is the Charitable Way of looking at it. The less charitable interpretation is to see the Bishops as Traitorious Free Masons who intentionally sabotaged Church Doctrine in an effort to cause the final collapse of a Church that had already been weakened by hundreds of years of persecution and onslaught.
Besides, as I had pointed out, the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is a Necessary Doctrine for Religion. You quite have no Religion without it. It is wonderful that a roundtable full of Intellectual Atheists should like to get rid of it -- they well know what they are about, but it is not HELPING RELIGION that they intend.
*************
M*W: The biblical scholars who want to 'de-emphasize' the virgin birth and resurrection were christian scholars in high offices and not atheists.
Yo Leo
Quote:
"But it all won't be enough until people stop behaving selfishly, like barbarians and predators. We will have Heaven on Earth as soon as people begin to act like Angels."
But if we were as your Bible says, created in the image of the Christian god, we are exactly following the example of this god. We are barbarians and predators, through no choice of our own. It seems we harbour as much vengeance and hatred as this god.
Ahem.
Quote:
"But it all won't be enough until people stop behaving selfishly, like barbarians and predators. We will have Heaven on Earth as soon as people begin to act like Angels."
But if we were as your Bible says, created in the image of the Christian god, we are exactly following the example of this god. We are barbarians and predators, through no choice of our own. It seems we harbour as much vengeance and hatred as this god.
Ahem.
How can we be saved when there is nothing to be saved from.
"Fear is the mind killer, Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit is to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."
We are the gods.
"Fear is the mind killer, Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit is to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."
We are the gods.
Blindman said:
If I said that, I would feel pretty small, since an earthquake or any natural force could kill me whenever it 'wanted', and I have no control over these laws. Without any of these, I could not even exist. Everything is merely a manifestation of the primal origin, but that existence is also present in everything, including humans. That doesn't mean that we are God itself, but we (or God) can express him through our bodies, through these powerful God-made instruments.
Blindman: How can we be saved when there is nothing to be saved from. "Fear is the mind killer, Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit is to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."
We are the gods.
*************
M*W: My sentiments exactly.
We are the gods.
*************
M*W: My sentiments exactly.
Blindman,
"We are the gods because we created them in our image."
Then what is it that created you in that form? What created the natural laws like that?
"We gave them their powers and defined their limits."
It's true that people have also created imaginary (or half-imaginary) gods from real knowledge.
"We hold the power to destroy god, we control the actions of all gods."
You can only destroy the images of false gods in your head. If I saw gods as you do, I wouldn't believe either. If you can control the events of this world, the actions of gods, then why do you let so many people die in natural disasters when you still want to save them?
"Without us there would be no god."
There wouldn't be any concept of god, but it's impossible that I wouldn't exist. Since god is omnipresent, there can be only one god, who is the center of all things, the ego, the self of all things.
"We are the gods because we created them in our image."
Then what is it that created you in that form? What created the natural laws like that?
"We gave them their powers and defined their limits."
It's true that people have also created imaginary (or half-imaginary) gods from real knowledge.
"We hold the power to destroy god, we control the actions of all gods."
You can only destroy the images of false gods in your head. If I saw gods as you do, I wouldn't believe either. If you can control the events of this world, the actions of gods, then why do you let so many people die in natural disasters when you still want to save them?
"Without us there would be no god."
There wouldn't be any concept of god, but it's impossible that I wouldn't exist. Since god is omnipresent, there can be only one god, who is the center of all things, the ego, the self of all things.
Natural selection.
The natural laws just exist, there is no need to create them. Any attempt to anthropomorphise the start of time is just foolish.
All gods are imaginary.
Gods do only what people say they do. They are figments of imagination and as with any imaginary character their actions are limited to the imagination and have no effect on the world around us. Our gods cant stop disaster because they dont exist.
That is simply your impression. Your god will be as distinct as your individuality and when you pass away your god will be gone forever. Your god lives in your mind. You may think it is real but so do all the other people that believe in gods and how can so many versions of one god exist.
Blind faith is a foolish, it closes the mind and holds our culture back.