Jesus was a Tao Bum

[Edward M]

Yes Alwayson, that is what read before i posted.. i was giving you my 'interpretation' of it.. they were trying to get him arrested by the roman government for not paying taxes... he didn't say you must pay and obey their laws.. he said it is ceaser's currency, it belongs to him.. 'thou shall not steal' if he didn't give it to ceaser he would be breaking God's law.

 

Peace

[Edward M]

also, Jesus was not working during his mission, he used to be a carpenter beforehand.. but i think you will find he didn't use money whatsoever during his mission 'after' he became christ..

 

Peace

[Jainarayan]

Im thinking there is more evidence that He was more against the Jewish religious community as it was at that time than the Roman empire specifically. The Roman empire was the status quo of the day.

 

 

2. Jesus Corrected and Confronted Directly: Jesus directly confronted false teachers in the church with the repetitious, “Woe to you…hypocrites.” When they came to trick Him, Jesus frequently silenced the Chief Priests, Scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees but putting them in their place with Scripture. On one occasion He came right out and said, “You’re wrong, not knowing the Scriptures or the power of God.” Jesus was not afraid to tell people–in the most confrontational way–”You’re wrong.”

 

The thrust of the new testament was towards reforming the "church" and working out a new covenant, not overthrowing Rome or defeating taxation.

 

It would seem that Jesus was one of at least three reformers of the practices of his day, the other two being the Buddha and Martin Luther. The Buddha wasn't against the Vedas, but he was against what the brahmins were doing with them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas#In_Buddhism

 

 

 

• The elderly Brahmins asked him, "Do the present Brahmans follow the same rules, practice the same rites, as those in the more ancient times?"
• The Buddha replied, "No."
• The elderly Brahmins asked the Buddha that if it were not inconvenient for him, that he would tell them of the Brahmana Dharma of the previous generation.
• The Buddha replied: "There were formerly rishis, men who had subdued all passion by the keeping of the sila precepts and the leading of a pure life...Their riches and possessions consisted in the study of the Veda and their treasure was a life free from all evil...The Brahmans, for a time, continued to do right and received in alms rice, seats, clothes, and oil, though they did not ask for them. The animals that were given they did not kill; but they procured useful medicaments from the cows, regarding them as friends and relatives, whose products give strength, beauty and health."

 

It was and is well-known that study of the Vedas was restricted to men of the learned class. The Vedas were not accessible to the common folk. The brahmins held this over the heads of the people, much as the Pharisees did with Jewish scriptures. Martin Luther railed against the excesses and what he considered the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church.

[Stosh]

I understand what youre saying ,

but I just disagree- that the thrust of the new testament

had much or anything to do with a specific tax policy or even the Roman power structure.

It was about the relationships of man with god and other men.

The Romans werent really the ones who wanted him crucified, they did it to placate the

Jewish establishment and keep order. (or so ,I was taught ,the book says)

[Stosh]

It would seem that Jesus was one of at least three reformers of the practices of his day, the other two being the Buddha and Martin Luther. The Buddha wasn't against the Vedas, but he was against what the brahmins were doing with them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas#In_Buddhism

 

 

 

It was and is well-known that study of the Vedas was restricted to men of the learned class. The Vedas were not accessible to the common folk. The brahmins held this over the heads of the people, much as the Pharisees did with Jewish scriptures. Martin Luther railed against the excesses and what he considered the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church.

Yep, thats pretty much the way I see it too. People see a need for governance and law of some type , political reformers fight political battles and religious reformers fight religious battles ( for the most part) IMO

[Stosh]

also, Jesus was not working during his mission, he used to be a carpenter beforehand.. but i think you will find he didn't use money whatsoever during his mission 'after' he became christ..

 

Peace

Judas Iscariot was given the job of keeping track of the common purse.

[Jadespear]

As to the timeline of Lao Tzu and Buddha- there are conflicting scholars who quarrel over the idea that Lao Tzu was an actual person at all, let alone existing before the Buddha....most historians believe that Lao Tzu was the pen name used by a group of taoists for whatever reason. I mean actually translated it reads " old man".... Which is not an identifying name.

 

I love the Tao and the writings in the Tao Te Ching, but I find it very hard to believe the legend of Lao Tzu.... Come on a baby kept inside his mothers womb for 72 years who is born an old man with grey hair ? ..... Sounds an awful lot like one giant Taoist metaphor to something.

[Edward M]

Stosh, cool, i agree it is not the thrust of the new testament, and completely agree it is about man and God..

 

I wasn't aware of Judas and the common purse.. maybe there is a message in there..

 

To be clear I believe Jesus was bringing in the spirituality to the jews and to the rest of the world, and raising our consciousness to a more spiritual one.

 

I see him as a fully enlightened being, one with God through the power of the holy spirit also known as kundalini. And when one is receives the laying on of hands, it is the same or similar to a diksha/shaktipat to act as an awakening of the hoy spirit in man/woman.. i don't know why we baptise with water now, that was for before Christ.. he and the apostles baptised with spirit and holy fire... so to me that says quite a lot. Either the apostolic succession has been broken or they just haven't lived up to the demands of the holy spirit? all i know is when i do confession i do actually feel a tangible difference, so there is something still there.. but as i said before Christ is still here, if you are sincere enough and really try, he may just come and baptise you himself

 

Peace

[RongzomFan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-g5qbFdtTQ

Edited July 16, 2013 by alwayson

[Edward M]

Well that's a matter of belief and/or experience....... peace

[Edward M]

you and your editing alwayson can't watch it, blocked in the uk... cheers anyway!

[RongzomFan]

How the Old Testament really came about

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eeZ42UgZq8

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9XK3DcQe9s

Edited July 16, 2013 by alwayson

[Jetsun]

Stosh, cool, i agree it is not the thrust of the new testament, and completely agree it is about man and God..

 

I wasn't aware of Judas and the common purse.. maybe there is a message in there..

 

To be clear I believe Jesus was bringing in the spirituality to the jews and to the rest of the world, and raising our consciousness to a more spiritual one.

 

I see him as a fully enlightened being, one with God through the power of the holy spirit also known as kundalini. And when one is receives the laying on of hands, it is the same or similar to a diksha/shaktipat to act as an awakening of the hoy spirit in man/woman.. i don't know why we baptise with water now, that was for before Christ.. he and the apostles baptised with spirit and holy fire... so to me that says quite a lot. Either the apostolic succession has been broken or they just haven't lived up to the demands of the holy spirit? all i know is when i do confession i do actually feel a tangible difference, so there is something still there.. but as i said before Christ is still here, if you are sincere enough and really try, he may just come and baptise you himself

 

Peace

 

There is clearly a progression with Jesus' teachings, the old testament was based on an eye for an eye which means it is based in the lower chakras, whereas Jesus taught forgiveness which is a heart chakra teaching, so there is clearly an obvious progression to a higher level for humanity with his coming.

[Edward M]

Totally agree Jetsun!

 

Peace

[Edward M]

Thanks for the video's alwayson.

 

Peace

[三江源]

.

Edited July 25, 2014 by cat

[ion]

Jesus certainly was against the religios structure of his culture, but it is pretty clear that his teaching was very unsupportive of Rome and its ways

 

Render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's...

Is a phrase that the Christian church, the Evangelicals certainly being one of them, has used for about 1800 years to make the masses and their followers complacent and good little drones.

 

Its context is almost always ommited and rarely analized. They fixate on that one line ONLY and use it to direct ones devotion from "god" and over to man.

 

In the actual context, the pharisees had wanted to trap him so they asked him if it was lawful to pay taxes; WHY? Why did they ask him that question? More then likely they thought he would say "no", because of the spirit of his teaching, and if he said "no", they could have had him executed by the romans which was their goal. Dont forget, at the time of christ's crucifixion, he was not excecuted for spreading gods word, he wasnt excecuted for teaching love, but for admittedly breaking roman law in stating that he was the king of the jews which was against roman law and that it was the pharisees that arranged this because it was unlawful for them to kill jesus themselves, they were constantly trying to get him to make an assertion that they could interpret as breaking roman law so that they could legally have him excecuted and be free from the karma of murder themselves.

 

But Jesus knew what they were upto so he threw them something to think about, because inorder to pay taxed, you have to render up to Ceasar, that which is Gods", your devotion your dubmission and your works.

 

Also if you read the bible in its entirety (which I have and I read 4 translations at once page by page from begning to end, it took half a year reading 4 pages at a time) from front to back, you see that Jesus's God had a plan, a layouut and format for starting a nation. In that nation there was no real rulers and no ownership of land. There was twelve tribal regions that were divided amongst the 12 tribes. They had Judges not rulers. Samson, who was a nazarite was a judge, he did not act as a ruler period at all, that was not his role. Samuel was the last of the Judges, actually his sons were for a short time, but they were corrupt. The judges role was to complete a circuit throughout Israel and then to Judge what he had seen and the people were supposed to take it to heart.

 

The book of Samuel shows the people of Israel discontent with their political structure and envious of other nations so they tell Samuel that they want to have a king and become a kingdom like other nations. This was heard by their God who condemed them them as evil and wicked for wanting such a thing.

 

 

 

1 Samuel 8

New International Version (NIV)

Israel Asks for a King

8 When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as Israel’s leaders.[a] 2 The name of his firstborn was Joel and the name of his second was Abijah, and they served at Beersheba. 3 But his sons did not follow his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice.

4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead[b] us, such as all the other nations have.”

6 But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeasedSamuel; so he prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”

 

 

10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commandersof thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

 

19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”

21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the Lord. 22 The Lord answered, “Listen to them and give them a king.”

and then

 

 

1 Samuel 12

New International Version (NIV)

Samuel’s Farewell Speech

12 Samuel said to all Israel, “I have listened to everything you said to me and have set a king over you. 2 Now you have a king as your leader. As for me, I am old and gray, and my sons are here with you. I have been your leader from my youth until this day. 3 Here I stand. Testify against me in the presence of theLord and his anointed. Whose ox have I taken? Whose donkeyhave I taken? Whom have I cheated? Whom have I oppressed? From whose hand have I accepted a bribe to make me shut my eyes? If I have done any of these things, I will make it right.”

4 “You have not cheated or oppressed us,” they replied. “You have not taken anything from anyone’s hand.”

5 Samuel said to them, “The Lord is witness against you, and also his anointed is witness this day, that you have not found anything in my hand.”

“He is witness,” they said.

6 Then Samuel said to the people, “It is the Lord who appointed Moses and Aaron and brought your ancestors up out of Egypt.7 Now then, stand here, because I am going to confront you with evidence before the Lord as to all the righteous acts performed by the Lord for you and your ancestors.

8 “After Jacob entered Egypt, they cried to the Lord for help, and the Lord sent Moses and Aaron, who brought your ancestors out of Egypt and settled them in this place.

9 “But they forgot the Lord their God; so he sold them into the hand of Sisera, the commander of the army of Hazor, and into the hands of the Philistines and the king of Moab, who fought against them. 10 They cried out to the Lord and said, ‘We have sinned; we have forsaken the Lord and served the Baals and the Ashtoreths. But now deliver us from the hands of our enemies, and we will serve you.’ 11 Then the Lord sent Jerub-Baal,[a] Barak,[b] Jephthah and Samuel,[c] and he delivered you from the hands of your enemies all around you, so that you lived in safety.

12 “But when you saw that Nahash king of the Ammonites was moving against you, you said to me, ‘No, we want a king to ruleover us’—even though the Lord your God was your king. 13 Now here is the king you have chosen, the one you asked for; see, theLord has set a king over you. 14 If you fear the Lord and serve and obey him and do not rebel against his commands, and if both you and the king who reigns over you follow the Lord your God—good! 15 But if you do not obey the Lord, and if you rebel againsthis commands, his hand will be against you, as it was against your ancestors.

16 “Now then, stand still and see this great thing the Lord is about to do before your eyes! 17 Is it not wheat harvest now? I will call on the Lord to send thunder and rain. And you will realize what an evil thing you did in the eyes of the Lord when you asked for a king.”

18 Then Samuel called on the Lord, and that same day the Lordsent thunder and rain. So all the people stood in awe of the Lordand of Samuel.

19 The people all said to Samuel, “Pray to the Lord your God for your servants so that we will not die, for we have added to all our other sins the evil of asking for a king.”

20 “Do not be afraid,” Samuel replied. “You have done all this evil; yet do not turn away from the Lord, but serve the Lord with all your heart. 21 Do not turn away after useless idols. They can do you no good, nor can they rescue you, because they are useless. 22 For the sake of his great name the Lord will not rejecthis people, because the Lord was pleased to make you his own.23 As for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the Lordby failing to pray for you. And I will teach you the way that is good and right. 24 But be sure to fear the Lord and serve him faithfully with all your heart; consider what great things he has done for you. 25 Yet if you persist in doing evil, both you and your king will perish.”

If you noticed, the rights the king will demand...By the time they were under roman rule, this prophecy had come to be fully appearent.

 

The christians seem to glorify the concept of kings etc idolizing David's position as sort of appointed by god, and by doing so they disregaurd this entire book completely.

 

During the time of Jesus Israel was under massive opression. That Jesus worked with wood is ddoubtful because Israel was one of the most UNimportant regions in Rome, if there was wood there it would've been being shipped elswhere and so would all the good carpentars. Its likely that most building wouldve been with rocks and clay broicks, the crappy wood they did have would be used for fishing boats.

 

The jews had become so poor from roman taxes, that they had to sell their homes and land to pay the taxes. All their choicest things and properties and people were taken by rome. They were under total opression and abuse by Rome, and givven the God of Israels stance on Kings and what it says they will demand as their rights, I think it is safe to say that Jesus's teaching was against rome and taxation.

 

I think its also safe to say that the God of Israel feels the same way about American emocracy. That everytime elections come around, and everyone is thinking that their prefered candidate is the one that will lead America to a better place is sinning and commiting an evil act, denying God as their savior and looking to a mere person to establish balance.

 

Tax cllectors were certainly thought of as bad guys, when ever they talk about the bad people that Jesus hung with, they mention tax collectors amongst them.

 

Besides the book of samuels prophecy being paralell to the state of Israel under Roman occupation, there is also the fact that Jesus says repeatedly that "this kingdom will crumble", "this kingdom will not stand because it is divided from with in" Also the teachings of the beatitudes really doesnt support the idea of taxation being lawful, because it causes people to sin/stumble in that it causes massive worry. If we are not to worry about the clothes we wear come from or what we are going to wear, if we are not supposed to worry about food and what we are going to eat or where it will even magicly appear from, then why should we be dedicating our lives to stressing about how were going to pay the taxes before the romans come and sieze our propperty?

 

 

Besides the context of the "Render unto Ceasar" phrase there is another paralel to that scenario where Jesus talks in private with Simon Peter, when there is no pharisees around. Hes talking about the temple tax, but I think it is safe to cross refrence these two scenarios to gain more understanding into the "render unto ceasar phrase"

 

 

24 When they arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the half shekel [the temple tax] went up to Peter and said, Does not your Teacher pay the half shekel?

25 He answered, Yes. And when he came home, Jesus spoke to him [about it] first, saying, What do you think, Simon? From whom do earthly rulers collect duties or tribute—from their own sons or from others [k]not of their own family?

26 And when Peter said, From other people [l]not of their own family, Jesus said to him, Then the sons are exempt.

27 However, in order not to give offense and cause them to stumble [that is, to cause them [m]to judge unfavorably and unjustly] go down to the sea and throw in a hook. Take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find there a shekel. Take it and give it to them to pay the temple tax for Me and for yourself.

Jesus doesnt ask if the priests collect taxes from their kin, he says earthly rulers and some translations use the expression "kings of the earth" so I stand confident that this verse can be cross refrenced with the "Render unto" verse, because its talking about taxation in general.

 

Of all the people I've talked to about the bible and its contents, noone is understands it worse then Christians. None of them read it from front to back, only little bits here and there so they miss the message. Plus the church has made axioms out of out of context statements to define the structure of their belief, but all of their fundamental beliefs are easy to prove wrong using the bible to do so.

 

The main one is that you have to worship Jesus in order to go to heaven and have eternal life. When asked how o recieve eternal life Jesus answered to "Love your brother" more then once.

 

Dont get me started on the fact that their is no biblical support for the idea of lucifer, let alone being a fallen angel and Gods most favoritest before the fall. The verses used to support that are taken out of context and completely distorted in order to make it seem that way. They are actualy about the king of Babylon, and Tyre and the prince of Tyre, but also and most ironicly, Jesus himself says in the bible that he himself is lucifer.

Edited July 16, 2013 by ion

[Edward M]

Great post, ion!!

 

Your last point leans heavily towards the message of Gnosticism who taught/teach that Lucifer and Christ were the same.

 

But the only thing they say that i reckon you will disagree with is that they hold the God of the old testament to be the demiurge, a kind of satan who believes he is the true eternal self sustaining one.. they believe that Christ coming as an incarnation of lucifer was to bring us back to the true God away from the demiurge.

 

This is supported by the shivaism tradition of old and many other traditions as well..

 

Peace

Edited July 16, 2013 by Edward M

[ion]

I dont believe christ and satan/lucifer are one, I believe ego and satan are one an when christ was tempted by satan while in the wilderness, that he was tempted by his own ego while in a state of deep meditation, where the battle is actually fought.

 

I do believe that the teachings of Christ are actually a tool of "satan/lucifer" and that the christian church is "the church that gives the beast its streangth" that was written about in revealation.

 

I believe that everything is alive and sentient, thoughts and concepts, corners and straight lines inclued, and thus the ego has a spirit. I also believe that in the dimmension of spirit where there is no time or space, that the spirits/awareness's conflate by similarity/likeness's. Sentient beings can be man made, like the ego, and like evil. The things we classify as good or bad become that because we breath that life into them, and so since there is what we call evil there is a spirit with that self awareness, but because of the law of conflation, all egos are one spirit in that dimmension, and also the spirit of evil is conflated with that spirit and so evil, and ego are one, because ego is also the source evil(negativity, selfishness and unbenificial acts).

 

I have a belief (sorta I can also see how it is untrue, but more an interpretaion of a happening) that Id say is similar to the gnostic belief. It is the core of my understanding of Tao which will proabably confuse anyone who reads this.

 

But, the scourceless scource, (the one true god) is entirely selfless and without self and creates nothing,(literaly creates nothing just by being) but that the yin-yang, & original myriad creatures unfold from its state however they "exist" in a state of non-existence and never come into being because from the sourceless source the only "law" is the law of nothingness. They all only exist in principle, but because they exist in principle, they have sentience and self awareness, so although they are truly non-existent, the spirit of them and their sentience do exist in the dimmension of spirit and mind. In that place, the yin-yang have two forms but share a single self awareness because of the conflating effect; they are the awareness of infinities n0-things/nothingness.

 

The collective awareness of these things comes into being and considers its self and understands that it is eternal, that it sits on a foundation that cant be taken away, that it can not not be. It considers its foundation, the yin-yang and the myriad creaturres which are the formless elemnts and phenomenon that create and maintain reality, (symmetry, balance, diversity, replication, opposite and likeness etc, the list goes on) and considers nonexistance and the possability of existance and goes onto create existance.

 

The creator, and the one true god are not the same thing, the creator is a eternal being who becomes nonexistant when it creates existance. It is somewhat an act of rebellion because the true scource made one law and that law is nothingness so the rebellion in heaven is the act of creation, and the creator was the rebel.

 

Existance was not meant to be because of the inevitable out come of creating existance is a human like being because once creation is created, it unfolds and creates itself and inevitably crates life which inevitably created humanoid which enevitably aquires an ego, creates evil, and the ego causes the hell dimmension which I've touched on a bit in another thread ("is there ever an end to individual consciousness?").

 

I have seen this but do I believe it? Yes and no. Its all true but It is a metaphor to understand other things, physacal and ego imagery to describe something that cant otherwiise.

[Edward M]

That's quite complex... but didn't you say jesus says he is lucifer in the bible? satan and lucifer are to different entities.. from what i've heard at least.

 

The thing with the demiurge theory is that this being has an ego and is deluded, he isn't actually evil, he is just desperatly trying to preserve the illusion that he wasn't created... he rules this solar system apparently...

 

Try reading this to see what i'm pointing at: http://www.theforbiddenreligion.com/gnostic-book.htm#.UeWog47UOLE

 

Note that he describes the true God as unknowable....

 

ps, not saying i subscribe to all this... i'm still searching for truth... all i know is if one is sincere they will get to the 'originator'..

 

Peace

[Edward M]

Blimey, just read the bits i missed before in that book i posted... it's a very controversial book to say the least.. once again i;'m not putting it up as an example of what i believe.. safest thing is if you believe in christ and want to follow him, don't make any assumptions like in that book, just focus on christ and whatver is the truth you shall find it..

 

ok, time i got off here..

 

Peace

[Stosh]

I dont believe christ and satan/lucifer are one, I believe ego and satan are one an when christ was tempted by satan while in the wilderness, that he was tempted by his own ego while in a state of deep meditation, where the battle is actually fought.

 

I do believe that the teachings of Christ are actually a tool of "satan/lucifer" and that the christian church is "the church that gives the beast its streangth" that was written about in revealation.

 

I believe that everything is alive and sentient, thoughts and concepts, corners and straight lines inclued, and thus the ego has a spirit. I also believe that in the dimmension of spirit where there is no time or space, that the spirits/awareness's conflate by similarity/likeness's. Sentient beings can be man made, like the ego, and like evil. The things we classify as good or bad become that because we breath that life into them, and so since there is what we call evil there is a spirit with that self awareness, but because of the law of conflation, all egos are one spirit in that dimmension, and also the spirit of evil is conflated with that spirit and so evil, and ego are one, because ego is also the source evil(negativity, selfishness and unbenificial acts).

 

I have a belief (sorta I can also see how it is untrue, but more an interpretaion of a happening) that Id say is similar to the gnostic belief. It is the core of my understanding of Tao which will proabably confuse anyone who reads this.

 

But, the scourceless scource, (the one true god) is entirely selfless and without self and creates nothing,(literaly creates nothing just by being) but that the yin-yang, & original myriad creatures unfold from its state however they "exist" in a state of non-existence and never come into being because from the sourceless source the only "law" is the law of nothingness. They all only exist in principle, but because they exist in principle, they have sentience and self awareness, so although they are truly non-existent, the spirit of them and their sentience do exist in the dimmension of spirit and mind. In that place, the yin-yang have two forms but share a single self awareness because of the conflating effect; they are the awareness of infinities n0-things/nothingness.

 

The collective awareness of these things comes into being and considers its self and understands that it is eternal, that it sits on a foundation that cant be taken away, that it can not not be. It considers its foundation, the yin-yang and the myriad creaturres which are the formless elemnts and phenomenon that create and maintain reality, (symmetry, balance, diversity, replication, opposite and likeness etc, the list goes on) and considers nonexistance and the possability of existance and goes onto create existance.

 

The creator, and the one true god are not the same thing, the creator is a eternal being who becomes nonexistant when it creates existance. It is somewhat an act of rebellion because the true scource made one law and that law is nothingness so the rebellion in heaven is the act of creation, and the creator was the rebel.

 

Existance was not meant to be because of the inevitable out come of creating existance is a human like being because once creation is created, it unfolds and creates itself and inevitably crates life which inevitably created humanoid which enevitably aquires an ego, creates evil, and the ego causes the hell dimmension which I've touched on a bit in another thread ("is there ever an end to individual consciousness?").

 

I have seen this but do I believe it? Yes and no. Its all true but It is a metaphor to understand other things, physacal and ego imagery to describe something that cant otherwiise.

 

 

 

Ego wasnt invented 2000 years ago It is a modern conceptual construct

 

EGO: For Freud, the ego is "the representative of the outer world to the id" In other words, the ego represents and enforces the reality-principle whereas the id is concerned only with the pleasure-principle. Whereas the ego is oriented towards perceptions in the real world, the id is oriented towards internal instincts

; whereas the ego is associated with reason and sanity,

 

Please use a different word (and the parameters of) your "source of evil"

Im really very curious what you come up with, because Ive heard this kind of thing over and over again

and I really cant 'sanity and reason' as evil, nor do I see having an 'identity' as evil either.

Nor do I see babies as evil. (undeveloped egos)

Edited July 16, 2013 by Stosh

[ion]

That's quite complex... but didn't you say jesus says he is lucifer in the bible? satan and lucifer are to different entities.. from what i've heard at least.

 

The thing with the demiurge theory is that this being has an ego and is deluded, he isn't actually evil, he is just desperatly trying to preserve the illusion that he wasn't created... he rules this solar system apparently...

 

Try reading this to see what i'm pointing at: http://www.theforbiddenreligion.com/gnostic-book.htm#.UeWog47UOLE

 

Note that he describes the true God as unknowable....

 

ps, not saying i subscribe to all this... i'm still searching for truth... all i know is if one is sincere they will get to the 'originator'..

 

Peace

This is one of the two chapters that the christian church says is about the fall of lucifer. It is In the book of Isaiah chapter 14 verse 12. The actual context is an area of Isaiahs scroll, about ten chapters of it, where the god of Israel is sending his prophet to neighboring nations rebuking all their kings or judging them, I dont remember if they are all rebukes. For some reason the church leaders isolate this verse out of that whole event to say that hes talking about lucifer.

 

 

12 You, the bright morning star,

have fallen from the sky!

You brought down other nations;

now you are brought down.

13 You said to yourself,

“I’ll climb to heaven

and place my throne

above the highest stars.

I’ll sit there with the gods

far away in the north.

14 I’ll be above the clouds,

just like God Most High.”

15 But now you are deep

in the world of the dead.

 

Heres the same verse from another translation

 

 

 

12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Heres the definition of Lucifer

 

 

Definition of Lucifer in English

Lucifer

Syllabification: (Lu·ci·fer)

Pronunciation: /ˈlo͞osəfər/

noun

• 1another name for Satan.

  [by association with the 'son of the morning' (Isa. 14:12), believed by Christian interpreters to be a reference to Satan]
• 2 literary the planet Venus when it rises in the morning.
• 3 (lucifer) archaic a match struck by rubbing it on a rough surface.

Origin:

Old English, from Latin, 'light-bringing, morning star', from lux, luc- 'light' + -fer 'bearing'

Lucifer is the latin name for venus, and the same as saying the morning star, day star and others. Probably an early latin translatoin is how the word lucifer got in there, I dont know, but its come to be that the christian church considers that morning star is a name for the ruler of hell, lucifer and considers that section from Isaiah as a reference to the devil and his fall from grace.

 

The last thing that Jesus says in the bible is in Revelation 22 and it says-

16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

Which in the first Latin translation would have said he was lucifer.

 

Incedently, this is the other part of the bible that the church uses as reference to there being a favorite angel that rebeled against god and fell from grace. Again the context is the god of Israel's prohet is rebuking neighboring nations-

 

28 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, say to the ruler of Tyre, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“‘In the pride of your heart

you say, “I am a god;

I sit on the throne of a god

in the heart of the seas.”

But you are a mere mortal and not a god,

though you think you are as wise as a god.

3 Are you wiser than Daniel[a]?

Is no secret hidden from you?

4 By your wisdom and understanding

you have gained wealth for yourself

and amassed gold and silver

in your treasuries.

5 By your great skill in trading

you have increased your wealth,

and because of your wealth

your heart has grown proud.

6 “‘Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“‘Because you think you are wise,

as wise as a god,

7 I am going to bring foreigners against you,

the most ruthless of nations;

they will draw their swords against your beauty and wisdom

and pierce your shining splendor.

8 They will bring you down to the pit,

and you will die a violent death

in the heart of the seas.

9 Will you then say, “I am a god,”

in the presence of those who kill you?

You will be but a mortal, not a god,

in the hands of those who slay you.

10 You will die the death of the uncircumcised

at the hands of foreigners.

I have spoken, declares the Sovereign Lord.’”

 

 

11 The word of the Lord came to me: 12 “Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“‘You were the seal of perfection,

full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

13 You were in Eden,

the garden of God;

every precious stone adorned you:

carnelian, chrysolite and emerald,

topaz, onyx and jasper,

lapis lazuli, turquoise and beryl.[b]

Your settings and mountings[c] were made of gold;

on the day you were created they were prepared.

14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub,

for so I ordained you.

You were on the holy mount of God;

you walked among the fiery stones.

15 You were blameless in your ways

from the day you were created

till wickedness was found in you.

16 Through your widespread trade

you were filled with violence,

and you sinned.

So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God,

and I expelled you, guardian cherub,

from among the fiery stones.

17 Your heart became proud

on account of your beauty,

and you corrupted your wisdom

because of your splendor.

So I threw you to the earth;

I made a spectacle of you before kings.

18 By your many sins and dishonest trade

you have desecrated your sanctuaries.

So I made a fire come out from you,

and it consumed you,

and I reduced you to ashes on the ground

in the sight of all who were watching.

19 All the nations who knew you

are appalled at you;

you have come to a horrible end

and will be no more.’”

The next verse he is rebuking thor whatever the word is, the king of Sidon but apearently that is to be taken literaly.

 

As far as satan and lucifer I dunno about them being different but I meant in the more conventional sense used by christians where in beelzubub, lucifer, the devil, and satan are all references to the same fallen angel and lord of hell.

 

I have heard that though about there being more complex beliefs about different deities or whatever by those names and others.

Ill check out that link in a while, I have to get out too.

 

 

@stosh, what an ego is, has been around for over 200,000 years and is a product of human mind, not freud . They even talked about ego in buddhas day but I dont know the sanskrit word for it.

 

I dont use freuds definition I think from what little I know about his philosophy I disagree with his ideas about it.

 

Other then that I do not understand what else you are saying in that other part. I said ego was the cause of straying from tao/negativity, undesirable behavior etc, and that evil itself is a concept not a reality, however due to all things being sentient, evil has a spirit and is a sentient being like all thoughts and concepts although it be man made. So is and does the thing I and many others refer to as ego, the concept of self and because of that and laws of conflating awareness that the two (and more), conflate and become one spiritual being. But I dunno if that is what you were saying