Messages

Dear Kal...
Insulted....not the least, why should I be insulted. I was just stating my point in regards to your line of arguments. I meet many people everyday that behave as you do and they certainly do not insult me at all. They do however leave me a bit sad and also feeling a bit sorry for them. If you choose this style that is your choice, the fact remain, that you through your own words have lost credibility and shown your self for what I believe you are an ignoramus....yes look it up. You are just one of the many ignorant loud mouthed persons sprouting off his or her own opinions and biased viewpoints, showing himself to be a fool. Thats all my friend just a fool. In this very aspect you , although I do not expect you to understand it, are actually very alike the very folks you attack and who you claim should be silenced. Have a nice day

Regards Little P

If your naughty Santa grows a pointy tail and horns and takes you into a cave in the South Pole...his ho, ho, ho turns into BWA! HA !HA!HA! and his bag of gifts holds torture instruments...His Anti-Santa Avatar...

Yeah, Jesus is king of the Jews and them alone. I follow my messiah, Chris, Commander of the Canadians.

Well Chris Kringle is close to bursting his cholesterol filled arteries for you and all you can do is pontificate...well, ya' no what, whenever I hear Chris' sermon on Rudolph..."Rudolph with your nose so bright, won't you drive my sleigh tonight"     just speaks to me about loving even weird reindeer with red noses...

Rudolph is a bunch of manufactured carp, he's not real like the other reindeer (all of whom are female). Santa's colours are red and white, just like Canada and Japan, coincidence? No. The only thing good that came from Rudolph was Yukon Cornelius and Eon from the sequel with Father Time. Eon kicked [edit].

http://www.santa-holidays.com/Santa-Claus-elves.html

with elf names like snowy bowy and tricky dicky in a place called "LAPland"...I would think the entire north pole is practicing some weird tantrik ritual or something... I wonder what kind of karma I have to have to be reborn in the north pole?

Hi Kal...
I have been following the thread as your statements grapped me. I find however that your arguments do not hold water at all and that your statements seem largely biased and due to a gross ignorance . That is in itself not a problem for me. I also have many beliefs and what I call opinions that I have a hard time letting go off....even when I am confronted with and challenged by someone with better more logic arguments. What I find problematic is that you as a result of running out of arguments pull the subject down to a level where it does not belong through sarcasm and various unfounded statements. If all you have to base your statement on is what you have so far shown it seems viable to reason that your words are just that....words , no substance no strenght logic or even reasonable considerations. The world is full of people who make outrageous claims such as you did. Your reasoning does not impress me instead I find it flawed and must then conclude that you are leaning toward a bigoted throwing of mud maybe because of personal attitudes disappointments or bitterness.

Kindly Little Penguin

woooo, oh my gosh, I insulted a Clausian...    

I know it's supposed to represent the third eye... but how do they get it on there? Is it drawn on, or is it a wound they keep picking at so it won't heal? Why not just draw an eye, it looks prettier, like on Tien Shin Han. Yes, I know his eye's real...

the men wear a long one, phallic/yang, that's a third eye of Shiva.  A real eye on the head....hmm...kindof scary...

women have to wear a round one, representing "a point of infinite density", the yoni/yin.  I think they are trying to make a point ...It should be drawn on with kumkum or sindoor.  The modern day stuff is a sticker and represents nothing in particular.  

It is only to be worn during prayers as it helps focus and later everyday by married women...since married women should pray everyday...    

Yeah, Jesus is king of the Jews and them alone. I follow my messiah, Chris, Commander of the Canadians.

Well Chris Kringle is close to bursting his cholesterol filled arteries for you and all you can do is pontificate...well, ya' no what, whenever I hear Chris' sermon on Rudolph..."Rudolph with your nose so bright, won't you drive my sleigh tonight"     just speaks to me about loving even weird reindeer with red noses...

well, since we're off topic ... I don't think most people seem to mind non-religious based governments, except when they start becoming two-faced...i.e. they will want religious freedom from other countries when their own countries don't allow a similar freedom...and most of the religious fundamentalism these days is being paid for by Saudi Arabia...

I'm not sure if it's just a rumor, but I did hear that non-Islamic religions are not allowed to be practiced in Saudi Arabia, and temples and churches are forbidden.  

Just recently the Pope allowed a mosque in his country, but Saudi Arabia didn't allow any catholic church in Saudi Arabia near it's holiest sites.

Why should other countries allow Islam to flourish in the relative freedom of democratic nations while Islamic nations, whose fundamentalists are paid for by Saudi Arabia, don't allow religious freedom to those of other religions in their own countries (with a few exceptions)?

Others see the immense similarity between krishna and christ and consider christ to be a saviour figure that hindus can embrace as a means to the divine and salvation.

Hindus also see great similarities between Krishna and Santa Clause (Mrs. Santa Clause Be Upon Him )...why we even understand how Santa Clause does all of his tricks -- Yoga of course... Santa is just another Yogi defying space time in his reindeer chariot...with his Siddhi magical powers able to shrink his giant Nordic body to fit into wee small chimney holes while not getting burnt by the fire at the same time...then he uses levitation to ascend back into his fiery reindeer chariot!

btw, GrandMa wasn't really run over by a reindeer, it was Santa Clause(Mrs. Santa Clause be Upon Him) looking for a new Mrs. to fill his harem in the north pole... obviously brought her back to life using ancient Hindu yogic tantrik techniques santa likes being naughty too you know ...

and, yeah, Santa (Mrs. Santa Be upon Him)was actually a reincarnation of some Indian Yogi who wanted to be called "Jolly old Saint Nick" after he attained Nirvana...duh!  


and another btw, just because Santa did Yoga doesn't mean he is the ONLY ONE who could do such tricks and that we will start worshiping Santa (Mrs. Santa Be Upon Him) as the "light and the way" ...although he can join our myriad saints and yogi masters as "just one of the above"...    

THere is no "first cause" in most "Dharma"  philosophies ...everything just keeps going on and on and on  , it's a self contradictory cycle of opposites, like the Tao, in Buddhism known as Shunya, in Hinduism as Yoga.

Brahma, Buddhist no-self, "beyond self and no-self" are simply terms to try to describe it to those who haven't experienced it.  Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are simply representations of what we perceive as time, but they are all Brahma.

However the Dharma systems make it clear that only the experience through  meditation counts...philosophizing alone is not enough.

What is commonly referred to as Hinduism and Buddhism today, both referred to themselves simply as the Dharma or Arya Dharma (the Noble Way), later in order to differentiate between the two, Buddhists were referred to as Bodha Dharma("Awakened Way") vs. Hinduism's Sanatana Dharma (the "Eternal Way")...

Bodha Dharma and Sanatana Dharma and Taoism are united in their ends--- to attain enlightenment through meditative techniques and later united in their means --- i.e. certain dieties and Tantric rites, except of course Bodha Dharma starts with the initiation guidelines set by the historical Siddhartha Gautham and Taoism starts with the historical Lao Tzu I believe and the Sanatana Dharma starts with Vedic initiation.

Kalratri,

This Aryan Dharma, Aryan Gods and Theology you talk about sound very interesting!

Some of it sounds Heathen proper and some sounds Buddhist (both of which interest me).  Where can I find out more about the stuff you are talking about?  From a historical perspective first, and from a religious perspective second.

I have a copy of the Upanisads, which I am currently reading (boy, its a dry read) is that related to what you are speaking of?

Well since Aryans consider themselves to be Super heroes, Aryans knew that the world's "one true religion" must verily be read as comic books:

http://www.amarchitrakatha.com

And God, the Aryan self, thought "hey, comics are fun to read, thank you Aryans you truly are the chosen ones!"

If any religion was the ONLY true religion, then not a single human alive would be able to deny it, as it would be self evident without the intervention of violence or other methods.  

That is akin to saying, well why do we need science since the truth ought to be evident to EVERYONE without science having to prove it.  

Any particular religion must prove itself by it's own practice...i.e. there ought to be similar results...which means  that if Islam is truly correct, then we should all get spasms and seizures and cry before corpses for forgiveness just like Mohammad after it's full practice since Mohammad was Islam's greatest practitioner and last prophet.

[You knumbskull use your mind and don't listen to the semites for verily they don't have one --- for all their thinking can be put into one small book]

I only wanted to write after you declared that it is all right to kill people if they are what you call "pagan":

So than Aryan religions say that you should NOT BOW DOWN TO ANY GOD. Those who do are slaves, Dasyu who should be killed. Aryans believed that humans were all God's incarnations .. so ARYANS WERE FORBIDDEN TO BOW DOWN TO ANYONE OR ANYTHING except the God within themselves.

1)Now if Aryans now say, people who bow down to ANY God are unworthy of living in Aryan territory...what would you say? Our books tell us to slay who bow down like slaves to God...so should we to FREE MANKIND from your enslavement to Allah?

Thats retarded. Thats the most disgusting filthy belief ive ever heard of. What you dont understand is that people arent free, they all are always enslaved to something. Since people have intentions and actions, and people have desires and will, they will always be enslaved unto something whether it be their desires, satan, power, money, God, or an idol that they worship besides Him. What this Aryan belief is saying, is that the One who created you does not have the right to be worshipped, but rather one should worship himself.

Since you don't seem to have an intellect, I will only talk to you in terms of religion and religous notions.   It seems only Semites were kicked out of heaven for listening to Satan, and perhaps it seems the Bible and Koran are nothing more than the continuation of that proud tradition of Adam.  Aryan Dharma is about freeing oneself FROM ALL BONDS - INCLUDING GOD. it is about self perfection not slavery to anyone or anything.

You talk about man being arrogant? God in Arya Dharma is deemed nothing more than an arrogant Magician who thinks he created the universe and demands worship.  The Universe is nothing more than an illusion...a nice hologram according to the Aryans and modern science is closer to proving this theory as the correct one.  

You see, your books are false, because just about everyone else has their own revelations saying they WERE NOT KICKED OUT OF HEAVEN.  So Semites and their "forked tongued" friend, "Satan" , jealous of the fact that the rest of us were actually stayed in Eden ... thought "WHY NOT BRING non_SEMITES TO HELL along with us?"...let us give them false revelations - THAT WAY NOONE WILL MAKE IT TO HEAVEN!

And no, we are not sons of Adam, Aryans are sons of "Manu Vaivasvan", the "shining glorious mind", they were born from the "smart one". Adam means "earth"...i.e. those who are "thick" in more ways than one. Which again goes to show you that your religion is ONLY MADE FOR SEMITES.
Your religion is not universal in any sense, since Mohammad declared only semites to be the greatest sages...but I think semites are according to your own scriptures, prisoners on earth, to be kept away from heaven and God's sight.


Semites are "People of the Book" a good excuse to not use your own brain.  

Aryans (who are always at peace )are "People of the Mind"...people who not only read books, but use their brains.

And God the self told the Aryans, "You knumbskull use your mind and don't listen to the semites for verily they don't have one --- for all their thinking can be put into one small book"  

[except the God within themselves.]

Quote:
I completely agree with that interpretation, for it is the historical interpretation and is correct. Jihaad is the means in which the banner of monotheism is uplifted and none is worshipped but the Creator.  


So you do agree with the interpretation that says violence is a legitimate way of spreading Islam? Don't you think there's enough violence in the world as it is? What exactly is gained when someone is killed for not converting? Also, if your religion is true, then shouldn't its truth speak for itself without having to convert people against their will, by force?

"And if Allaah did not check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief. But Allaah is full of bounty to the 'Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists)"

[al-Baqarah 2:251]

Ya i do agree with the interpretation. What is gained from fighting is uplifting the word of la ilaha illa Allah(there is nothing worthy of worship except Allah). Directing one's worship towards the Creator alone is true freedom, for it frees one from servitudes unto any person or any creation. Worship isnt simply asking God for forgiveness once a week, but rather it encompasses our whole life(with obedience, submission, love and reverence), and it is the purpose of our existence:

I only wanted to write after you declared that it is all right to kill people if they are what you call "pagan":

So than Aryan religions say that you should NOT BOW DOWN TO ANY GOD.  Those who do are slaves, Dasyu who should be killed.    Aryans believed that humans were all God's incarnations .. so ARYANS WERE FORBIDDEN TO BOW DOWN TO ANYONE OR ANYTHING except the God within themselves.

1)Now if Aryans now say, people who bow down to ANY God are unworthy of living in Aryan territory...what would you say?  Our books tell us to slay who bow down like slaves to God...so should we to FREE MANKIND from your enslavement to Allah?

2)Also, not every human is born from Adam.  Your books the Quran and Bible come from  a very fine lineage of a Man named Adam who was kicked out of heaven.  Abraham also lied about his wife Sarah being his sister. Do you think you have the highest truth?  In other words, if these men could LIE TO GOD HIMSELF...what makes you think they can't lie to you?

3) Mohammad was the ONLY "sage" who used to get siezures while recieving revelations...he also might've died crazy, in Islamic history books, Ayesha says that Mohammad goes at night asking forgiveness from corpses seeming afraid of something.

IF the founder of your own religion was not deemed mentally sound, could the practice of this religion lead to mental imbalance and even madness?

4) your religion only says I get to go to heaven, and MOHAMMAD WAS THE LAST PROPHET of ALLAH...does this mean that Muslims can't go higher than Mohammad and if by chance someone did, would you kill such a man?
"O people ! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Apostle of God and the last in the line of Prophets. And God is Aware of everything." (Surah Al Ahzab: 40)

5) You say that only SEMITIC "apostles" are fit for worship, i.e. Christ and Mohammad.  But make no mention of Aryan, Greek and Chinese sages.  Is this RACIST?  Why should non-Semites worship Mohammad who claimed that Semites were superior?  Why should non-Semites take the word of people who were kicked out of heaven?

I don't know why you would say the founding fathers thought Christianity was ridiculous, that certainly was not true.  In our day we have little notion how Christianity permeated every aspect of the US society in the late 18th Century.  Any objective study of the era would show this.  However, there were a few that were what we would call Deists; such as Franklin and Jefferson, but they were both ranking members of the Illuminati  and you don't belong to that group without a profound belief in the Spirit world and God.  I can assure you that none of them were atheists, as atheism was very rare at that time frame.  With a few exceptions, of course, mostly among some of the European intellectuals.

Kerux

The "founding fathers" of America were thinkers and revolutionaries, they have made some pro-Christian statements certainly for that is the religion they were born in, but they also made a whole number of anti_Christian statements and I believe these contradictions simply mean they were THINKERS who had the guts to question their long held beliefs in no uncertain terms:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1777/fathers.html

and this is obviously an anti-Christian site:

http://www.ecis.com/~alizard/founding-fathers-xtianity.html

This is even a more interesting site for it states that REAL CHRISTIANS ARE FORBIDDEN TO HAVE REVOLUTIONS:

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

Now this guy is obviously a "Son of the Mind" (Manu), an Aryan...not a "son of Adamah "clay...

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, not by any Church that I know of. MY OWN MIND IS MY OWN CHURCH."--Thomas Paine, _Excerpts_from_The_Age_of_Reason:_Selected_Writings_of_Thomas_ Paine_, edited by Richard Emery Robers, NY Everybody's Vacation Publishing Co, 1945, p.342

Ethan Allen, whose capture of Fort Ticonderoga while commanding the Green Mountain Boys helped inspire Congress and the country to pursue the War of Independence, said, "That Jesus Christ was not God is evidence from his own words." In the same book, Allen noted that he was generally "denominated a Deist, the reality of which I never disputed, being conscious that I am no Christian." When Allen married Fanny Buchanan, he stopped his own wedding ceremony when the judge asked him if he promised "to live with Fanny Buchanan agreeable to the laws of God." Allen refused to answer until the judge agreed that the God referred to was the God of Nature, and the laws those "written in the great book of nature."
From:
Religion of the American Enlightenment by G. Adolph Koch, p. 40 (1968, Thomas Crowell Co., New York, NY.) quoting preface and p. 352 of Reason, the Only Oracle of Man and A Sense of History compiled by American Heritage Press Inc., p. 103 (1985, American Heritage Press, Inc., New York, NY.)

What about germans, like anglo-saxons, saxons/picts, and the nordic/scandinavian peoples?

the Anglosaxons, Franks, Germans, Goths, Visigoths are Aryan, they belong to Germanic tribes...I believe the Scandinavians, such as Swedish Kings used to trace their lineage to Inga, one of the sons of Mano.  However, I don't think Fins and some others are...however they all believe they are descended from certain Gods.

Again:  The Inguaeones are definitely linked with the minor god Ing considered the ancestor of the dynasty of the Ynglingar in Sweden.

Here is another excerpt from Germania:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I must now proceed to speak of the Suevians, who are not, like the Cattans and Tencterians, comprehended in a single people; but divided into several nations all bearing distinct names, though in general they are entitled Suevians, and occupy the larger share of Germany....

The Suevians, even when their hair is white through age, continue to raise it backwards in a manner stern and staring; and often tie it upon the top of their head only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

basically, that's the "hairstyle" of Aryan sages/warriors...the top knot on the head...


also, Manu wasn't just a progenitor, he was a divine creator:

33. But know me, O most holy among the twice-born, to be the creator of this whole (world)

and he created all the Gods on earth, so Manu and Manushyas are more powerful than those who are descended from the Gods.

[Celts]

Let me get this straight ;
the book tacticus germanica says that the germanic peoples are descended from the 'manu aryans'. The word manu is the indo-european root word for 'man'. I'm assuming that the teutonic indo-european peoples are descended from the 'manu aryan' peoples, and the celtic and germanic/nordic/scandinavian peoples stem from the teutonic peoples, thus people descended celtic and germanic tribes are aryans. Is that correct so far?

No, Manu was a sinless perfected soul, he was honest and good.  Manu means mind...those of PERFECTED MINDS..the purest of souls.  Aryans are those who DIRECTLY trace their lineage to Manu and generally have "Man" to commonly mean people in their vocabulary.  They are MANKIND or Manavas.

Celts are those who trace their lineage to the Goddess Danu.  Celts also do not have the word "man" to mean people. They are Danavas, not Manavas (Manu's children), so they are not of DIRECT Aryan lineage.

Semites are Adamic.  Ben Adamah means "son of Adamah"...so they would be called "Adam's kind" who partake of "original sin" not Manu's kind.

Persians are derived from the brother of Manu -- Yama/Yima the twins.  He was "fallen", so still was not as pure as Manu.  Yama was the FIRST MORTAL  and was the one who showed fallen Aryans back to immortality and is the gate keeper, the one who decides which Aryan shall ascend to heavens or descend to hells.  So in that sense, Persians are NOT Manavas, since his brother Manu was purer and was chosen as the flood hero.

CHINESE  They are indeed the hidden Aryas.  I just found out that "Min" in chinese also means "people", the tribe of Huang Di, the Yellow Emperor and the Jade Emperor created people, they are Min.

And the indo-aryan peoples came to europe via their migrational patterns from persia/northern india to the eurasian steppes, or the uzbekistan/kazakhastan/siberian area, right?
And from what I understand the aryan peoples came to india from persia, and established all the religion and culture of india. They were a lighter skinned people and according to you are descended from a certain emperor, his name escapes me, and he is descended from a sun goddess. The emperor has a chinese sounding name, so was his empire on the asian land mass and did the aryan peoples go from there to persia, then to northern india etc?

Aryans are descended from the hero of the UNIVERSAL flood.  For the ancient books state that MANU AND HIS PRIESTS DESCENDED FROM THE HIGHEST PEAK OF the WORLD ---THE HIMALAYAS.  Noahs flood seems only LOCAL, since the highest peak is Mt. Ararat, which is a very little mountain.

Aryans spread out from the Himalayas.  

From their own books, Persians state that Zoaraster had to run away to the west because the priests tried to kill him...somewhere in Afghanistan to Persia, and Persians again trace their lineage to Yama, not Manu.  So Persians are not related to the Indian Aryas who trace their lineage to Manu and say they descended from the Himalayas.  

Indian Aryans are the only ones who have detailed lineages and the story of the flood, whereas other Aryans only have a vague memory of being related to Manu.

"I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far (Philippians 1:23)."
"We know that if the earthly tent [body] we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God [a spiritual body], an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands.  . .While we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because. . . we long to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling [spiritual body], so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. . .We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:1, 3, ."

yes, but you must remember that we are talking about evangelical christianity...which in order to get converts says:

1) The good news is Christ died for your sins...i.e. become baptized and you go to heaven--- tadaaa!
2) When Christ comes, all non-Christians will be killed or go to hell -- so convert now!
3) Yahweh was the ONE TRUE GOD, all other gods are false and you are pagan (HERE'S EXOTHEN)...this is when Aryans get an angry twitch  since they remember that Yahweh always ran to the Aryan Gods to save his "chosen ones" and to give back little  Israel to them on grounds of charity...This is the truth...it's not politically correct...but you can take it or leave it.  And now we are to believe it is thanks to the Jewish God Yahweh, who could not even grant Israel to his own people without Aryan help, that Aryans are ruling the earth once again, when they have ruled it for eons without any Jewish God.  Aryans are great spiritual attainers and have been granted their own covenant...thank you...and Aryans don't have to say 'woof, woof' to ANYONE.

In India, they go:

Did you know Aryans thought you were slaves, you should follow semitic God --- semites just say you should go "woof, woof" they'll throw you a few crumbs...

This thread is about the plague of evangelical Christianity from the deep ends where people don't really think too much.  They misrepresent semitic tradition  time and time again in a positive light and make Aryans into a bunch of spiritual clowns! .  

Ooh, Aryans had many Gods ...oooh, Aryans were pagans...Aryans were racists...Aryans were mean...Aryans are unkosher...One would think Aryans were big green eyed monsters that plagued the earth and these poor, poor sons of Adam couldn't tell a lie, when that's the reason they were kicked out of heaven in the first place...

They have even misrepresented Aryan texts!  Saying Aryans have many Gods. Rig Veda 1:132:2, the VERY FIRST BOOK talks about a UNIVERSAL ONE GOD.  The BIble only talks about  one diety, and he isn't even universal.


Why do Aryans rule the world?  Certainly NOT because of the Jewish God yahweh: God says in the Rig Veda 4:26:7:2 : I give the earth to the Aryan.  

Now I wonder what would happen if Aryans throughout the world demanded the earth, like Jews demand Israel because of their covenant?

Hi Berserk,

I'm sorry you think I am being arrogant or facetious, I'm just being my natural obnoxious self... well, I'm glad that you have had a great experience and you are not one of those "it's my religion or else" type evangelists, but you must admit there are those types and it is to them that I pose these questions.  

I have no problems with open minded sorts who read about every religion and offer all sages respect.  Again, I never said I was against Christ, I simply asked a very good question...why wait for the return of anyone?  Why should you leave the work of self redemption to someone else's return?  Isn't that simply wasting your time...and you surely must agree that time waits for noone.  Jesus has finished his job, now you have gotta do yours, you've got to bear the cross...or forget about it.  Jesus never said he'll make it easier for you.

You also seem to have been somehow insulted that I speak of Quetzacoatl and Christ in the same breath. Why?  That is quite arrogant.  I was simply making the point that to me a Jewish God somewhere in Israel is the same as some Mayan God somewhere in south America... they do not speak to me...although as human beings, albeit of different spiritual lineages, we share some experiences.

And if you are insulted that Jesus can be compared to Quetzacoatl, Aryans can be insulted that their Gods are being compared to a Gods from a people who couldn't even rule Israel for long without Aryan help. The Mayans were a highly gifted people and so were there Gods, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna start worshipping Quetzacoatl any time soon and wait with baited breath his return


You also quote one of my conversations with Exothen, who despite my historical references of  Mitanni ruling northern Syria and being a part of Egyptian royalty refuses to admit that the Bible as well as most world scriptures are a product of mutual influence and wishes to separate eastern traditions from the semitic ones simply because he can't stand the idea of humanity actually sharing spiritual ideas.

And yes I make no apologies, I do not think like many Christians, that the semitic tradition is the highest...or that they recieved the highest truths...I follow the Aryan traditions of my ancestors and I think they have the highest understanding...Aryans have been maligned as racists for far too long, with the semites quietly and sometimes violently converting people behind their backs...so it is not wrong for me to set the record straight and show the semites their own racist/casteist records -- they are sons of Adam no doubt, having lied and been kicked out of heaven...Aryans atleast are honest and have never misrepresented their beliefs to anyone...

Kalratri, just so you know: as a college religion professor, I regularly taught Hinduism in my course on Comparative Religion.  I only spoke positively about your faith and had a great relationship with my Hindu colleague, who is one of the leading experts on Hinduism in America.  All I want from you is this: replace your acerbic ad hominems with probing questions and I will never hassle you about your bias.  I only wish I knew as much about Hinduism as my Hindu colleague.

No, Kalratri, I have not misjudged you.  If you wonder about my blunt tone in dismantling both your critical skills and your penchant for gross inaccuracies, then you should know that I decided by pay you back in kind for your arrogant ad hominen attacks against a young Christian, exothen, in another thread.   Here is a collage of your remarks to him:

"I know that in the neo-religious traditions of the Middle East, you are supposed to turn off your brain and just believe, but that's not the eastern way. . .But it seems you are not after the truth, but simply after continuing to believe what you believe. . . So what?  What is your point (besides showing your poor reasoning)?. . .I'm just amazed that you and many other evangelists keep saying the same things, even after you are wrong."

You began the present thread by smugly confronting Christians with issues arising from a "very embarrassing quote" (Matthew 15:21-28).   But I have exposed your many interpretive errors and demonstrated that your strident ignorance of biblical teaching is the only source of embarrassment here.  So you resort to the desperate expedient of trying to save face by changing the subject to Christ's Second Coming and future millennial reign in Israel.  Neither subject is relevant to your thread, but in making this shift you only succeed in exposing additional ignorance:

[Kalratri:] "Wait for the second coming of Quetzacoatl...? Are you crazy, what a waste of time!  I'd rather work on my very own first resurrection."
_________________________________

I'll leave aside your sarcastic "Hallelujahs" and mocking comparison of Christ with Quetzelcoatl [note the correct spelling] and direct my comments to your mistaken assumption that the Christian hope is pinned to the second coming of Christ.  True, in the early years of his ministry, Paul expects Christ's imminent return, and so, does not anticipate the fact that his converts will all die (see 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52).   But with additional revelation, Paul comes to the same realization as Jesus, namely that at death we receive spiritual bodies appropriate for the heavenly realm.  Thus, Paul can exult in his later epistles:

"I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far (Philippians 1:23)."
"We know that if the earthly tent [body] we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God [a spiritual body], an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands.  . .While we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because. . . we long to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling [spiritual body], so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. . .We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:1, 3, ."

By his later epistles, Paul shares Jesus' conviction that we enter our heavenly home fully conscious at the moment of death.  The crucified Jesus makes this conviction clear to the penitent thief on a nearby cross:

"Then he [the thief] said, `Remember me when you come into your kingdom.'  He replied, `Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise (Luke 23:42-43).'"

[Kalratri:] "Why should I wait for some Jewish person to come riding on a horse with his kingdom in Israel?"
_____________________________

Your crude caricature of Christ's anticipated millennial reign has two fatal flaws: (1) You assume that the Bible teaches that Christ's future kingdom will be located in time and space, that is, in Israel.  But your error is exposed by Jesus' statement in Luke 17:20-21:

"Once having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, `The kingdom of God does not come with signs to be observed, nor will people say, `Here it is,' or `There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

If Jesus road down to Israel on a horse, that would be "a sign to be observed", now wouldn't it?  And if Jesus established His kingdom in Israel, people could say, "There it is", now wouldn't they?

(2) You are of course making a disparaging reference to the doctrine of Christ's future millennial reign.  But the highly symbolic text on which this doctrine is primarily based never says that Christ's millennial reign will occur on this earth (Revelation 20:4-6).  In fact, the prophetic seer envisions the divine creation of "a new heaven and a new earth" after our earth passes away (21:1).  In his vision the new earth lacks any sea.  It seems likely that the seer intends us to conclude that Christ's millennial reign will be located on this new earth, i. e. probably on an earthlike astral plane.   Otherwise, "the new earth" has no function in early Christian thought!  

Berserk

Ah, a Hindu who manifests uncharacteristic New Age hostility to Christianity!  Well, you're entitled, as long as you pose questions rather than make dogmatic assertions about issues you poorly grasp.  Perhaps, my detailed clarification will create a more tolerant Kalratri.

You misjudge me --  I'm not against Christ , I just say he came for the Jews primarily and perhaps after his resurrection for others, and it's there problem that they couldn't recognize a divine figure of their own, not mine...

you know like Quetzacoatl(sp?) came for the Mayans...now if some follower of Quetzacoatl comes to me and says convert and Quetzacoatl is gonna save you and he's gonna have a second coming, I'll say....well actually I don't know what I would say!  Then I would have to look up all Quetzacoatl verses and see if he ever called me a dog...even in a zen way...then I would see that Quetzacoatl ALSO gained eternal life...and then I would go Hallelujah...why so many immortals in this world...now I gotta do what I gotta do since they are done with their hard work and now want to start a silly following...

wait for the second coming of Quetzacoatl...?? Are you crazy, what a waste of time!  I'd rather work on my very own first resurrection ---


Tell me, all  folks want to know on how Christianity will help me have a resurrection and a second coming...?  Can I be the second Christ...if not, why should I care, why should I wait for some Jewish person to come riding on a horse with his kingdom in Israel?  It's the same with Islam, Mohammad said he was the last prophet...isn't that like well, sorry rest of you pathetic losers can't do it...just follow me atleast you'll get to heaven.... don't other people find this very limiting?...why should anyone wait for Jesus the King?....I want to be king...er, Queen...   I just don't see the benefits...

Hi Berserk,

Dear Kalratri,

Your post would be quite acceptable if you posed it as a question.  Instead, you resort to the typical New Age expedient of issuing dogmatic pronouncements about texts you don't understand.  My main beef with New Agers is that they often don't know what they don't know.

well actually I'm an old ager type... , it's really funny that young whipper snapper religions such as Judaism and Christianity can be called "that old time religion" compared to Hinduism/taoism or Buddhism and other smaller religions.

You quote Matthew 15:21-28 and label it "this very embarrassing quote."
First, you imagine that Jesus is being coarse and rude to the Canaanite woman.  What you overlook is the need, often stressed by Jesus, for the supplicant to act on her [his] faith before it can be effective.  The test begins with Jesus' silence at her request.  The term "dog" is a slang Palestinian term for "Gentile" and lacks the offensive connotation it has today.  The woman takes Jesus' test in stride with a witty retort and Jesus is gladly bested in His rhetorical skirmish with her.  Far from contempt, Jesus' high regard for her is finally revealed in His response, "Woman, great is your faith!  Your request is granted (15:28)."

It would however seem in VERY bad taste to test someone when they have a sick dying child, now wouldn't you say?  Christ however did state several times that he ONLY came for the 10 tribes of Israel, even on his return he only mentions saving some members of the 10 tribes.

I'm not saying Christ didn't attain to spiritual greatness, particularly after his resurrection, it's that Christ didn't come for non-Jews until AFTER his death, when Paul had a vision of him... but then again who needs this?...Gentiles have their own spiritual histories who have produced  men and women equal to or of greater spiritual caliber than Christ.  Christ came to fulfill the covenant for the Jews, he even died on the cross to fulfill this Jewish covenant...non-Jews can accept him if they please as long as they admit that Christ did not come for them primarily.  As I said, I like Christ, but am not gonna sell out my own religion for him any time soon.

The only ones who fare badly in this incident are Jesus' disciples who urge Him to "send her away, for she keeps crying after us."  Their reaction mirrors the low standing of Jewish women in first-century Palestinian society.   According to early rabbinic tradition, a Jew is urged to speak to his wife as little as possible and not even to greet a woman in public.  A Jewish woman is not permitted to approach a Jewish teacher in public.  This oppressive attitude explains why no Jewish woman ever confronts Jesus with a request for healing.  

So the woman with the menstrual bleeding problem sneaks up behind Jesus to touch His garment in the hope that this will bring her healing (see Mark 5:26-34).  By Jewish law, she made Jesus "unclean" in the act of touching Him.  Jesus makes her act of faith public to praise it and to expose the stupidity of heartless religious laws.  He implicitly poses the question, "Why would God heal her if she was sinning by touching me?"  



In the synagogue Jesus knows that the crippled woman will not dare approach her; so He takes the initiative, summons her, and heals her on the Sabbath (see Luke 13:10-17--another no no).  Jesus must also take the initiative to engage the Samaritan woman in conversation (see John 4).  She becomes the first Christian missionary to non-Jews.  

Jesus is revolutionary in His unprecedented respect for women.  Note His sexually parallel parables, one featuring a man, the other a woman.  Note also His love and openness to the socially marginal--prostitutes and tax collectors.

Jesus was revolutionary in the middle east I guess.  He was definately nicer to women than the Jews of THE TIME.  However Jesus didn't think women could be priests, atleast according to Paul.  

(2) Second, you imagine you detect a serious contradiction between Jesus' initial restriction of the disciples' mission to Israel (Matthew 15:24, cp. 10:5-6) and  the Risen Lord's instructions to take His message "to all nations" (Matthew 28:18-20).  Of course, the contradiction exists only in your untutored imagination.  Jesus' message cannot be finalized until His redemptive death (see e.g. Mark 10:45).  Prior to His resurrection, Jesus first needs to establish an ample  Palestinian core group of followers.  But even during His public ministry, Jesus anticipates that, after His death, His disciplies would take the Gospel to the Gentile world outside Israel:

"And the Gospel must...be preached to all nations (Mark 13:10)."
"And this Gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed thruoghout the world, as a testimony to all nations (Matthew 24:14)."

Berserk

YOu forget as a TESTIMONY...the gospel is to be preached as a testimony that Jesus did arise from the dead --- HALLELUJAH...that's it... the guy did it, did I ever say he didn't?  Nope, only certain priest type Jews did... priests are always jealous of outsiders attaining higher than they did...believe me I know, I'm a Hindu:lol:

This very embarrassing quote:
---------------------------------------------
"A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, 'Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession.  Jesus did not answer a word.  So his disciples came to him and urged him, 'Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.'
 
He [Jesus] answered, 'I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel.'  The woman came and knelt before him.  

'Lord, help me!' she said.  

He [Jesus] replied 'It is not right to take the children's [Jews] bread [blessings and miracles reserved for them] and toss it to their dogs [the Canaanite, or the Philistines].'  
'Yes, Lord' she said, 'but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table.'    
Then Jesus answered, 'Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.'   And her daughter was healed from that very hour.   (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 15:22-28)"


"I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel":  

Jesus also said:  "These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: 'Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.'  (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 10:5-6)"  

And when Jesus told his disciples to go "to all nations" and teach them the words and baptize them in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit (Mathew 28:18-20)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

No I haven't heard of it. Do they still have any books that have the precise rituals or have they been lost (probably burned in the library at Alexandria)...?



I think many of the rituals have been preserved within in the 'Corpus Hermeticum' of body of hermetic lore that survived christian prohibition, and the tragic lose of the Library of alexandria,  preserved in many cases secretly by Christian monks funnily enough! and was transmitted to the middle-ages and from there to the various modern western mystery schools, like the Golden Dawn etc.

However I am not sure if it is just the basic outline that survived or the presise details.

Concerning Hermetism:
Hermetisism/gnostism differs from eastern traditions however as it isnt pantheistic as such more kind of a mix of monotheism AND polytheism, wherin there is a trancendent One above all knowledge but this manifests itself down a 'chain of being' in a pyramid right down to our level, manifesting as all the various gods, spirits etc... a favourite line is that 'the One manifests itself in diversity'.



It probably wouldnt take much to shift the trancendent 'One' to a pantheistic 'Brahman' interpretation mind you, and in my view would reconcile the two philosophies.. perhaps this has been done already. This is pretty much the view of modern neo-paganism.

Brahman is a monistic idea, where all is derived from one transcendant substance.  Pantheism is when all things are worshipped as God, sort of like multiple energies.  So you are actually saying the same thing.

Monotheism is "ONE GOD SEPARATE FROM CREATION"...in other words, God and the substance used to create are two separate objects and therefore one cannot become the other.  Polytheism is similar, except there are multiple Gods you can never become that just play around with you like you are their puppet and all humans are capable of are becoming heroes or attaining heaven.

Actually, if I were pagan and really wanted to revive my religious tradition, the first thing I would do is try to get all original NONTRANSLATED incantations for all the Gods in europe, even if it is very little, then I would transliterate and translate it for others who are interested in pre-christian religions.

I have seen translations of incantations of Odin on the internet, but not the original one.

kalratri_


The monotheists didnt get this however... although funnily enough in some christian denomenations (Catholic and Orthodox for example) icons are ok, even when they fulfil the same function! but there you go..

Doug

I do generally dislike the hippocracy associated with monotheitic religions, that is why I actually like calling them the "Adamic" religions ... these religions come from people who are descended from Adam --- the guy who lied to God, blamed the woman for all his problems, and both were disgracefully kicked out of heaven.   So I say, what do you expect?

Even the Muslims actually have a stone, "THE BLACK STONE" which they are supposed to circumambulate 7 times and kiss, which Mohammad called the "Right hand of God"...anyone familiar with the stone and world religions would see it as a Phallic symbol akin to a Shiva Linga.  Shiva is ofcourse the "right side of God".  But you will not find many muslim who will admit to this...the Adam's family values continues...

Also, the Adamic religions did not ever get a "universal one God" akin to "Brahman"...monotheism is simply the picking and worshipping of  one diety.  That's why you have further fights between Jews, Christians and Muslims who claim that their God is different from the others.  The statement "my Christian God is not the same God as Allah..." is found quite often. ..but I digress.

PS kalratri, have you heard of 'theurgy'? this was a form of mysticism/magick performed in Roman times and one of the practices was the creating of specialised statues that could be the recepticles of the gods.. this might be accomplished by placing special herbs or other materials associated the the god inside the statue or special prayers etc.. the god in question is then able to inhabit that statue or focus on it in some way, allowing a more direct connection with worshippers... It sounds a bit like the eastern practice you describe..
I have to add however that this practice was only conducted by specialists and was in no way a common practice amongst most pagans in the ancient world.

No I haven't heard of it.  Do they still have any books that have the precise rituals or have they been lost (probably burned in the library at Alexandria)...?

Also it is interesting that you mentioned some Greek concepts of "idolatry"... it is similar to the buddhist mandala, where the perfection of the mandala itself is considered "holy" or divine.  The sanskrit term "siddha" means perfection...perfection is divine.

ould simply say.. so what?

I have never been able to understand this hangup.. even in classical greek times, people KNEW that the statua wasnt ACTUALLY a deity but was simply a useful representation, and was a focus for reverence. they wre well aware that the deity itself didnt have this exact form (although it could adopt it if it so chose)...

This hangup ultimatly all come's from that scare tactic line in Leviticus 'he who prays to idols shall be destroyed'.... yeah very nice, I'm worried.

Douglas

Actually the statue is more than a point of meditation, most statues are blessed constantly with specific rituals for statues...if the energy of the priest becomes powerful enough, than that statue alone confers blessings and aligns the energy in accordance with the energy represented by that diety for a lay person...thus that diety becomes "living" within that statue and the statue itself is the diety--- and thus it becomes even more powerful for meditation.

The same concept lies in the story of Adam, as energy is put into a mud/clay statue, and the energy becomes high enough that it comes to life.  That's also idolatry. Except in the statue the more powerful energy never becomes God (actually there are stories in Hinduism where the statue itself comes to actual life and even walks temporarily by a powerful sidha) but it becomes highly energized and confers blessings.

Hi Paul,

What I don't like about the old ways Paul, is that to accept them also means to accept their limitations, and the path is extremely long, compared to my own.  Besides, I do not seek Liberation from the Series of Incarnations I chose to experience on this world...  I am happy to return again and continue with the work to be done in Earth's future.  My choice as I see it.

Thanks for the opportunity to answer this question Paul.

Love Always.

That's unfortuneate.  Anyone given the opportunity by being given birth into a lineage with spiritual knowledge has every obligation to take it as far as they possibly can.  Every time someone attains a high state, they raise the energy of entire humanity...  It is a horrible burden, but the knowledge you have now CAN BE LOST IN YOUR NEXT LIFETIME...

For me, that would be a complete waste...it takes a lot of work and a lot of practice...I can't imagine if I lost this knowledge in my next life. Win or lose,  I'm certainly going to try my best.

[I said, 'I am the Son of God]

Hello again Exothen,

Sorry for my late response, but I had a holiday and was too busy ...

kalratri,

I know in the neo-religious traditions of the middle east, you are supposed turn off your brain and just believe, but that's not the eastern way.

That is not it at all. The Bible commands people to think and use reason, not to turn off one's brain. But this is so with eastern religions. Is that not the whole purpose of meditation: to forget everything, empty one's mind and become one with the universe?

Ooooh, I'm impressed, you have some basic "reading" knowledge of eastern theology.  But Eastern theology can never be confused for semitic tradition since eastern theology is based on pure reason and very advanced meditative techniques which further hone that reasoning ability.  The concept of "no mind" or "empty mind" is a useless idea until it's actually experienced.  This concept can come AFTER reasoning or without any reason.  It depends on how naturally spiritually advanced you are.  There are several Zen tales of even illiterates attaining Nirvana before Zen masters.  But I will not go further in explaining this.  

So yes, spiritual PRACTICE is considered far superior to intellectualization in eastern tradition, it has such advanced spiritual techniques that even today no semitic tradition meditator matches up with a Buddhist or Hindu or Taoist one.  In fact there are NO meditation books on how to meditate in the semitic traditions.  It is inner knowledge, the east has made it into a science that even "idiots" can see "God"...

But it seems you are not after the truth, but simply after continuing to believe what you believe.


This, of course, implies that I don't have the truth and you do, which proves that you are just trying to win an argument.

Well when someone proves someone wrong on a basic premise, then either you admit you were wrong and start studying more or you can be like yourself and continue the way you are going.  We all have a choice.

You clearly stated that Jesus was the ONLY son of God, you can go back and see the version I posted from another translation which states he was A son of God.  But you are insistent and say that He was the ONLY one.  Again you are wrong.  So I might have the whole truth but I do know basic Christianity better than you, a hard headed evangelist.

First of all, Jesus was not THE son of God, he claimed he was "ONE WITH THE FATHER" or one with God, that is why he is beyond other "sonS of God"

Are you reading what I'm posting?

Joh 10:36  do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

Again that might be just one translation, I had another translation where he said he is A SON OF GOD, not THE son of God.  Again, before Christ resurrects he cries "elohi, elohi why have you forsaken me" in Hebrew of course which was a part of the psalms I beleive.  Again, if you say he WAS GOD then you have to tell me why he had to say this.  How could God forsake Himself -- was he talking to himself?

Second of all, Jesus said that the son of God is not exclusive and he was NOT the only son of God, sons of God are mortal and die like men, but since he became one with God he was immortal

I take it that you haven't studied what I suggested? The use of the phrase "sons of God" as it applies to men, only meant that they were righteous representatives of God; it is used of kings and rulers anointed by God.

No it wasn't.  Genesis also states that there were daughters of Adam who married the Elohim and became "ben elohim"...they were giants on earth.  So No they were not just talking about rulers and kings.  It is just like Jesus the Christ who was fathered by the "Elohim"... So your 2000 year old church is either very wrong or can't see the truth and doesn't want to or both.

The Jews as a whole were to make the one and only God, Yahweh, known to the rest of the world. You would know this if you studied what I suggested.

Yahweh was not the ONLY god, again even the Jews admit this in the Bible and mention that there are other Gods but only Yahweh for the Jews since he gave them the 5 books of Moses.  The Elohim are another set of Gods...so you ARE WRONG AGAIN!!! Yahweh was a war God found amongst canaanites whereas the Elohim were related to El, I believe YAhweh was a son of El, but I would have to look it up.  So that means you either don't know enough middle eastern history or you just like misrepresenting other people's religions to suit your inadequacies.  Yahweh is simply another name of the ONE...just like Elohim and El are.

Thirdly, the claim of being "ONE WITH GOD" or "ONE WITH THE WAY" is largely found in eastern traditions from Hinduism to Taoism

So what? The use of it by Jesus is a claim of equality with God - he was one in essence and nature. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus was God in the flesh, God incarnate. This is the very opposite of what eastern traditions believe.

How silly, Apollo and a whole host of others were "sons of Gods" way before Christ.  Eastern traditions never had sons of Gods only Gods...sorry, I'm afraid our meditative techniques only generates Gods who encompass the entire universe in their body, no sons of Gods.  So that would mean that Christ was their Son.... that's cool...

So the church is wrong once again, since thousands upon thousands of people besides Jesus have become "ONE WITH GOD"....So Jesus is not the ONLY one

Well, Jesus and the Bible are in strong disagreement with you.

No, I'm afraid Jesus disagrees with you and the modern misrepresentation of him by the church.  

The concept of Avatars, or "God becoming flesh" is quite ancient.

So what?

Er, okay so he had a revelation in a shaman ritual, so did he get any revelation of Christ in a church ritual...?

Not as far as I know, but his revelation was very much in agreement with Christian theology. He used to be quite like you actually - strongly disliked Christianity, was into all the eastern philosophy and spiritual practices, like AP (which is why he was a member here). And I'm quite certain that he isn't the only one who has had revelations of the real Satan and real Jesus.

He was like me? er, yeah.  No he couldn't be like me.  I am not experimenting with religion, I have a very wonderful religion THE MOST ANCIENT RELIGION...your 2000 year old church still can't match...whose purfying practices makes me see many of the immortals in very little time.  And I never said strongly disliked Christianity or Christ, as I said I appreciate anyone willing to undergo that spiritual transfiguration.  I only disagree with SOME members of the church who insist on reducing Christ to a fast food religion -- 1 billion served and counting-- and NOT ONE IMMORTAL ...

within the framework of 2000 years of church, Hinduism and Buddhism and Taoism has made over 100 immortals at the same level of Jesus the Christ according to our records -- some even exceeded him .... walking on water, healing, committing bodily suicide...it's like old news...  Of course we also had many more miracles... higher "miracles" than anything in the Bible, of course to us it's just Yoga.... Even today, there are more Buddhists, Hindus and Taoists who can perform more miracles than most Christians/Jews/muslims...

the proof is in the pudding, after Christ, how many immortals has the church produced.

[