Jesus - the most misunderstood

A

andrasnm

Jesus was the most remarkable esoteric teacher in human history. Unfortunately he is the most misunderstood of them all. Jesus and Apollonius of Tyana both did remarkable feats, healed the sick, they were clairvoyant and prolific Esoteric Teachers of the Ancient Wisdom. Interestingly from these two Masters Apollonius' name is all but forgotten by the masses. Why is this? Jesus died on the cross and Apollonius of Tyana disappeared after sensed that persecution is foreboding. This death on the cross that made Jesus the most talked about and most misunderstood of the two.
When Constantine had his wholesale conversion of the Roman Empire into Christianity (after and before the Council of Nicea) he had to come up with some new ideas from the historical facts in order to make the new religion more palatable to the masses.
The Council of Nicea was important for several reasons. Beside bringing together church leaders, the council was the first time that church and state had melded. Constantine, via his position as head of the council, was the first to assert political power over the Christian Church. And, many church laws were formed at the Council. Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code discusses the council as the time at which Jesus was declared more than just a charismatic prophet.
Despite the Da Vinci code popularity I suspect very few people cognitive about that indeed Jesus was VOTED into a “Son of God” status by a slim margin.
The declaration of the Son of God has special meaning. The masses that questioned the logic behind Christianity by asking “what prophet would allow his execution especially when he had the powers such as Jesus did” and “What God would allow his son to be murdered by a fickle and hysterical mob?” had to be satisfied.
To answer all these nagging questions the new Church/State declared that Jesus died for your sins. This idea at least had some cohesion and logic behind it.
The reality is that all Teachers have a theme and Jesus’ teaching was Love and Sacrifice.
"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."
As you all know best teaching is by example. When the authorities came to take Jesus away they came for the whole group. The twelve disciples were to meet the same fate on the cross. This makes sense since the whole movement was to be eliminated and extinguished as they authorities feared riots and the Romans to step in.
So when the men came in the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus stepped forward and asked them
“Whom do you seek?” this direct confrontation made these men stop in their tracks. I imagine the force of the voice and Jesus reputation must have helped. These armed men who came to take the whole group away, answered. “We seek Jesus of Nazareth.”
“I am he. You came for me, now let these men be” and the disciples ran forth into a dozen directions, some naked.
So Jesus’ death does not lift your Karma. Everybody needs to account for his/hers deeds.

Copyright 2006 by Andras M. Nagy
 
andrasnm;

"When Constantine had his wholesale conversion of the Roman Empire into Christianity (after and before the Council of Nicea) he had to come up with some new ideas from the historical facts in order to make the new religion more palatable to the masses."


Yeah, too bad he screwed around with the gold standard and destroyed his empire.
 
THe council of nicea-interesting period, i bet. Devolution of phylosophy, into something the common folk would buy without rioting in defense of their pagan rituals.


I gather, he was one of the biggset backers of the gold standard, just keeping up with supply had the usual effects-hoarding, decreased (real) money circulation, and -inflation.

So, moral of the story, hoard gold, because
goldmembersoffice.jpg


"You shee, i luffe goold, mishter powers, yesh, goooold........"
 
Quote from andrasnm:

When Constantine had his wholesale conversion of the Roman Empire into Christianity

snip
Copyright 2006 by Andras M. Nagy
More...

fwiw-Constantine did not convert the empire, rather he permitted Christians to worship and restored property stolen from them

The Edict of Milan did this and it reads:

"When I, Constantine Augustus, as well as I, Licinius Augustus, fortunately met near Mediolanurn (Milan), and were considering everything that pertained to the public welfare and security, we thought, among other things which we saw would be for the good of many, those regulations pertaining to the reverence of the Divinity ought certainly to be made first, so that we might grant to the Christians and others full authority to observe that religion which each preferred; whence any Divinity whatsoever in the seat of the heavens may be propitious and kindly disposed to us and all who are placed under our rule."

Council of Nicea was likely held for political reasons not belief. It is interesting to see which of the many "holy books" were excluded from the Bible. The ones not making the cut were those that were in part not politically acceptable such as the Gospel of Phillip.

The Council of Nicea has many political elements such as multiple godheads (tell me who is the HOly Ghost) included to appease pagans such as the setting of Christmas to coincide with the pagan celebration of Sol Invictus that for some strange reason was 25 December too.

Ultimately this led to Christianity being the offical religion but Nicea in part was about the State controlling religion not the other way around. So Constantine the Great gets " the Great" added by the Church and to me for his political skills at the Council.


Seneca
 
Arianism
Arius (256-336 A.D.) was a Christian priest, based in Egypt, who was purported to be responsible for a massive division in early Christian thought. Arius had asserted that Jesus Christ was not divine as the Christian church had heretofore taught. Followers of Arius subscribed to this belief, thus forming the first challenge to existing church doctrine which taught that God existed as a Trinity – The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit. The divide in the church that resulted from the different viewpoints of Arianism and Trinitarianism came in the early fourth century and culminated in the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

The truth behind the doctrine of the Holy Trinity
Constantine and his contemporaries, with the advent of the Arianism controversy, uncovered the first misunderstanding of the trinity. The real trinity is , according to the esotric doctrine of Ancient Wisdom, a symbolism of Sprit, Matter, and Motion (or Guide, Guru, Master). This is a foundation of the known universe and the explanation of the ever-present conflict between Creationism and Evolution.

The largest problem with explaining the Holy Trinity is that Christians will frequently get a different answer depending on the flavor of the denomination. This is not an intellectually sound practice for people who possess common sense and rationale. The sad reality is that organized religion is offers no true philosphical answers and acts only as a weekend social circuit for many.

First Council of Nicaea
First Alterations of the original teachings
The controversy created by the divide between the followers of Arianism and Trinitarianism became too profound for Constantine to ignore. In 325 A.D., Constantine took steps to resolve the matter by calling the First Council of Nicaea. This conference was the first time leaders of the Christian Church gathered to define and dictate doctrine. Unfortunately for Arianus, more than ninety nine percent of the attendees voted against him and he was declared a heretic, excommunicated, and exiled, along with his followers. Additionally, all of his writings were burned.

During the Council, church leaders made decisions regarding the alteration of the Gospels. Clarification of doctrine takes place in all religious organizations and the early Christian Church was no exception. The reasons for these alterations were primarily political. Church leaders were given the opportunity to edit the gospels to form what they believed to be a more accurate and acceptable religious testament. Mary Magdalene was, at this time, declared to be an undesirable. Many historians believe that this was more a grievous error than an intentional slight. Jesus Christ was declared the immortal son of God. The dates of important Christian celebrations were changed to align with current pagan holidays. And the all-important observance of Easter was formally separated from the Jewish observance of Passover. These changes undeniably changed the Church.

This Creed of Nicea not only clarified the position of Jesus Christ in the church. By changing the dates of Christian celebrations to those of pagan holidays, the Church facillitated the conversion of pagans to worshippers of Christ. Additionally, Constantine viewed the Jews as the murders of Christ, therefore the separating of Easter from Passover was of special importance to him. There is no doubt that the Creed of Nicea and the First Council of Nicaea was wrought with politics and political motives.


Quote from seneca_roman:

fwiw-Constantine did not convert the empire, rather he permitted Christians to worship and restored property stolen from them

The Edict of Milan did this and it reads:

"When I, Constantine Augustus, as well as I, Licinius Augustus, fortunately met near Mediolanurn (Milan), and were considering everything that pertained to the public welfare and security, we thought, among other things which we saw would be for the good of many, those regulations pertaining to the reverence of the Divinity ought certainly to be made first, so that we might grant to the Christians and others full authority to observe that religion which each preferred; whence any Divinity whatsoever in the seat of the heavens may be propitious and kindly disposed to us and all who are placed under our rule."

Council of Nicea was likely held for political reasons not belief. It is interesting to see which of the many "holy books" were excluded from the Bible. The ones not making the cut were those that were in part not politically acceptable such as the Gospel of Phillip.

The Council of Nicea has many political elements such as multiple godheads (tell me who is the HOly Ghost) included to appease pagans such as the setting of Christmas to coincide with the pagan celebration of Sol Invictus that for some strange reason was 25 December too.

Ultimately this led to Christianity being the offical religion but Nicea in part was about the State controlling religion not the other way around. So Constantine the Great gets " the Great" added by the Church and to me for his political skills at the Council.


Seneca
More...
 
please give a a scholarly citation to the fact that the council of Nicea altered the gospels.

That seems to me a misread to me. While they agreed on what became the Cannon I have never heard anyone claim they rewrote the gospels.

Secondly, I think you can see another misdirectiion.

The first or second poster explained that heretofore there was a belief in the trinity and that teh arians challenged the orthodoxy.

The council of Nicea stamped its approval on the orthodoxy which flows from and understanding of the old testament and the earliest teachings of the church.

Just go to the Jews for jesus cite and search on trinity.

You will see that the hebrew word echad stands for compound unity and that even in Gensis God refers to himself in the Plaural.
 
jem,
Let's forget about the "scholars". Clearly the historians and the theologians would never deny the fact that the original ideas of Gnostics and not politically correct versions of the gospels in fact existed but later exterminated and burned by dozens. I would like to point you to the Dead see scrolls, and the Nag Hammadi Library to start.
Here are some pointers;
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html


How about you explaining me the Holy trinity and how that actually works? How about it? How is Jesus actually a man but the God as well? And what about the Holly Ghost? The original teaching of Jesus and the 12 disciples had no such nonsense it it. The Bible never had this nonsense it. Despite the fact that the Bible is misquoted and rather poorly translated it is a story of 3 levels and interestingly most people actually dabble on the 1st level.

Dogma
The Church crystallized the falsehoods and dogmas about sin, redemption and Jesus’ new status as God incarnate. With all this the church would later sell redemption notes and decide what sins require what penance (in terms of hail marries or other prayers).
The reality is no incarnation of God exists or has ever existed. There must an understanding of the Infinite and Transcendental Principle first. For something to be pure and omniscient it is required to take no carnal form or be of matter as matter by definition is finite and hence cannot be denigrated as Godly or Divine.

Conclusion
Despite the convenience of ‘do as you please as long as you confess on Sunday’ - Jesus’ death does not lift your Karma. Everybody needs to account for his/hers deeds. If you think about it - it make perfect sense. If it is too good to be true – is usually is…


Quote from jem:

please give a a scholarly citation to the fact that the council of Nicea altered the gospels.

That seems to me a misread to me. While they agreed on what became the Cannon I have never heard anyone claim they rewrote the gospels.

Secondly, I think you can see another misdirectiion.

The first or second poster explained that heretofore there was a belief in the trinity and that teh arians challenged the orthodoxy.

The council of Nicea stamped its approval on the orthodoxy which flows from and understanding of the old testament and the earliest teachings of the church.

Just go to the Jews for jesus cite and search on trinity.

You will see that the hebrew word echad stands for compound unity and that even in Gensis God refers to himself in the Plaural.
More...
 
what the orthodoxy was - vs. whether the orthodoxy is true -- are two entirely different arguments.

I do not consider it my job to prove to you that my beliefs are true.

but I am more than willing to explain to you the man places int he bible in which the trinity is either foreshadowed or alluded to.

However I think the most pressing question you may be asking is - did jesus claim to be the messiah or did jesus claim to be god. Both questions I am willing to address if that is your question.

Just let me know which questions you are posing and I will address them.
 
From the jewsforjesus.com website.

there are many more powerful explanations of the trinity this is just for starters.


The doctrine of the Trinity is fundamental to the Christian faith. We who believe in Jesus affirm that there are three persons in one Godhead, so that all three are one God as to substance, but three persons as to individuality. But an unbeliever, particularly an unbelieving Jewish person hearing those closing words at an Anglican wedding service, would find them irrelevant. Most Jewish people think that the doctrine of the Trinity is a foreign, Gentile concept. While it is true that the Old Testament portion of Scripture does not present as clear a picture of the three-in-one/one-as-three Godhead, there are indications of the plurality of the Godhead in the Hebrew Scriptures.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Genesis 1:1-2 we read, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." In the very beginning of God's revelation of himself we read of two Persons—God and the Spirit of God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, in Exodus 3:13-14, Moses says to God, "Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?" God's answer to Moses is, "I AM THAT I AM…Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you." Here God, when asked to identify himself, says, in effect, "I AM, I AM, I AM. Tell the children of Israel that the Triune God has sent you. Not Isis, not Moloch, not Baal, not Ishtar, but the unique Triune God of Israel has sent you."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then there is the blessing of Numbers 6:22-27: "And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, In this way ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying unto them, The LORD bless thee, and keep thee; The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them." Here God says three times that his name is THE LORD, and he promises to bless those who call upon him as THE LORD, THE LORD, THE LORD. This also seems to hint at the triune nature of God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Deuteronomy 6:4, the great Sh'ma prayer of Judaism, God says, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD." Again we see the three in one, The LORD, God, the LORD—one.

It appears that God revealed himself in his Triune nature whenever he was about to make some drastic change in his dealings with his people or when he was about to act in judgment.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moving on to the historical books, in I Samuel 3 we find the beautiful story of God's call to Samuel. Israel was far gone in apostasy and immorality, but the child Samuel ministered faithfully in the Temple. One night, when all was quiet and old Eli and Samuel were asleep, the Lord called Samuel. The passage in verses 4-9 begins, "…the LORD called Samuel. And he answered, Here am I. And he ran unto Eli and said, Here am I; for thou calledst me. And he said, I called not; lie down again. And he went and lay down. And the LORD called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And he answered, I called not, my son; lie down again.…And the LORD called Samuel again the third time. And he arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And Eli perceived that the LORD had called the child." When the LORD called Samuel the third time, Eli knew that this surely was God calling Samuel, and not a dream. Could it not be that Eli and other godly Jews believed in a triune God?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Isaiah 6:3 we see that the Lord of hosts is not merely holy, but "Holy, holy, holy." Again one Lord, but three times holy.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another hint that godly Jews believed in a triune God may be seen in Jeremiah 7:4: "Trust not in lying words, saying, The temple of the LORD, The Temple of the LORD, The Temple of the Lord, are these." There was only one temple and only one Lord, but belief in a trinity might be expressed by saying three times, "The temple of the Lord." In this chapter we see that the Lord was chiding those who were careful to keep up with their religious obligations, and to hold true doctrine, but who did not carry their religion into the streets and into their own lives. He was telling them that their worship was correct and their beliefs were true, but their deeds did not match their worship or their beliefs.

There are also other passages that would seem to indicate the triune nature of God. Isaiah 48:16 and Zechariah 4:6 refer to the Spirit of God; there are two references to God's son—one in Psalm 2 and another in Proverbs 30:1-4. Thus, we see that God, the Son of God, and the Spirit of God were known to ancient Israel. Could it not be that the Lord's ancient people, those who knew God in truth, did hold to a belief in the triune nature of God?
 
Jem,
Nobody can prove anything. The Buddha said it "Listen, ask questions and if you hear something reconcile it in your heart and in mind, if it makes sense accept it and if it does not, then don't".
The Bible has passages that some will interpret as Jesus was god but as I have stated I believe that they are allegories and the Bible is written in 3 levels that 90-percent is misunderstood as the orthodoxy goes. I believe in trinity too but not the way most. Your passages only state a trinity but I question your interpretation of the trinity not the existence of it.... [Spirit, Matter, Motion][Guru, Guide, Master]
Cheers

Quote from jem:

what the orthodoxy was - vs. whether the orthodoxy is true -- are two entirely different arguments.

I do not consider it my job to prove to you that my beliefs are true.

but I am more than willing to explain to you the man places int he bible in which the trinity is either foreshadowed or alluded to.

However I think the most pressing question you may be asking is - did jesus claim to be the messiah or did jesus claim to be god. Both questions I am willing to address if that is your question.

Just let me know which questions you are posing and I will address them.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top