You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
traders who are deeply religious
- Thread starter hermit_trader
- Start date
The magi were followers of Zoroaster. They resided in modern day Iran. They worshipped a eternal flame that is never allowed to die. They anticipated Jesus' birth, not for hundreds of years, but for thousands of years. They went to meet baby Jesus as Zoroaster had prophesied 2000 years before baby Jesus' birth. In return for their gifts, given to baby Jesus, the magis received his baby cloth. After returning back to their homeland, they placed this cloth in their divine flame. The cloth did not burn, thereby proving that Jesus was who he was. There are many miracles attributed to Jesus, right after his birth, that are not in the current Bible versions. You will have to read the Egyptian Coptic Bible and ancient persian texts to find out what those miracles were.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroaster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroaster
Quote from jem:
It is said the Magi were astronmers for other lands who for hundreds of years anticpated the birth of the King of the world by reading the stars.
Quote from TheConMan:
How deep into occult learnings have you gone?
Not too deep. But someone who went deep was Hitler. Basically Hitler was a genius alchemist from a very young age. No one recognized or acknowledged this. So he showed us what he could do.
Hitler worked with the 2nd and 4th dimensions to make things happen in the 3rd dimension.
The Kabbala is a map of the dimensions of creation...nine of them with a tenth overall that is unexplainable and beyond words. This technology was gotten from the Egyptians who used it to create a harmonic morphogenic field called the Blue Nile. It created peace and prosperity for hundres, even thousands of years. The Egyptians were linked up to Sirian intelligence through the pyramids and other temple technologies. Same intelligence as the Magi. Sirius is 6th dimensional, and they are the Keepers of Form. The Magi assisted in keeping Jesus Ka...his light bodies in form with his physical body through alchemical components like gold, frankensense and myrr.
But the Hebrews were moslty only interested in using the technology to communicate and link up with a single source...the planet Nibiru and its inhabitants in the 4th dimension. These are the gods of this world, who are all about power and control. A classic method is monetary exchange.
Hitler turned this technology around on them, and everyone else.
So far, most alchemical endeavors end up falling short due to greed and control issues. What are religions?
The new age is about accessing all nine dimensions..not just for a few elites, but for all on the planet. Jesus was from the ninth dimension and/or from the center of the galaxy. The ninth dimension is one continuous orgasm. Thats some fine alchemy, and it starts here with kundalini rising.
In the new age, there won't be any more occult because the wont be any more secrets. All will come to the light, and all will have the power.
JohnnyK
Quote from JohnnyK:
The new age is about accessing all nine dimensions..not just for a few elites, but for all on the planet. Jesus was from the ninth dimension and/or from the center of the galaxy. The ninth dimension is one continuous orgasm. Thats some fine alchemy, and it starts here with kundalini rising.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9050082810376516406
Here's a thought: is it possible to love God without having a concrete notion of who or what He / She / It is?
Maybe God is a sentient being with a specific book of truths to tout, or maybe not. Maybe God is a spontaneous emergent property born of collective consciousness. Maybe God is the composite of elegant dovetails woven into the fabric of reality, the sum of ground rules that allow for a breathtaking and fulfilling existence in spite of all the bullshit and pain. Maybe God is a pure mental construct embodying the gratitude and joy we feel in our daily lives, as real as any notion of commerce or productivity or purpose.
Not trying to engage in new age psychobabble here. Just wondering aloud if we can search for God without committing ourselves to a specific theistic position or point of view. Maybe God is just a label for 'it' --like the ebay commercials-- with 'it' representing the core essence of what inspires joy, gratitude and fulfillment in life.
And of course, God-as-deity remains an option for some. But are they so far off from worshiping an abstract concept anyway? Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods are real people, but the millions of folks who idolize them don't look up to the actual human being that is MJ or TW. They look up to mental constructs, media composites, stylized images. And while hero worship can be easily distorted or overdone, there is no fatal defect in the core concept of abstracting someone's achievements and qualities to draw strength / inspiration from them.
Maybe freedom lies in recognizing the truths of the observed universe, committing one's self to an upholding of those truths, and yet at the same time recognizing the freedom we have within the constructs of reality to choose our sources of joy, gratitude, and meaning. There is a path to peace--and maybe even bliss!--that remains logically consistent.
If this view has merit, it would explain why the 'sourpuss' attitude of many atheists is a turnoff, even for those who do not quibble with the basic philosophical stance of atheism. There is just something unappealing about devoting one's energy to the relentless destruction of another's hope, rather than finding a cause / hope of one's own. Balance has an appeal that is probably rooted in genetic tendencies (good genes, stable structures and so forth); maybe there is a similar balance appeal to those who seek not just to tear down, but also to build up.
Maybe God is a sentient being with a specific book of truths to tout, or maybe not. Maybe God is a spontaneous emergent property born of collective consciousness. Maybe God is the composite of elegant dovetails woven into the fabric of reality, the sum of ground rules that allow for a breathtaking and fulfilling existence in spite of all the bullshit and pain. Maybe God is a pure mental construct embodying the gratitude and joy we feel in our daily lives, as real as any notion of commerce or productivity or purpose.
Not trying to engage in new age psychobabble here. Just wondering aloud if we can search for God without committing ourselves to a specific theistic position or point of view. Maybe God is just a label for 'it' --like the ebay commercials-- with 'it' representing the core essence of what inspires joy, gratitude and fulfillment in life.
And of course, God-as-deity remains an option for some. But are they so far off from worshiping an abstract concept anyway? Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods are real people, but the millions of folks who idolize them don't look up to the actual human being that is MJ or TW. They look up to mental constructs, media composites, stylized images. And while hero worship can be easily distorted or overdone, there is no fatal defect in the core concept of abstracting someone's achievements and qualities to draw strength / inspiration from them.
Maybe freedom lies in recognizing the truths of the observed universe, committing one's self to an upholding of those truths, and yet at the same time recognizing the freedom we have within the constructs of reality to choose our sources of joy, gratitude, and meaning. There is a path to peace--and maybe even bliss!--that remains logically consistent.
If this view has merit, it would explain why the 'sourpuss' attitude of many atheists is a turnoff, even for those who do not quibble with the basic philosophical stance of atheism. There is just something unappealing about devoting one's energy to the relentless destruction of another's hope, rather than finding a cause / hope of one's own. Balance has an appeal that is probably rooted in genetic tendencies (good genes, stable structures and so forth); maybe there is a similar balance appeal to those who seek not just to tear down, but also to build up.
that would make you a deist. the religion of many of our founding fathers.
http://www.deism.org/frames.htm
Deism (n): Belief in God as revealed by nature and reason combined with a disbelief in scripture, prophets, superstition and church authority.
Deism is a free-thought philosophy, much like Agnosticism, Atheism or Pantheism in that it rejects the dogmas and superstitions of religion in favor of individual reason and empirical observation of the universe. Deism differs from these other free-thought philosophies in that it sees an order and architecture to the universe that indicates a Creator. The word "God" is used to describe this creator, not to be confused with the "Biblegod."
Deism notes that we as humans are endowed with the power of reason and an indomitable spirit. It follows that we are intended to exercise them. Therefore, skepticism and doubt are not "sins" but rather natural expressions of God's gift of reason.
http://www.deism.org/frames.htm
Deism (n): Belief in God as revealed by nature and reason combined with a disbelief in scripture, prophets, superstition and church authority.
Deism is a free-thought philosophy, much like Agnosticism, Atheism or Pantheism in that it rejects the dogmas and superstitions of religion in favor of individual reason and empirical observation of the universe. Deism differs from these other free-thought philosophies in that it sees an order and architecture to the universe that indicates a Creator. The word "God" is used to describe this creator, not to be confused with the "Biblegod."
Deism notes that we as humans are endowed with the power of reason and an indomitable spirit. It follows that we are intended to exercise them. Therefore, skepticism and doubt are not "sins" but rather natural expressions of God's gift of reason.
Quote from archimedes:
Here's a thought: is it possible to love God without having a concrete notion of who or what He / She / It is?
Maybe God is a sentient being with a specific book of truths to tout, or maybe not. Maybe God is a spontaneous emergent property born of collective consciousness. Maybe God is the composite of elegant dovetails woven into the fabric of reality, the sum of ground rules that allow for a breathtaking and fulfilling existence in spite of all the bullshit and pain. Maybe God is a pure mental construct embodying the gratitude and joy we feel in our daily lives, as real as any notion of commerce or productivity or purpose.
Not trying to engage in new age psychobabble here. Just wondering aloud if we can search for God without committing ourselves to a specific theistic position or point of view. Maybe God is just a label for 'it' --like the ebay commercials-- with 'it' representing the core essence of what inspires joy, gratitude and fulfillment in life.
And of course, God-as-deity remains an option for some. But are they so far off from worshiping an abstract concept anyway? Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods are real people, but the millions of folks who idolize them don't look up to the actual human being that is MJ or TW. They look up to mental constructs, media composites, stylized images. And while hero worship can be easily distorted or overdone, there is no fatal defect in the core concept of abstracting someone's achievements and qualities to draw strength / inspiration from them.
Maybe freedom lies in recognizing the truths of the observed universe, committing one's self to an upholding of those truths, and yet at the same time recognizing the freedom we have within the constructs of reality to choose our sources of joy, gratitude, and meaning. There is a path to peace--and maybe even bliss!--that remains logically consistent.
If this view has merit, it would explain why the 'sourpuss' attitude of many atheists is a turnoff, even for those who do not quibble with the basic philosophical stance of atheism. There is just something unappealing about devoting one's energy to the relentless destruction of another's hope, rather than finding a cause / hope of one's own. Balance has an appeal that is probably rooted in genetic tendencies (good genes, stable structures and so forth); maybe there is a similar balance appeal to those who seek not just to tear down, but also to build up.
"If this view has merit, it would explain why the 'sourpuss' attitude of many atheists is a turnoff, even for those who do not quibble with the basic philosophical stance of atheism. There is just something unappealing about devoting one's energy to the relentless destruction of another's hope, rather than finding a cause / hope of one's own. Balance has an appeal that is probably rooted in genetic tendencies (good genes, stable structures and so forth); maybe there is a similar balance appeal to those who seek not just to tear down, but also to build up."
to answer the second part of you question. i think it is the holier than thou attitude of fundamentalist christians that get them in trouble. the constant insistence that they have reveled truth in the bible in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is a collection of fables grates on people. that along with them telling people that they are "lost" and "going to hell" and "living in darkness" is a direct insult. people like me get tired of being insulted by willfully ignorant people and tend to strike back.
if christians actually followed the direction of their bible in Matt people like me would get bored and go away.
Matt.6.6 But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you
to answer the second part of you question. i think it is the holier than thou attitude of fundamentalist christians that get them in trouble. the constant insistence that they have reveled truth in the bible in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is a collection of fables grates on people. that along with them telling people that they are "lost" and "going to hell" and "living in darkness" is a direct insult. people like me get tired of being insulted by willfully ignorant people and tend to strike back.
if christians actually followed the direction of their bible in Matt people like me would get bored and go away.
Matt.6.6 But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you
Quote from vhehn:
that would make you a deist. the religion of many of our founding fathers.
I guess... though an atheist, agnostic or theist label could also apply, depending on which metaphysical path one takes... no matter what certainties we entertain in regards to 'reality' and what reality 'is', there will always be a lacuna separating perception of X and the ontological existence / inherent nature of X... assuming we concede division of the forms...
See, why talk about kundalini 5th dimensions when the questions of everyday life and observed reality are so dang interesting. You don't have to drop acid or suspend the faculties of reason to get into some truly trippy shit...
Quote from vhehn:
to answer the second part of you question. i think it is the holier than thou attitude of fundamentalist christians that get them in trouble. the constant insistence that they have reveled truth in the bible in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is a collection of fables grates on people. that along with them telling people that they are "lost" and "going to hell" and "living in darkness" is a direct insult. people like me get tired of being insulted by willfully ignorant people and tend to strike back.
if christians actually followed the direction of their bible in Matt people like me would get bored and go away.
Matt.6.6 But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you
Sure, that makes sense.
Correct me if I am wrong, then, but it seems fair to say that the hostility of many atheists is the result of an anger response... a lashing out in disgust, if you will.
It seems also fair to note, then, that while disgust and anger are often justified, they are rarely effective.
Like the buddhist observation, hate is a hot coal you pick up with your bare hand to throw at someone else. The one experiencing the rage and disgust is the one who loses from the emotional transaction -- all the more so if the holy roller gets an extra dose of self righteousness from "standing up to a heathen."
There is a great line from one of the city slickers movies: "If hate were people, I would be China." Hating outspoken bible bangers because they are callous dolts is like hating all the bad drivers in L.A. Furthermore, if someone tried to gin up a proportional sense of self-righteous indignation at all the ignorance and stupidity in this world --not just in regards to religion, but economics, politics, social interaction, technical incompetence, bad taste, everything-- their head would explode.
Perhaps it is better to recognize that mass ignorance and gross selfishness are basic evolutonary byproducts of a trial-and-error process that, while somewhat unappealing in contemplation, got us where we are today. At any given point in time, the masses are going to engage in a whole host of outrageously stupid and short-sighted activities because, on balance, we are selfish and simplistic creatures who pick and choose our beliefs for personal or societal utility, not for their veracity. Enlightenment is notable because it is such a rare thing for someone to reach for, let alone achieve.
Making peace with foolishness is like living in L.A. and recognizing that not only do bad drivers outnumber good drivers by a factor of ten to one, it has to be this way because that is how reality works. Excellence, intelligence and thoughtfulness always operate at the margins... but with just enough influence to fight against entropy and do their good work over time.
I would suggest, then, that wise atheists should find a way not just to 'deal with' their visceral reaction to fundies, but to reorder their conceptual frameworks in such a way that the perpetual handwaving of twits no longer disturbs their inner calm. This would also allow for more effective philosophical engagement with the other side on a case by case basis -- like throwing a single starfish into the sea, perhaps, but still something if one feels compelled to fight the good fight.
perhaps you are right and i actually wish religious debates were banned on elite, but when they will not be satisfied until they dictate the very laws we live under this old saying comes to mind:
"All that is needed for ignorance to succeed is for wise men to say nothing."
"All that is needed for ignorance to succeed is for wise men to say nothing."
Quote from archimedes:
Sure, that makes sense.
Correct me if I am wrong, then, but it seems fair to say that the hostility of many atheists is the result of an anger response... a lashing out in disgust, if you will.
It seems also fair to note, then, that while disgust and anger are often justified, they are rarely effective.
Like the buddhist observation, hate is a hot coal you pick up with your bare hand to throw at someone else. The one experiencing the rage and disgust is the one who loses from the emotional transaction -- all the more so if the holy roller gets an extra dose of self righteousness from "standing up to a heathen."
There is a great line from one of the city slickers movies: "If hate were people, I would be China." Hating outspoken bible bangers because they are callous dolts is like hating all the bad drivers in L.A. Furthermore, if someone tried to gin up a proportional sense of self-righteous indignation at all the ignorance and stupidity in this world --not just in regards to religion, but economics, politics, social interaction, technical incompetence, bad taste, everything-- their head would explode.
Perhaps it is better to recognize that mass ignorance and gross selfishness are basic evolutonary byproducts of a trial-and-error process that, while somewhat unappealing in contemplation, got us where we are today. At any given point in time, the masses are going to engage in a whole host of outrageously stupid and short-sighted activities because, on balance, we are selfish and simplistic creatures who pick and choose our beliefs for personal or societal utility, not for their veracity. Enlightenment is notable because it is such a rare thing for someone to reach for, let alone achieve.
Making peace with foolishness is like living in L.A. and recognizing that not only do bad drivers outnumber good drivers by a factor of ten to one, it has to be this way because that is how reality works. Excellence, intelligence and thoughtfulness always operate at the margins... but with just enough influence to fight against entropy and do their good work over time.
I would suggest, then, that wise atheists should find a way not just to 'deal with' their visceral reaction to fundies, but to reorder their conceptual frameworks in such a way that the perpetual handwaving of twits no longer disturbs their inner calm. This would also allow for more effective philosophical engagement with the other side on a case by case basis -- like throwing a single starfish into the sea, perhaps, but still something if one feels compelled to fight the good fight.