Home | Community | Message Board

Cannabis Seeds UK
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: SpiritualWarrior]
    #18852108 - 09/17/13 12:42 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

SpiritualWarrior said:
Quote:

MarkostheGnostic said:
I am beginning to think markosthegnostic has lost his way and fallen into an almost entirely heretical belief system. Seems like in every post he is taking the view that the orthodox church has got it all wrong and that we need to take another look at the scriptures and completely revise our understanding of them into some kind of eastern philosophy of awakening.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but Awakening is not "eastern" in the sense that it belongs to India, Tibet, etc. Eastern Orthodox Hesychasm for example utilizes Yoga-like postures, breathing, visualizations, and mantras (repetitive prayer, the Prayer of the Heart). OF COURSE MY POSITION IS HERETICAL FROM AN ORTHODOX PERSPECTIVE! HELLO! I've been here since 1999 and you've JUST come to that conclusion? Congratulations! :cheers: My tag is MarkostheGnostic. My philosophical stance towards Jewish and Christian scriptures is a radical departure from whatever mainstream orthodox theological perspective you apparently adhere to. I've been saying that for 15 years on these forums.

YOU are considered by a  Gnostic typological model to be a Psychic Christian. Sola Fide. I would be considered to be a Pneumatic Christian, with an entirely different take. You 'believe' this take to be an error. A Gnostic take is that the Pneumatic has the more mature position and can take the "meat" of Reality whilst the Psychic is still taking "milk," comforting mythic stories that attribute spiritual growth to a superego-like Deity, a loving parent, who has already won 'salvation' for their 'child of God.' This is the position of almost every self-proclaimed Christian I've ever met. I have never seen anyone transformed by mere 'belief.' Programmed, as any cult can do yes, but truly transformed to the core, no, never. Belief is a mental content. It is not Being itself, the Logos, the "mind of Christ."

With Gnostics, it is much more a matter of "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" as Philippians 2:12 says. The 1 Thessalonian 5:17 "Pray without ceasing," is no longer understood merely as an Evagrian 'prayer of the mind,' or a Macarian 'prayer of the heart,' but of a continuous transpersonal center that has 'turned on' as a synthesis of mind-breath-heartbeat - an active Sacred Heart, a Heart Cave. Eastern Orthodoxy, I am assured by my old Greek Orthodox childhood friend, that unlike Catholic iconography which is deemed to gauche or gaudy to represent, is implied in Orthodox iconography. In Kabbalistic terms, one has crossed the 'Veil of Paroketh' to Tiphereth, The Sun, The Heart, on the glyph of the Kabbalistic Tree. One has stopped identifying so much with the earthly body-personality, and has come to experience oneself more as 'a spirit having a human experience' than 'a human having a spiritual experience.' One is metaphorically no longer on Earth looking at the Sun, one realizes that one is essentially the Sun looking at the appendage of one's body-personality. And in this metaphor, the Sun is the Son. Iesous identified with the Logos more than with his earthly body-personality He is the paradigmatic, mythic example, but not a unique specie of historical human being. That is the Christ mythos.

The scriptures may reflect the living experience of Gnosis, but living experience is the center of Reality, not the written word. Perhaps unlike yourself, I had experiences that I only later saw reflected in scriptures, but for me, experience preceded anything I ever read. Hopefully I have explained my position. You view it as erroneous, which is just a recapitulation of lots of previous history. I wonder how violent you might have be towards those of Gnostic bent if you lived in the theocracy of the ancient persecutors of Gnostics. Those with profound doubts have always tried to suppress the reminders of their doubts. I, on the other hand have no problem with the average Christian going about with a head full of stories and beliefs that myth was actually historical. This dichotomy between Pneumatic and Psychic exists in every religion on Earth throughout history. I do not adhere to any of the myths, biblical OR Gnostic.

I express myself here, but I have no expectation that anyone will adopt my view. Chances are, those who are in agreement with me, developed the way I did. Gnostics have traditionally been very tolerant of other's takes. Live and let live. Judgement is not your job or mine. I do not speak ill of your faith any more than I'd tell a child or an elderly person that they are wrong. Better a millstone be hung around my neck and me tossed into the sea. Their understanding is just what it is, just as your's is your's and mine is mine. So ask yourself where your self-righteous criticism has its origins.

In the future, perhaps less middle school talking ABOUT me, and more adult talking TO me would be indicative of a courtesy befitting an adult.




He was talking about Orthodox as "correct" Christianity not Eastern Orthodoxy. By the way Hesychasm has nothing to do with visualizations, you're dead wrong on that one. Your Greek Orthodox friend sure is stupid to have you as his friend and let you be confirmed in your heresy. Maybe you could learn from him that in reality the Orthodox Church has way more in common with your own beliefs than you actually think. However it does not go into the philosophical thought and theory that you do, the EOC is about mystical union with God through Christ and the Incarnation.

When mystical union with God takes place, then the person reaches theoria then he sees all of creation radiant with the presence of God. This is an activity of the grace of God and there are many other different effects of it. Point is, we are not "Psychic" like you said but very Pneumatic. We believe that we must have God's Spirit inside of us and it is only through the Sacraments such as Baptism, and Holy Eucharist (body and blood of Christ) that God is able to enter a person and confirm on him Holy Illumination and mystical union. And we teach that the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and that the "Prayer of the Heart" which you said was nothing really does turn into an active "Sacred Heart" as you said. The entire body in fact becomes radiant with the presence of God. So it is "Pneumatic" as well as "Psychic". We believe in the dynamic energies of God and a dynamic union with God through the grace of the Holy Spirit. We receive God's Energies because of Jesus Christ, Prayer, and the Sacraments.

We believe that spirit must become united with matter in order for God to fully dwell inside us. As an Incarnational Faith, we believe Jesus was God and Man, Matter and Spirit, and He symbolizes as well as fulfills that union by his miracles and Passion and Resurrection.
Without this affirmation the faith comes to nothing.

The Eastern Orthodox tradition is like Christian Gnosticism but it is not the kind of Gnosticism which you ascribe to. It is Gnostic because of its deep spiritual traditions and teachings about God and the Holy Spirit, and that you can read a state of Holy Illumination and Theoria (Union with God). Something other Faiths don't teach because they did not have a monastic tradition.

I think you lost the way when you passed the EOC up. You didn't see what was already there, that the traditions and monastic teachings really were that of the Truth. Have you ever read St. Symeon the New Theologian?

Eastern Orthodoxy is different than other forms of Christianity. It is the true Gnostic Christianity which you missed out on. By the way Eastern Orthodoxy is only one ancient sect of Orthodox Christianity, there also are the Egyptian Orthodox, the Syrian, the Armenian etc. These places are where many great monastics came from who taught about God.






Yes, I think this is the crux of my disagreements with markgos which have been ongoing and not restricted to this thread. He sees people like you and I as psychic yet by his own descriptions of psychic and pneumatic, we fit the description of pneumatic.

Markos, (hey look I am addressing you directly) this is what was at the center of the debate we had in the other thread I just didnt know how to express in such few words.

Anyway, what you described described is very close to my beliefs as a Catholic.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18852110 - 09/17/13 12:42 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

WHen you say you dont adhere to any of the myths what do you mean? you dont believe God spoke to Moses or that Moses lead the Israelites out of Egypt or what? I dont know exactly what you mean.

Exactly. The Tenach is midrash - stories that are intended to convey spiritual truths. Theophanies are very colorful highlights to such stories. They were intended to be awe-inspiring, and they are, but it is the holy emotion of awe that is important and not the stories themselves. No, I do not believe that God walked in the Garden of Eden in the cool of the day, or tha Moses was hidden in a cleft of rocks so that he could only see God's 'hind portion' pass over him. The flaming Seraphim that spoke from the burning bush, the pillars of flame and smoke that guided the exiled Israelites by night and day...Need I go on? The Hebrews had their midrash as the Greeks had their mythology, although it seems like splitting hairs to define them separately. Other religious people do not take their holy scriptures literally, except for the very young or very concrete minded. The great battle in the Bhagavad Gita is understood by educated Hindus to represent an inner struggle. There is a psychological understanding of mythos, not a historical misunderstanding.

you say that by saying salvation happens by grace, i am attributing salvation to a superego like deity and that that is somehow an inferior position. I dont understand why you think it is inferior. To me, it is just one way of describing what salvation is. Its not necessarily superior or inferior to other ways, its just one way.  The basic thing being communicated in the statement salvation is by grace, is that the ego cannot save itself. Salvation comes from something that lies beyond the ego. Do you disagree with this assertion? If not, why do you see it as inferior?

Salvation does come from something that transcends the ego. If each of our egos is a little wave, the ocean that gives each wave temporary existence is God. God is an incomprehensible Mystery, and like the Buddha or the philosophically inclined Hindus before him, Saguna Brahman - God (with attributes) - was rejected. Likewise I reject the attributes of the Divine Mystery that are clearly obvious psychodynamics of the childhood mind, the mind of wish-fulfillment, of an Old-Bearded-Guy-in-the-Sky, Zeus in Greek turned Deus in Latin, turned YHWH in Hebrew, turned Abba (Father, familiar form, equivalent to Dada) in the NT. The Buddha took the Nirguna Brahman (God without attribute), and in medieval Christian Neo-Platonism, Pseudo-Dionysius referred to this same God-without-attribute as "the Superessential Godhead," of which cataphatic mysticism says nothing can be posited. Even saying that "God is love" [agapé] does not mean that the word we use for dispassionate warmth toward others IS Ultimate Reality.

I refuse to project comprehensible psychological qualities, especially those rooted in infantile emotional needs, onto the Mystery that people call God. Or worse, talk about what God 'wants' as if: (1) God 'wants' anything, (2) a human knows the intentions of Ultimate Reality, AS IF the very Creator of the universe in all of its unknown dimensions intends human beings not to eat certain foods, or have sex before a ritual marriage, (3) a  man-made collection of writings selected for political reasons is the very 'Word of God.' Word is a poor English translation of Logos, and Logos is a very sophisticated philosophical notion. It is not the Bible or JUST the Bible. These are a few of my objections, and the people who most insist upon these things do so because they serve as their sad frame of reference in an otherwise chaotic and incomprehensible existence. They are drowning in fear, and insist upon very specific ideas as a life-raft, when they could have a much more sea-worthy vessel constructed of a whole lot more sophisticated and helpful teachings - teachings that effect their very minds and Being, not just feeding childish wish-fulfillment fantasies about being rescued from Hell by a Big Brother and a Father figure sitting on thrones above the clouds.

Grace, whatever that is, seems to constellate around those who live in The way. It is not something that comes off the hand of God as painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Gnostic religion is not a set of beliefs, although there are a plethora of myths. The Gnostic take is perhaps best illustrated in post-modern writings by Eckhart Tolle's The Power of Now. No esoteric writings, nothing academic and complex. Simply a profound shift from our "natural man" or egoic mind to Being or "the mind of Christ."


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #18852471 - 09/17/13 06:15 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:


Exactly. The Tenach is midrash - stories that are intended to convey spiritual truths. Theophanies are very colorful highlights to such stories. They were intended to be awe-inspiring, and they are, but it is the holy emotion of awe that is important and not the stories themselves. No, I do not believe that God walked in the Garden of Eden in the cool of the day, or tha Moses was hidden in a cleft of rocks so that he could only see God's 'hind portion' pass over him. The flaming Seraphim that spoke from the burning bush, the pillars of flame and smoke that guided the exiled Israelites by night and day...Need I go on? The Hebrews had their midrash as the Greeks had their mythology, although it seems like splitting hairs to define them separately. Other religious people do not take their holy scriptures literally, except for the very young or very concrete minded. The great battle in the Bhagavad Gita is understood by educated Hindus to represent an inner struggle. There is a psychological understanding of mythos, not a historical misunderstanding.





Yes, I would agree that it is the holy emotion of awe that is important and not the stories themselves. However, if you don't think the stories are important then why make a big deal out of not believing them? The Bible tends to mix in real historical happenings with the more fantastical supernatural tales. To me the line between the two isn't always clear. For example in the book of exodus we read that God spoke to Moses face to face, unlike the prophets before him, whom he communicated with in dreams and visions. Now there are several ways that this can be interpreted. I used to interpret it in a rather metaphorical way, until I was shown on psychedelics that God is quite capable of speaking to you face to face. So it is possible that at least from the point of view of Moses, this really did happen. My opinion is that it is best to receive these stories with a mindset of faith. That doesn't mean you have to believe in them in a literal sense, for instance I highly doubt the Noah's ark story happened just the way the Bible tells it. But at the same time, you don't have to reject everything supernatural as pure myth either. What difference does it make whether or not you believe God walked in the garden in the cool of the day? How do you feel about the supposed healing peformed by Jesus and the apostles?


Quote:


Salvation does come from something that transcends the ego. If each of our egos is a little wave, the ocean that gives each wave temporary existence is God. God is an incomprehensible Mystery, and like the Buddha or the philosophically inclined Hindus before him, Saguna Brahman - God (with attributes) - was rejected. Likewise I reject the attributes of the Divine Mystery that are clearly obvious psychodynamics of the childhood mind, the mind of wish-fulfillment, of an Old-Bearded-Guy-in-the-Sky, Zeus in Greek turned Deus in Latin, turned YHWH in Hebrew, turned Abba (Father, familiar form, equivalent to Dada) in the NT. The Buddha took the Nirguna Brahman (God without attribute), and in medieval Christian Neo-Platonism, Pseudo-Dionysius referred to this same God-without-attribute as "the Superessential Godhead," of which cataphatic mysticism says nothing can be posited. Even saying that "God is love" [agapé] does not mean that the word we use for dispassionate warmth toward others IS Ultimate Reality.




I can't tell you how you should practice but I think this is a very important difference in our approaches. For me, rejecting Saguna Brahman was one the biggest mistakes I made on the spiritual path, causing me to get stuck at a certain level of meditation unable to progress for years. It wasn't until I re-read Ramana Maharshi's teachings and realized there was no shame in worshipping Suguna Brahman that I began to make rapid progress. Focusing only on Nirguna Brahman lead me to a state of light without love, which while some what blissful was overall a very flat, uncompassionate, boring and meaningless form of existence which I would classify as actually inferior to karmic existence with its up and downs. It was through the Christian practice of learning to love God, that I was able to bring joy and enthusiasm into my spiritual practice and have it become meaningful again.

let me quote an artcile I found that explains the difference, which I encountered:

In Saguna meditation, the devotee considers himself as entirely different from the object of worship. The worshipper makes a total, unreserved, ungrudging, self-surrender to the Lord. He respects, honours, adores the Lord and depends on Him for everything, for food, protection and his very existence. He looks always for help of any sort from the Ishta Devata. There is nothing independent for him. He is an instrument in the hands of the Lord. His hands, legs, senses, mind, Buddhi, physical body belong to the Lord. A devotee does not at all like the idea of Jnana or merging. He likes to have his separate entity as a servant and to serve, worship and love the Lord always. He does not like to become sugar as a Jnani, but like to taste sugar and eat sugar. This method of worship is one of contraction. Suppose there is a circle. You have a position in the centre. You contract yourself to a point and merge in the circumference. This is Saguna meditation. This is suitable for people of emotional temperament. Vast majority of persons are fit for this line of worship only.

In Nirguna meditation, the aspirant takes himself as Brahman. He denies and sublates the false adjuncts or fictitious environments as egoism, mind and body. He depends upon himself and upon himself alone. The aspirant asserts boldly. He reflects, reasons out, investigates, discriminates and meditates on the Self. He does not want to taste sugar but wants to become a solid mass of sugar itself. He wants merging. He likes to be identical with Brahman. This method is one of expansion of lower self. Suppose there is a circle. You have a position in the centre. You so expand by Sadhana to a very great extent that you occupy the whole circle, and envelop the circumference. This method of meditation is suitable for persons of fine intellect, bold understanding, strong and accurate reasoning and powerful will. Only a microscopic minority of persons is fit for this line of meditation.


I take issue with you rampant promotion of the rejection of Suguna Brahman when I actually believe this is the most important and powerful practice for the vast majority of people in the world. Sure, it's true that the ultimate truth is non dual but can you really say you have no ego? As long as the ego lasts, one should admit the existence of Saguna Brahman and worship it. If you think the other path is for you, that's fine but why act like it is superior? What's important is reaching the goal, not the means of getting there.

Love for God and faith in Him will certainly take one to the goal and it is a very safe and practical route also. Why discourage anyone following this path by calling their beliefs childish or "rooted in infantile emotional needs"? Don't all of our ego's consist of infantile emotional needs? Jesus did not reject Saguna Brahman, do you consider yourself above him?


Quote:


I refuse to project comprehensible psychological qualities, especially those rooted in infantile emotional needs, onto the Mystery that people call God. Or worse, talk about what God 'wants' as if: (1) God 'wants' anything, (2) a human knows the intentions of Ultimate Reality, AS IF the very Creator of the universe in all of its unknown dimensions intends human beings not to eat certain foods, or have sex before a ritual marriage, (3) a  man-made collection of writings selected for political reasons is the very 'Word of God.' Word is a poor English translation of Logos, and Logos is a very sophisticated philosophical notion. It is not the Bible or JUST the Bible. These are a few of my objections, and the people who most insist upon these things do so because they serve as their sad frame of reference in an otherwise chaotic and incomprehensible existence. They are drowning in fear, and insist upon very specific ideas as a life-raft, when they could have a much more sea-worthy vessel constructed of a whole lot more sophisticated and helpful teachings - teachings that effect their very minds and Being, not just feeding childish wish-fulfillment fantasies about being rescued from Hell by a Big Brother and a Father figure sitting on thrones above the clouds.




Again, I object. The teachings in the Bible and of the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches DO affect peoples minds and being. Some of the greatest spiritual wisdom I have come across I have found in books written by Catholics, such as "the Imitation of Christ". If you have something that is so much better, please show me.


Grace, whatever that is, seems to constellate around those who live in The way. It is not something that comes off the hand of God as painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.




Actually, it is. Grace comes from God. Of course it constellates around those who live in the way. First of all, they need grace in order to live in the way, secondly God showers his grace upon those who merit it. Of course, grace is ever present. It's really a process of learning how to accept it.

Quote:


Gnostic religion is not a set of beliefs, although there are a plethora of myths. The Gnostic take is perhaps best illustrated in post-modern writings by Eckhart Tolle's The Power of Now. No esoteric writings, nothing academic and complex. Simply a profound shift from our "natural man" or egoic mind to Being or "the mind of Christ."




What strikes me as odd is that you think this is any different from traditional Christianity. Catholics also speak about entering the mind of christ. It's the shift from the natural (carnal) man to the new man, who lives in Christ. This is not an idea unique to gnosticism, it's very much a part of mainstream Christianity. It's also known as being filled with the holy spirit.

My question is, how does one go about obtaining this shift? Are there any methods and techniques one can use to help bring it about or is it entirely beyond one's control in which case whats the point in speaking about it? If there are methods and techniques what are they and how are they different from the traditional ones? Is there some special prayer gnostics say or something? On a serious, practical level, what spiritual tools can you give me that cannot be found in my catholic church?

Edited by Deviate (09/17/13 06:22 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18852946 - 09/17/13 10:11 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

I can't tell you how you should practice but I think this is a very important difference in our approaches. For me, rejecting Saguna Brahman was one the biggest mistakes I made on the spiritual path, causing me to get stuck at a certain level of meditation unable to progress for years. It wasn't until I re-read Ramana Maharshi's teachings and realized there was no shame in worshipping Suguna Brahman that I began to make rapid progress. Focusing only on Nirguna Brahman lead me to a state of light without love, which while some what blissful was overall a very flat, uncompassionate, boring and meaningless form of existence which I would classify as actually inferior to karmic existence with its up and downs. It was through the Christian practice of learning to love God, that I was able to bring joy and enthusiasm into my spiritual practice and have it become meaningful again.

let me quote an artcile I found that explains the difference, which I encountered:

In Saguna meditation, the devotee considers himself as entirely different from the object of worship. The worshipper makes a total, unreserved, ungrudging, self-surrender to the Lord. He respects, honours, adores the Lord and depends on Him for everything, for food, protection and his very existence. He looks always for help of any sort from the Ishta Devata. There is nothing independent for him. He is an instrument in the hands of the Lord. His hands, legs, senses, mind, Buddhi, physical body belong to the Lord. A devotee does not at all like the idea of Jnana or merging. He likes to have his separate entity as a servant and to serve, worship and love the Lord always. He does not like to become sugar as a Jnani, but like to taste sugar and eat sugar. This method of worship is one of contraction. Suppose there is a circle. You have a position in the centre. You contract yourself to a point and merge in the circumference. This is Saguna meditation. This is suitable for people of emotional temperament. Vast majority of persons are fit for this line of worship only.

In Nirguna meditation, the aspirant takes himself as Brahman. He denies and sublates the false adjuncts or fictitious environments as egoism, mind and body. He depends upon himself and upon himself alone. The aspirant asserts boldly. He reflects, reasons out, investigates, discriminates and meditates on the Self. He does not want to taste sugar but wants to become a solid mass of sugar itself. He wants merging. He likes to be identical with Brahman. This method is one of expansion of lower self. Suppose there is a circle. You have a position in the centre. You so expand by Sadhana to a very great extent that you occupy the whole circle, and envelop the circumference. This method of meditation is suitable for persons of fine intellect, bold understanding, strong and accurate reasoning and powerful will. Only a microscopic minority of persons is fit for this line of meditation.

I take issue with you rampant promotion of the rejection of Suguna Brahman when I actually believe this is the most important and powerful practice for the vast majority of people in the world. Sure, it's true that the ultimate truth is non dual but can you really say you have no ego? As long as the ego lasts, one should admit the existence of Saguna Brahman and worship it. If you think the other path is for you, that's fine but why act like it is superior? What's important is reaching the goal, not the means of getting there.

Love for God and faith in Him will certainly take one to the goal and it is a very safe and practical route also. Why discourage anyone following this path by calling their beliefs childish or "rooted in infantile emotional needs"? Don't all of our ego's consist of infantile emotional needs? Jesus did not reject Saguna Brahman, do you consider yourself above him?

I agree with the writer, and with you. I appreciate the need, still, for petitionary prayer at times. But again, you immediately assume that what you read in the Bible pertaining to Jesus is something that happened historically. Was there really a reporter observing Jesus as he sweated blood while he prayed in Gethsemani? Was that reporter in Bethlehem taking notes on a baby that glowed like a 100 watt lightbulb in an obscure manger, while angels hovered about and an astronomical anomaly shining down on him like a scene from Close Encounters? God-with-attributes is a concept. I do not want to pray to a concept of my own mind. Sometimes I give credit to God for understanding my attempt at communication, but the idea that God is 'A' being with whom I can talk is yet another concept, and a false one. God is the "Ground of Being," which is a very different inference.

I am reading a book by Tim Freke called The Mystery Experience: A Revolutionary Approach to Spiritual Awakening. Although he takes a Jungian approach, he speaks of the unconscious nature of God, except where God's creation (us) has attained not only consciousness, but self-consciousness. He differentiates the word consciousness from Awareness, and I long ago arrived at the same necessary semantics, but I digress. When praying in such a matter that one addresses God, who is other-than-oneself, the prayer does not have a spacio-temporal destination. If God is Awareness, formerly called Spirit, and Spirit does not exist in or as space-time, to Whom or to where is the prayer being addressed? If it has a destination, it must be (as Sri Ramana insisted as a practical matter) that the prayer is addressed inwardly, away from any vain imaginings above the sky, or 'out there,' meaning anywhere extended in space-time. As vast as space is, it is bounded by a receding horizon, beyond which is non-existence, the not-yet-created. Perhaps only 'beyond' the expanding boundary of the universe does one find God, retracting his Infinitely Dense Being omni-directionally to make room for the bubble of the expanding universe. Then the universe is something akin to a dream in the mind of God - not an original thought at all on my part.

What strikes me as odd is that you think this is any different from traditional Christianity. Catholics also speak about entering the mind of christ. It's the shift from the natural (carnal) man to the new man, who lives in Christ. This is not an idea unique to gnosticism, it's very much a part of mainstream Christianity. It's also known as being filled with the holy spirit.

My question is, how does one go about obtaining this shift? Are there any methods and techniques one can use to help bring it about or is it entirely beyond one's control in which case whats the point in speaking about it? If there are methods and techniques what are they and how are they different from the traditional ones? Is there some special prayer gnostics say or something? On a serious, practical level, what spiritual tools can you give me that cannot be found in my catholic church?


I am not rejecting the truth embodied in Christianity. But I have no more use for the Augustinian, or Patristic theologies that bridged my quest for truth via Indian Yoga and Greek Neo-Platonism almost 40 years ago. If you remember our difference in what constitutes Christian maturity, be advised that I have not neglected my spiritual life since it began at age 18, and that I recently turned 60! The difficulty is, whereas one can appreciate the writings of Christian mystics like Teresa of Avila's Interior Castle, such a writing is not something that one can turn into a technique. It may serve as a map, but not a technique. The same with John of the Cross. His 'Dark Night of the Soul/Senses' is a record of his spiritual journey, psychologically expressed. It too may help as a map. When my intellect, Buddhi, craved 'challenge,' I delved into Pseud-Dionysius, and his predecessor Plotinus (The Enneads). Whatever methodology best teaches you the immediacy of God, of Timeless Being, existing simultaneously with space-time, is recommended. I have practiced Yoga, then as I moved into a Christian idiom, Hesychastic methods. Eventually, the words descend from head to heart, the breath and heartbeat become the 'ceaseless prayer.' But that is still a method, because breath and heartbeat cease with death, and only God remains, but 'we' do not. It is imperative to identify with agapé in the NT because if "God is love," then only love exists eternally, while everything else perishes. Love is not a technique, it is a matter of "letting be." If you still have a need to understand this intellectually, read John McQuarrie's Principles of Christian Theology.

When I was still in my 20s, in seminary, we discussed Thomas Acquinas' comment when he had completed his compendious Summa Theologica. He said, "It is all straw," i.e., worthless. The professor said, 'Well, yes, but he first had to go through all that living and thinking and writing, before he came to the wise conclusion that no amount of thinking brings one any closer to God, or to understanding what God is.'  Now I am apparently at a stage of life where along with Socrates, I endeavor to Know Thyself, because with regard to God, "I know that I know nothing." Rather, I try to become a hollow reed, a pot of clay, containing Emptiness. It is an Emptiness that is Compassionate to living things. It can be suffused by the presence of others, but it does not dwell long with vexing people. That is why I avoid loud, self-righteous quoters of the Bible. The louder they speak, the less they know, but they still think they know something that they are going to teach me. I have learned these lessons, they have not. If they knew anything at all, they would know to be still. They would Know that Psalm 46:10, "Be still and know that I am God" holds more Wisdom than any and all quoting of biblical words can contain. In fact, Paul's letters to various churches were not intended to become holy scriptures. They were simply letters to advise and encourage  new church groups. Some of them are genuine, the pseudo-Pauline letters are forgeries.

What's wrong with a childlike acceptance of the Bible? Everything. Study for a few years and see for yourself. When my mother fed me beets, I spat them out at her. I still don't care for beets much, although when I was taken to the Russian Tea House in NYC to eat borsht with my girlfriend's parents in college, I tolerated it out of love for her. The same with Christian theology. But on my own, I spit it out most of what has been spoon-fed to me. There's something wrong with people who put ancient bearded misogynistic, anti-Semitic, tyranny-supporting so-called Church Fathers on a pedestal. Get a little healthy self-esteem and question authority for God's sake! Paul himself was wrong about the immanent end of the world, and the political agenda that wove its way through theology is still with us today. There is the Christian Right in the USA that is the best example of a Christianity that Jesus supposedly abhorred. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's." The Christian Right has wrongly appropriated Christ just as Constantine and the murderous fascist Christian emperors who followed him in history. Gun-loving 'Christians' are an abomination, but this country is saturated with this militant fundamentalist mentality who hate their own reflection in Muslim fundamentalism, often depicted with upraised rifle in hand. They're exactly the same! They're Christian jihadists. Charleton Heston with a keffiyeh! Some people WANT to begin Armageddon just to show that the Bible is accurate!

And now, my coffee-energy has run out...


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #18853593 - 09/17/13 01:42 PM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:


I agree with the writer, and with you. I appreciate the need, still, for petitionary prayer at times. But again, you immediately assume that what you read in the Bible pertaining to Jesus is something that happened historically. Was there really a reporter observing Jesus as he sweated blood while he prayed in Gethsemani? Was that reporter in Bethlehem taking notes on a baby that glowed like a 100 watt lightbulb in an obscure manger, while angels hovered about and an astronomical anomaly shining down on him like a scene from Close Encounters?





I don't just assume everything I read in the Bible pertaining to Jesus happened historically. I just don't spend inordinate amounts of time trying to figure out which things did happen and which did not. That's why I asked you, do you believe that Jesus and the apostles performed "miracles" such as healing the sick? We both agree that the point of all this is to help us learn how to put on the mind of Christ. Therefore, when I read the Bible my main focus is what can I learn from it that will help me to attain the christ mind, not assessing it's historical accuracy. Sometimes I probably end up believing things that didn't actually happen. I don't see a huge problem with this. I want to know what you think I shouldn't believe and why its important, how will disbelieving it help me to attain the mind of christ? I guess I tend to think that faith is a more productive mindset than scepticism when it comes to practicing Christianity.

Quote:


God-with-attributes is a concept. I do not want to pray to a concept of my own mind. Sometimes I give credit to God for understanding my attempt at communication, but the idea that God is 'A' being with whom I can talk is yet another concept, and a false one. God is the "Ground of Being," which is a very different inference.




St. Paul says that we don't know how to pray as we ought, but the spirit will teach us. There's nothing wrong with praying to a concept, what's important is opening your heart to God. I really don't understand your reasoning here. All spiritual practices are based on concepts that are false from the standpoint of ultimate reality but true from the standpoint of the ego. That is why Ramana Maharshi says "who meditates?" "practice seems to be necessary. Who is to practice? In looking for a doer, the act and accessories disappear".

Furthermore, you are correct in saying that God as a being with whom you can talk is a concept, but incorrect in saying that it is a false one. On the contrary, Ramana Maharshi has said that you can talk to God just as you talk to another person and he hears, understands and answers prayers. God in the most absolute sense, is the ground of being, but God is also everything that appears to exist also. When you speak to me, you are speaking to God in the form of me. If I can hear, understand and respond to you, why would you assume that God could not? God is infinitely more powerful than I. Anyway, the purpose of worshiping God with attributes is to realize God without attributes. However, and this is a very important distinction which caused a great deal of confusion for me, Ramana Maharshi teaches that while the ego lasts, there is a personal God who controls what happens to you and to whom you can pray.

What's true from the standpoint of ego and what is ultimately true are two very different things. But I am afraid you are making the mistake of failing to recognize that while certain things are realized to be false after realization, they are absolutely true from the standpoint of the ego and must be accepted.

You reject God with attributes because you know that God is the absolute ground of being. But is that your experience? If its not your experience, then that itself is really just a concept for you.

Ramana maharshi uses the example of someone who hears the teaching that he is not bound by karma, but his true nature is limitless being. The person then asks if he can go steal something, because he is supposedly not bound by the karma that would create. Ramana maharshi tells him, that so long as he can take the beating he would receive for stealing without feeling aversion to it, he is free to steal. Otherwise, he must accept that he will receive the fruit of his actions.


Quote:


I am reading a book by Tim Freke called The Mystery Experience: A Revolutionary Approach to Spiritual Awakening. Although he takes a Jungian approach, he speaks of the unconscious nature of God, except where God's creation (us) has attained not only consciousness, but self-consciousness. He differentiates the word consciousness from Awareness, and I long ago arrived at the same necessary semantics, but I digress. When praying in such a matter that one addresses God, who is other-than-oneself, the prayer does not have a spacio-temporal destination. If God is Awareness, formerly called Spirit, and Spirit does not exist in or as space-time, to Whom or to where is the prayer being addressed? If it has a destination, it must be (as Sri Ramana insisted as a practical matter) that the prayer is addressed inwardly, away from any vain imaginings above the sky, or 'out there,' meaning anywhere extended in space-time. As vast as space is, it is bounded by a receding horizon, beyond which is non-existence, the not-yet-created. Perhaps only 'beyond' the expanding boundary of the universe does one find God, retracting his Infinitely Dense Being omni-directionally to make room for the bubble of the expanding universe. Then the universe is something akin to a dream in the mind of God - not an original thought at all on my part.




Simplify. It is enough that you put forth sincere effort in prayer, then the spirit will do the rest. You dont need to worry your ego about where to address it, God hears it no matter where you address it. Thats my advice.


Quote:


I am not rejecting the truth embodied in Christianity. But I have no more use for the Augustinian, or Patristic theologies that bridged my quest for truth via Indian Yoga and Greek Neo-Platonism almost 40 years ago. If you remember our difference in what constitutes Christian maturity, be advised that I have not neglected my spiritual life since it began at age 18, and that I recently turned 60! The difficulty is, whereas one can appreciate the writings of Christian mystics like Teresa of Avila's Interior Castle, such a writing is not something that one can turn into a technique. It may serve as a map, but not a technique. The same with John of the Cross. His 'Dark Night of the Soul/Senses' is a record of his spiritual journey, psychologically expressed. It too may help as a map. When my intellect, Buddhi, craved 'challenge,' I delved into Pseud-Dionysius, and his predecessor Plotinus (The Enneads). Whatever methodology best teaches you the immediacy of God, of Timeless Being, existing simultaneously with space-time, is recommended. I have practiced Yoga, then as I moved into a Christian idiom, Hesychastic methods. Eventually, the words descend from head to heart, the breath and heartbeat become the 'ceaseless prayer.' But that is still a method, because breath and heartbeat cease with death, and only God remains, but 'we' do not. It is imperative to identify with agapé in the NT because if "God is love," then only love exists eternally, while everything else perishes. Love is not a technique, it is a matter of "letting be." If you still have a need to understand this intellectually, read John McQuarrie's Principles of Christian Theology.

When I was still in my 20s, in seminary, we discussed Thomas Acquinas' comment when he had completed his compendious Summa Theologica. He said, "It is all straw," i.e., worthless. The professor said, 'Well, yes, but he first had to go through all that living and thinking and writing, before he came to the wise conclusion that no amount of thinking brings one any closer to God, or to understanding what God is.'  Now I am apparently at a stage of life where along with Socrates, I endeavor to Know Thyself, because with regard to God, "I know that I know nothing." Rather, I try to become a hollow reed, a pot of clay, containing Emptiness. It is an Emptiness that is Compassionate to living things. It can be suffused by the presence of others, but it does not dwell long with vexing people. That is why I avoid loud, self-righteous quoters of the Bible. The louder they speak, the less they know, but they still think they know something that they are going to teach me. I have learned these lessons, they have not. If they knew anything at all, they would know to be still. They would Know that Psalm 46:10, "Be still and know that I am God" holds more Wisdom than any and all quoting of biblical words can contain. In fact, Paul's letters to various churches were not intended to become holy scriptures. They were simply letters to advise and encourage  new church groups. Some of them are genuine, the pseudo-Pauline letters are forgeries.

What's wrong with a childlike acceptance of the Bible? Everything. Study for a few years and see for yourself. When my mother fed me beets, I spat them out at her. I still don't care for beets much, although when I was taken to the Russian Tea House in NYC to eat borsht with my girlfriend's parents in college, I tolerated it out of love for her. The same with Christian theology. But on my own, I spit it out most of what has been spoon-fed to me. There's something wrong with people who put ancient bearded misogynistic, anti-Semitic, tyranny-supporting so-called Church Fathers on a pedestal. Get a little healthy self-esteem and question authority for God's sake! Paul himself was wrong about the immanent end of the world, and the political agenda that wove its way through theology is still with us today. There is the Christian Right in the USA that is the best example of a Christianity that Jesus supposedly abhorred. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's." The Christian Right has wrongly appropriated Christ just as Constantine and the murderous fascist Christian emperors who followed him in history. Gun-loving 'Christians' are an abomination, but this country is saturated with this militant fundamentalist mentality who hate their own reflection in Muslim fundamentalism, often depicted with upraised rifle in hand. They're exactly the same! They're Christian jihadists. Charleton Heston with a keffiyeh! Some people WANT to begin Armageddon just to show that the Bible is accurate!

And now, my coffee-energy has run out...




So basically, that's a very long no you don't have any special techniques or prayers that I cant find in regular Christianity. For me, the traditional methods of faith, prayer, meditation, love for God, trying to keep the commandments, frequent reading of the scriptures regular mass attendance, reception of the Eucharist and last but certainly not least, CONTEMPLATION are working very well. They are teaching me the immediacy of God, his infinite and timeless nature and how to abide in Him.

The path taught by Christianity may not be for everyone, but in my experience it is a very effective means for facilitating one's spiritual development.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18854313 - 09/17/13 04:27 PM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Here is a techniques from Nicephoras the Solitary, taken from Kadloubovsky & Palmer's Writing From the Philokalia on Prayer of the Heart.



As to your question on whether the miracle stories are historical, I refer you to a single book that I read just a couple of years ago and stuck firmly. She documents her sources most thoroughly and paints a most convincing picture that the New Testament culled most of its stories of healing and raising of Lazarus (L'Auzar: Of Auzar or Ausar, the Egyptian name for Osiris, god of resurrection) from the ancient Egyptian Pyramid texts and Coffin Texts. Whereas J.S. Spong illustrates how, why, where, and for whom the New Testament was constructed, and how it closely adhered in its stories to the Jewish liturgical calendar, D.M. Murdock approaches those same stories from a different vector, showing their origins in ancient Egypt.  I cite these two books because they both embody the views I have adopted from them, which pretty much sums up my take on the Bible. Now, the further psychological, archetypal wealth of insight that can be gleaned from the Bible is another matter, but these two books provide a literary analysis with surgical precision that leave little room for the vestiges of fancy, imagination, childhood wish-fulfillment, or cherished notions of "I know my faith is correct." I have come to acknowledge Murdock's take as being probable, versus any historical veracity to multiplying fishes and loaves, restoring the vision of a blind man with mud and spittle, etc. I see these stories as having allegorical significance for the most part, but I look for the levels of interpretation that Jewish scriptures can be viewed by:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardes_(Jewish_exegesis)



As for prayer life, it is a personal matter. I do not want to put an example of a very specific petitionary prayer, with its seemingly impossible fulfillment on a public forum (to be picked apart and violated), but suffice to say that I have had a lengthy prayer life without having held any concept of that Mystery to which I was addressing my petition. I pondered the possible mechanisms of why I asked for something so specific in the first place, why it came to pass in exactly the way I envisioned it suggesting such things as precognition (I somehow knew what was going to occur, and asked for it before it manifested), but that didn't seem to fit. Pure mathematical probability of the specifics seemed utterly impossible. Solipcistic creation of the entire sequence was considered. The reception of my desires telepathically by the exact type of family that actually moved in next door (after a series of horrible neighbors) was considered. And last but not least was the simple homespun answer that it was an answer to my prayers. I simply do not recognize the qualifiers of God as wrathful, jealous, loving, rewarding, etc. These are anthropomorphic projections that I prefer to banish from awareness along with any type of imagery. Finally, I do not judge anyone's prayer life, so long as animal sacrifice is not involved. :nono:


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: SpiritualWarrior]
    #18856636 - 09/18/13 02:44 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

SpiritualWarrior said:


Do you see how people have made an idol out of the text of the Bible and misinterpreted it over the years? Its not that the book is evil its that the people abuse the text that's already there by misinterpreting it.




Have you ever read John Allegro's The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross? He reveals how the text is composed in layers, and the core meaning layer is meant for the initiated. But you know what? ALL the layers are coming from a solar-patriarchal mindset.

Quote:

You're misinterpreting what the Knowledge of Good and Evil is. What that is...is us thinking ourselves to be God instead of God to be God. We think we're God everytime we take something from this world, whether it be a drug or a bad idea and start to believe that this thing came from itself and that God did not make it. That is why they had to stretch for the hand and eat the fruit of the tree, they misused the creation of God. First they thought about it what the fruit would be used for, with the Wisdom of the Serpent that is, then the act came. The Wisdom of the Serpent is Wisdom which is self seeking and crawls along the ground like a snake.




Do YOU know right now what good and evil is?

If you say yes, isn't that a good thing? If you say no, what do you mean you dont know the what is good from what is evil.
What do you mean 'God made it'? What like some architect in the sky? Explain.

So your saying 'God' made the Tree and Fruit? HOW did 'they' misuse the 'creation of God'? Your not making any sense to me.
The wisdom of the Serpent is far older story than than your 'creation myth'. The Serpent who also is the Great Mother ALWAYS guarded the Tree of Life. it is your tyrannical god who is the upstart and wants to suppress that meaning.

Quote:

So in reality the story is about misuse of God's creation and coveting God's creation, believing that is belongs to us and not thanking God for it and ascribing it to God. We put ourselves in God's place when we do that.




That very story about Adam having dominion over nature is the CORE instigator of all the mindsets who think they can do what they like with other peoples who don't, and who DO, believe their control-freakery shit, and subjugate animals, and nature. So it is VERY hypocritical to assume that myth is for the good of all

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18856641 - 09/18/13 02:55 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Deviate said:



Quote:

zzripz said:
As any woman (women are amongst the main victims of this sick mindset) who knows what what will tell you, the Bible is patriarchal, and the patriarchy is exactly like what is being exposed. Utterly hypocritical, and sadistic. We are seeing exactly that in the world today, right now. They are insane----they are connected with this abusive book. Totally connected to it.

Look at their creation myth. It is really about stopping people having access to psychedelic fruit--hence they are told off for eating the fruit of knowledge, and barred from the Tree of Life. This Tree is symbolically meaning psychedelic vegetation. So straight away that tyrant 'God' is stopping our ancestors being able to freely explore their consciousness, body, and the natural world. And what do you see to this day..............?

the so-called WAR ON DRUGS and of course included is war on psychedelics. War against us exploring consciousness, and understanding that nature is alive and sacred! So my point is is that that sick mindset carries on even from those ancient times, and it does so via pushing you toxic myths. (/11 was/is a toxic myth, etc. They create FEAR, GUILT, SHAME, and this is supposed to divide and control and have you clining to their author-itry (their CONTROL OF THE NARRATIVE). And look at how people will defend this tyrant 'God', and also this tyrant 'State'. they become blind to their own victimhood and abuse and end up abusing themselves and others.




Whoa dude, I see a lot of completely unsupported assertions in your post. If you are going to make claims completely contrary to the way the Christian faith has been practiced and understood for the past 2,000 years, you'd better provide some solid evidence.

Psychedelics are fun toys which allow one to play around with spiritual states of consciousness, they are not nearly important enough to be the focus of the geneses myth about the true knowledge and the tree of life.

The knowledge of good and evil is the mindset mankind has adopted in which he has set himself up as the judge over what should or should not happen, rather than letting God be the judge. Before eating this fateful fruit, man was in a state of grace. His heart was joyful and at peace in the Lord and so nothing that befell him on earth troubled him because he trusted in the Lord. If something seemed painful or bad, rather than judging it or trying to resist it, he just accepted it because he knew that there must be some greater purpose or reason for it, or the good Lord would not have sent it upon him.

After eating from the tree and falling from grace, man lost his special connection with the Lord. He became his own master but lacking wisdom, he was like a sheep without a shepard. He gained the knowledge of good and bad from the standpoint of his body, but lost the knowledge of what was truly best for his soul. This is what has happened to us, we have become identified with our bodies to the point where we seek to gratify the desires of the flesh (the good) and avoid pain and injury (bad) instead of seeking only to do the will of the Lord.

Psychedelics and nature worship can raise ones consciousness and put them in touch the divine. However, it cannot take them all the way to the goal, which is union with God. That was the great insight of Judaism and the reason for the condemnation of paganism. Its not the paragnism wasnt real spirituality, on the contrary, through nature worhsip you can become much more spiritual than the materiaslitc people our society generates. However, you will never get all the way to the goal, you will never attain union with the most high, through such means. You speak of the sacredness of nature. Nature is indeed quite sacred, but only because the good Lord made it so. Thats the insight of Judaism and its daughter religion, Christianity. The fact the Lord is the source of all that is good and we need only to look to Him and only by looking to Him can our souls ever find true rest. What does an entheogen do anyway? the word itself means to make God appear within. THats what they do, they fill you with a portion of the Holy spirit for the duration of the trip and it shows you things. But its just temporary. You see, psychedelics and nature worship can only take us so far. In fact, humans are more spiritually evolved than plants and animals and nature spirits. The nature spirits might seem quite spiritual to you, because they dont suffer from the delusions and afflictions of modern society, they are much more pure. However, nature spirits lack the development of self awareness and self consciousness that is possessed by humans. Hence from the standpoint of the evolution of consciousness, human beings are the most evolved species on the planet and you would do well to pay attention to the sacred writings of human beings. That doesnt mean you cant have a great love for nature, i have found that as my love for the Lord grows, so does my enjoyment of the natural world, for it is God's creation. The more you love your creator, the more you will love creation.

Just be careful not to love creation more than the creator. That tendency is original sin.
\




Psychedelic are "fun toys"....?:huxleyfacepalm: I am sorry mate, that is your limited interpretation of psychedelic experience, and not mine, but I would also encourage you to read some good books about this subject, other than the Bible, if I was you as you are out of your depth..... Psychedelic have always been and remain THE main inspiration for mythology---they ARE the very source of the Dreamtime!! The Dreamtime, or Otherworld, or the mythical dimension is a place which is here in other dimensions, and brings us into direct contact with the sacred. Let me make it clear that life 'ordinarily' is also sacred, but there are depthless depths to reality one can experience in continuum with the one you are currently experincing.

Mythology wasn't always writ down. Writing is fairly new invention, and once it began getting writ down really coincides with the beginnings of the  patriarchy, and their strategy to divide and control and maintain a slave culture is evidenced in their writings.

Read this great book, Shamanism and the Drug Propaganda: The Birth of Patriarchy and the Drug War, by Dan Russell

Edited by zzripz (09/18/13 02:58 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: zzripz]
    #18861599 - 09/19/13 04:16 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

I have no doubts about the depths of divinity one can experience under the influence of psychedelics. I am well aware that they provide keys to accessing the other world, what I like to call the spirit world or spiritual realm. But why assume they are the only means or even the most efficient? Why assume that we even belong in all the realms psychedelic provide us with access to or that it is to our benefit?

I have studied shamanism by the way and read a lot about psychedelics. My usage of and study of psychedelics eventually lead me to begin investigating the source of the divinity I experienced on psychedelics. Invariably this search lead me to the Lord, and so I read the Bible and learned how to pray. I learned that prayer was a better means for accessing the sacred than psychedelics, though more difficult because it requires one to live an upright and holy life striving to free himself from the grips of ignorance and sin. On the other hand, a psychedelic drug user can sin all he wishes and yet still access the divine whenever he wishes through the use of drugs.

I'm not saying psychedelics have no place in spirituality, they certainly served as a catalyst to my awakening. But they pale in comparison to the real thing. All trips come to an end, but God's love is eternal.

The mature spiritual seeker does not desire kingdoms but only to love and serve the Lord. FOr me psychedelics are at best reminders/natural medicines that help keep my soul on the right path and at worst toys and distractions, or even just plain old drugs to get high off. No psychedelic compares to the purity of love I experience when recieving the sacrament of Holy Communion by the way, psychedelics are incredibly dirty compared to that energy.

Why the obsession with psychedelcis? The divine is not contained in the drug, the drug simply temporarily removes the barriers that prevent the mind from descending into the heart, which contains the source of all that is sacred and divine. Why not abide in the heart always rather than only visiting from time to time with psychedelics?

Edited by Deviate (09/19/13 04:20 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #18861654 - 09/19/13 05:21 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

MarkostheGnostic said:
Here is a techniques from Nicephoras the Solitary, taken from Kadloubovsky & Palmer's Writing From the Philokalia on Prayer of the Heart.







I am already familiar with the Philokalia and prayer of the heart from my studies of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. This illustrates the point I have been trying to make to you. Promoters of these alternative Christian sects criticize the mainstream churches, acting as if they are in possession of some higher spiritual wisdom or that they alone are the true followers of Christ while the mainstream churches have gone astray.

So my response is excellent. I am always struggling to grow closer to God, so if it turns out that I have been doing things the hard way this whole time, following the wrong path then by all means, enlighten me as to the true teachings of Christ and the true way to follow Him. Then I always end up disappointed because as far as I have been able to tell, the alternative Christian sects do not have very much to offer that cannot be found in traditional thought and practice. In other words, there is simply no reason I cannot practice prayer of the heart as a Catholic. This method of prayer is not unknown in the Catholic church.  It appears to me that there aren't a whole lot of short cuts on the spiritual path. Whether you are Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant or Gnostic, it's really up to you to put in the effort in prayer and the effort you put into seeking God is a lot more important than what brand of Christianity you adhere to. That's not to say I believe all Christian faiths are the same, there are specific criticisms I have for certain churches, for example I think the protestants have hindered a lot of peoples understanding of the relationship between salvation and sin. But that doesn't mean one cannot grow in holiness as a protestant.

So why expend so much effort pushing gnosticism? why not just encourage encourage all Christians to live righteous, faithful and holy lives and to seek the Lord through prayer and contemplation? Is the goal spiritual awakening or is the goal advanced knowledge and understanding of the Bible? The former can certainly happen without the latter.

Quote:


As to your question on whether the miracle stories are historical, I refer you to a single book that I read just a couple of years ago and stuck firmly. She documents her sources most thoroughly and paints a most convincing picture that the New Testament culled most of its stories of healing and raising of Lazarus (L'Auzar: Of Auzar or Ausar, the Egyptian name for Osiris, god of resurrection) from the ancient Egyptian Pyramid texts and Coffin Texts. Whereas J.S. Spong illustrates how, why, where, and for whom the New Testament was constructed, and how it closely adhered in its stories to the Jewish liturgical calendar, D.M. Murdock approaches those same stories from a different vector, showing their origins in ancient Egypt.  I cite these two books because they both embody the views I have adopted from them, which pretty much sums up my take on the Bible. Now, the further psychological, archetypal wealth of insight that can be gleaned from the Bible is another matter, but these two books provide a literary analysis with surgical precision that leave little room for the vestiges of fancy, imagination, childhood wish-fulfillment, or cherished notions of "I know my faith is correct." I have come to acknowledge Murdock's take as being probable, versus any historical veracity to multiplying fishes and loaves, restoring the vision of a blind man with mud and spittle, etc. I see these stories as having allegorical significance for the most part, but I look for the levels of interpretation that Jewish scriptures can be viewed by:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardes_(Jewish_exegesis)







Having not read the books or studied the evidence regarding these allegations, I am not in the position to comment on them. I will however post this for consideration:

Even with all the differences between Osiris and Jesus, it is still striking that early men would imagine a God with even a few similarities, don’t you think? How could that happen? Is it really possible that someone could imagine something that could later become a reality, even if only in part? Well, let’s take a look at another example from history. What if I told you that a man named Morgan Robertson once wrote about a British ocean liner that was about 800 feet long, weighed over 60,000 tons, and could carry about 3,000 passengers? The ship had a top cruising speed of 24 knots, had three propellers, and about 20 lifeboats. What if I told you that this ocean liner hit an iceberg on its maiden voyage in the month of April, tearing an opening in the starboard side forward portion of the ship, and sinking along with about 2,000 passengers? Would you recognize the event from history? You might say, “Hey, that’s the Titanic!” Well, you would be wrong. While all these details are identical to the Titanic, the ship I am talking about is the “Titan” and it is a fictional ship described in Robertson’s book called “the Wreck of the Titan” or “Futility” (Buccaneer Books, Cutchogue, New York, 1898). This book was written fourteen years BEFORE the disaster took place, and several years before the construction was even begun on the Titanic! In addition to this, other writers and thinkers had also started to develop a mythology about such large ships. In the 1880’s, the well known English journalist, W. T. Stead also wrote an account of a sinking ocean liner in the mid-Atlantic, and by 1882 had added the detail that an iceberg would be the cause of the disaster. There are also quite a number of recorded premonitions on the part of passengers who cancelled at the last minute before boarding the Titanic for its maiden voyage in 1912, citing that the ship would suffer a similar fate.

http://pleaseconvinceme.com/2012/is-jesus-simply-a-retelling-of-the-horus-myth/

Now that could be way off for all I know. But at the same time, I don't feel a particularly strong psychological need to take on what would could amount to a massive undertaking of trying to sort out the actual truth behind the composition of the new testament. The fact of the matter is that regardless of why or for whom the Bible was written or whether it tells of actual events, the spiritual truth expressed in the stories seems genuine to me. Entire religions have been built around the Bible and many saints have arisen following the path it prescribes. Certainly many of these saints were real historical people who left behind their own teachings. Seldom do I find myself having to choose between the truth expressed by the saints and the truth expressed in the Bible. So if the Bible provides, good, sound, spiritual advice, why do I need to concern myself with questioning it's origins? In my experience, the best approach for fostering spiritual growth is childlike faith and innocent acceptance, even if it sometimes means potentially believing something that didn't actually happen. I believe in putting my faith in the Holy Spirit as the revealer of truth, rather than Biblical scholarship.

Quote:


As for prayer life, it is a personal matter. I do not want to put an example of a very specific petitionary prayer, with its seemingly impossible fulfillment on a public forum (to be picked apart and violated), but suffice to say that I have had a lengthy prayer life without having held any concept of that Mystery to which I was addressing my petition. I pondered the possible mechanisms of why I asked for something so specific in the first place, why it came to pass in exactly the way I envisioned it suggesting such things as precognition (I somehow knew what was going to occur, and asked for it before it manifested), but that didn't seem to fit. Pure mathematical probability of the specifics seemed utterly impossible. Solipcistic creation of the entire sequence was considered. The reception of my desires telepathically by the exact type of family that actually moved in next door (after a series of horrible neighbors) was considered. And last but not least was the simple homespun answer that it was an answer to my prayers. I simply do not recognize the qualifiers of God as wrathful, jealous, loving, rewarding, etc. These are anthropomorphic projections that I prefer to banish from awareness along with any type of imagery. Finally, I do not judge anyone's prayer life, so long as animal sacrifice is not involved. :nono:




You call them anthropomorphic projections, I call them figures of speech. For example, God tells us that he is a jealous God, to help us remember to love Him and him alone lest we be lead astray by the love of created things. It doesn't have to mean that God feels the human emotion of jealousy in the way that you are I do. Do you object to phrasing in your chemistry book if it says that two atoms which have formed a covalent bond "want" to stick together? Is that an anthropomorphic projection that must be banished from awareness or is it simply a figure of speech and an effective one at that?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineliononfire
just a girl
Female User Gallery


Registered: 07/30/13
Posts: 29
Loc: NY Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: xbloodwhipx]
    #18861900 - 09/19/13 08:03 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

The translation that the maker of the video uses is horrible.  I don't like it.  I personally stick with King James or NKJ versions.  He reads 1-3 or 4 verses, but there is important points that must be understood in the words before and after the verses that will make for a clear understanding of the message.  Ya know what I mean?  In the last scripture Jeremiah 19:9, if you were to read the entire chapter, you would have knowledge as to why the people were eating the flesh of others. There was famine in the land and in order to preserve their lives, they had no choice if they wanted to live.  Some people would die before eating their brother, but don't you think there were some people that made that choice to surive?  As gross as it is.  Anyway, these people were worshipping idols as it states in 19:4.  It also goes on to say that the people were murderers of the innocent, they turned their hearts from God and made a choice to serve other gods.  Those people had been previously warned and had turned their faces from God.  They didn't want Him or accept Him.  Free will.  The consequences  of sin is death. 

It's important to understand the context of the words and to read The Word from a legitimate version.  King James is the best, to my knowledge.  I have never heard of the version that this man was reading from. 

I think that if anyone wants clarity of all those versus, then you have to read the entire chapter to understand the message in order to get the message right.  There's no purpose in reading into just the verses he has quoted without knowing what is written before and after.


--------------------
:mushroom2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: liononfire]
    #18861961 - 09/19/13 08:26 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

King James is the most beautiful, especially the Psalms IMO, but he does what virtually every scribe has done throughout the centuries - he makes insertions. Like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. There is no word for homosexual in Greek. It therefore could not have appeared in the original Greek manuscripts of the NT. But it is a matter of psycho-history that King James himself was homosexual, and no doubt a self-hating homosexual at that.

Luke 17:20-21 is another important example. ".. the kingdom of God is within you. The original Greek uses an -ento form, not an -eso form, according to my NT professors in seminary. The more precise translation, and the one I used, was the Revised Standard Version (there are even better ones today) which says "...the kingdom of God is in the midst of you." Now, personally, I never liked this because I am an introvert, and INTP, with a strong mystical bent, and I preferred to conceptualize the kingdom of God as having a transpersonal 'locus' in my psyche, and further, at my psychospiritual Center, which I identified for a number of reasons with my heart. The word "midst" suggests rather, a presence that exists inter-personally, between individuals, and this suggestion supported the 'social gospel' model of  most of the Methodist professors I had. In fact, the first day of class, a NT prof asked if there were any Catholics in the room. A friend of mine kicked my foot, but I didn't answer because I was a Jew who received Catholic baptism and was suddenly in a Protestant seminary. Nevertheless, I could see that said professor wanted to be sure not to offend anyone before proceeding. I dropped his class and took the course with another prof - a Hindu-turned-Christian. He was not much better since he was influenced more by Marxist political philosophy than anything mystical. He did suggest one thing I remembered though: "Metaphor is more potent than LSD."


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18861987 - 09/19/13 08:40 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

We have come to the end of this communication as far as I am concerned. You have expressed your position, and I'll end with saying that I am more a Panentheist (not Pantheist) than a Theist. Yet, I find myself more a Theist than a Deist, in that I still make petitionary prayers, and prayers of thanksgiving, which I would not do if I were a Deist. I've coined a term for myself which is rather difficult to describe, so I won't: Monopanentheist. Couched within this fabrication is the notion that the Creator is singular, yet is not radically separated from creation, or else any of the Theist claims for responsiveness between Creator and creation would not exist. In other words, the creation is what the Bhagavad Gita refers to as the "material energies of God," and what western esoteric traditions refer to as 'The Goddess,' more colloquially, 'Mother Nature.' Within individual being, me, Wisdom and Compassion (as the Tibetan Buddhists like to express Ultimate Reality), Sophia and Christ, Head and Heart, are the essential metaphysical dualities that are simultaneously One.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #18864186 - 09/19/13 05:56 PM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

MarkostheGnostic said:
We have come to the end of this communication as far as I am concerned. You have expressed your position, and I'll end with saying that I am more a Panentheist (not Pantheist) than a Theist. Yet, I find myself more a Theist than a Deist, in that I still make petitionary prayers, and prayers of thanksgiving, which I would not do if I were a Deist. I've coined a term for myself which is rather difficult to describe, so I won't: Monopanentheist. Couched within this fabrication is the notion that the Creator is singular, yet is not radically separated from creation, or else any of the Theist claims for responsiveness between Creator and creation would not exist. In other words, the creation is what the Bhagavad Gita refers to as the "material energies of God," and what western esoteric traditions refer to as 'The Goddess,' more colloquially, 'Mother Nature.' Within individual being, me, Wisdom and Compassion (as the Tibetan Buddhists like to express Ultimate Reality), Sophia and Christ, Head and Heart, are the essential metaphysical dualities that are simultaneously One.





Yes, yes. What you described is exactly how I see things, exactly.

It seems we differ only in our approach. I am really just trying to learn from you by questioning. If I seem resistant to changing my viewpoints, it's only because what I am doing right now seems to be working.

Can I ask you what spiritual practices have helped you the most over the years?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18864729 - 09/19/13 07:39 PM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Can I ask you what spiritual practices have helped you the most over the years?


BTW, I am not here to win coverts to my way of looking at things. If anything, I practice a kind of Socratic midwifery that intends for highly programmed individuals to be honest about their own experience, and birth truth from that. Those most deeply asleep continue to parrot scriptures that they believe address a particular facet of the human condition, even though those scriptures are ineffectual in reality. At some point, I have seen belief turn psychotic delusion in people.

- Entheogens taken with the intention of uncovering truth has been #1 on my list of spiritual practices.
- Training manuals included the book BE HERE NOW, and many of the books in its bibliography that taught me the disciplines of Yoga, for handling the energies released by Entheogens, and for showing the sheathes that need to be peeled like an onion in order to reach one's Center. The mental sheath contains religious beliefs that also need to be removed like the cognitive-emotional garment that they are.
- Christian Orthodox Heschastic techniques simply bridged the world between India and Greek theologies, but while I was immersed in a Christian idiom, they helped in the same way as Yoga did. So did Ramana Maharshi's Self-Inquiry.
- Sexual continence. Sometimes celibacy, even during the absolute worst time of my life, in my twenties. But later, controlled chastity, selectivity, quality over quantity.
- Simple diet, preferably plant based. I am mostly vegetarian. I do not eat mammals. That seems to incur 'colon karma,' not to mention more subtle kinds. It's a matter of health and ethics.
- The Buddhist Eight-Fold path has always informed me. So has Patanjali's Eight-Limbed Yoga (Ashtanga/Raja)
- No discernible vices: prostitutes, narcotics, gambling, gaming, over-eating, drinking to drunkenness, or cannabis for that matter over the last 30 years.
- Compassion is Buddha and Christ in practice. Compassion is my inner gyroscope for all thoughts and actions.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #18871300 - 09/21/13 09:10 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

I also think entheogens taken with the untention of uncovering the truth are very helpful. Without them i would most likely still be an atheist.

Why aren't enthogens used more in contemporary religion and spirituality? it is not just a Christian thing because for the most part, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus and Muslims dont use them either.

I have also read new age indictments of psychedelics. They warn about how they are dangerous and can produce traumatic experiences, which i found silly because LIFE has produced far more traumatic experiences than mushrooms or acid. Ive only had one really bad trip on mushrooms (and it wasnt even all bad) and a few hours afrter it ended, i felt 95% recovered and i felt like I was a stronger person for having gone through it. i wish all trauma was that easy to heal from

For me, entheogens played a central role in my awakening. I needed them to give me that push in a new direction. Otherwise my old thought patterns were just too difficult to break free from and it didnt seem worht the effort.

I know that sounds silly but it really didnt seem like the kingdom of heaven was worth going through so much effort for. but after experiencing heavenly states of being on ethnegoens, i realized it was the only thing worth working for.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18875675 - 09/22/13 12:11 PM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Why aren't enthogens used more in contemporary religion and spirituality? it is not just a Christian thing because for the most part, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus and Muslims dont use them either.

Pretty much everyone I've taken entheogens with, identify with being a Christian, Jew, Buddhist, etc., so the real question is addressing the relative number of people who do not use them, and perhaps you're asking why organized churches and temples haven't established them as sacraments, or moksha medicine. The esoteric members of any religion have always been relatively few in number compared to the multitudes. Most people go to church because they've been socially conditioned to do so. I'm sure that pastor who presented himself as a homeless man to his new congregation, and was treated like shit is a good example of what most church assemblies are like. Under a cloak of social responsibility, most people are just selfish secularists who play social roles. There is no seeking for the Kingdom of Heaven, no real here and nowness to their lives. As long as they are identified with self-importance, in driving the most prestigious car or getting junior into Yale, there is precious little awareness of Eternity in their lives. Entheogens would overturn the tables of their worldly mentality. "For the heart of this people is stubborn, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." - Acts 28:27


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDeviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 6 months
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #18878995 - 09/23/13 01:43 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

I dont know markos, why don't more so called gurus recommend them though?

I mean, to my knowledge Buddha advised against all intoxicants. Jesus didnt seem to have much to say about them, ramana Maharshi never endorsed them to my knowledge, meher baba came out very strongly against them, Eckart tolle didnt think LSD was anything special, etc.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: xbloodwhipx]
    #18879941 - 09/23/13 10:16 AM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

xbloodwhipx said:
Im just trying to get opinions. Being a christian myself... This makes me not want to be one anymore







Good choice.  You can certainly do better on your own imo.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: What do you christians think of this video [Re: Deviate]
    #18882404 - 09/23/13 09:11 PM (10 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Deviate said:
I dont know markos, why don't more so called gurus recommend them though?

I mean, to my knowledge Buddha advised against all intoxicants. Jesus didnt seem to have much to say about them, ramana Maharshi never endorsed them to my knowledge, meher baba came out very strongly against them, Eckart tolle didnt think LSD was anything special, etc.




And yet, Lama Anagarika Govinda, a German who lived and trained as a Tibetan Buddhist lama said that he never really understood what his training was truly about until he took LSD. Neem Karlie Baba told Ram Dass that LSD "was useful," especially if taken in a "cool place" (temperature-wise). He said that such substances were known in the Kulu Valley long ago, but the knowledge was lost. Buddha holds a medicine bowl' in much iconography. Huxley called psychedelics "Moksha Medicine." Perhaps that was the content of Buddha's medicine bowl. I never read Tolle's opinion of psychedelics.

Medicine may have the effect of being inebriating, or intoxicating, but much more goes along with those feelings, like insight, prajna. Opiates can still pain, but they are initially abused for their intoxicating properties. I no longer need to be stoned, high, or whatever you want to call it, but when I was a kid I never wanted a trip to end. I used hashish to create plateau highs to bridge the time between trips. Tripping improves my mental health, it has given me some classic experiences which lent me further insight into religion as well as depth psychology, and yeah, it feels good at times. Other times can be a grueling struggle and not any kind of escapist bliss, which is what Buddha was opposed to. No doubt the Buddha knew about the Soma of the Rig Vedas, and while we are unsure of its identity today, Buddha may well have known exactly what it was in 450 BCE. It has been suggested that Buddha died from being fed poison mushrooms, accidentally, or pork, but I think trichinosis takes a while and it's unlikely he ate animal flesh.

At the time of Jesus the Greek wines often contained so many herbal drugs that they had to be diluted 20:1 with water before being drunk, or they would kill you. I'm not sure exactly which herbs, but I suspect things like Datura species and drugs that today are referred to as 'nightmare alkaloids.' Atropa Belladonna, Deadly Nightshade, Henbane, and others are potent hallucinogens. These things are not mentioned in the New Testament, but Jews drank only kosher wines which probably did not contain drugs. Mushrooms growing from dung wouldn't be kosher either.

Clearly, shamanism developed with the use of plant allies, and as practices left the substances behind, shamanism may have given rise to practices that became the various Yogas, of which gurus rather than shamans were the proponents. Yoga tended to move against dependence on nature, and developed an ascetic philosophy which abandoned dependence on most externals: spouses, food, shelter, possessions, and perhaps psychedelics other than cannabis. Just speculating. :shrug:



--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Christianity........the "cop out" religion.
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
niteowl 12,991 80 06/10/07 04:05 PM
by MushroomTrip
* Altars Silversoul 2,167 15 10/04/06 06:48 PM
by Silversoul
* The Next Christianity spud 5,645 16 01/30/06 03:54 PM
by Gliders
* So, I guess I'm Christian now...
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
Silversoul 19,309 131 01/02/10 11:10 PM
by andrewss
* Christianity/Catholicism and the like, what's the deal? ToqomS 2,781 14 04/22/06 08:34 AM
by psyillyazul
* Pope reasserts other Christian denominations are not true churches
( 1 2 all )
fivepointer 4,911 23 06/10/10 11:19 AM
by p4kSouL
* how many real christians are there?
( 1 2 3 all )
secretmachine 6,889 59 03/02/20 03:08 AM
by Amanita86

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, Shroomism, Rose, Kickle, yogabunny, DividedQuantum
6,121 topic views. 0 members, 2 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.046 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.