09-17-2010, 02:28 PM
(09-17-2010, 12:02 PM)Ali Quadir Wrote: Of course, I never denied any of this, and it is exceptionally clear to me that there are religions out there started by negative adepts. You won't find them in the mainstream they do not have a tendency to be big, or if they are the biggest part is not showing the core of the religion. But you can still find them. More often than that however the religion is slowly corrupted over time by the work of negative adepts. The core, the original message remains pure and clear to positive adepts.
you know from Ra that moses was positively inclined, however he contacted negative orion entities, and the entities have given him negative information, and then built up on the information, creating the current judaism religion and accompanying sects.
we dont know what orientation was mohammad. yet, examining his sayings and what he has done in his lifetime, and his acts, tell a lot about his orientation. an examination of the islam religion also ends up in a similar situation with judaism.
these two religions are mainstream.
Quote:It can be said, it just won't be true. You're gambling on semantics again. Jesus was the spiritual founder of Christianity. Whether he intended to turn it into a religion or not. He walked the land and taught the lessons.. Buddha, same story, Mohammed. Again same story.
jesus of nazareth is not the founder of anything. moreover, he is actually the destroyer of a religion, a philosophy, in the form of then existing judaism. moreover, ra says that his intention and plan was to share love in purest form. this is not founding any religions or bringing any rules and else. 'spiritual founder' is something that only you attribute to him. 'we are inspired by him' is quite different than 'he founded a religion'.
buddha didnt found anything. the only person who founded a religion, brought out rules, and ordered people around, is mohammad in those examples.
Quote:Except for at least his two commandments of course.
everything regarding jesus of nazareth is relayed to us by apostles and followers. not him. the very people who founded the christianity religion actively immediately after his death, are the very same people.
Quote:His actions on the market square seem to indicate otherwise. He had a very clear capacity for judgment. He did not accept everything, he accepted people but rejected much behavior.
he has been tearing apart an existing religion in the market square.
Quote:This is merely your opinion. I've met Christians who are as fully committed to the Christ consciousness as Jesus was in his day.
christ consciousness as jesus was in his day is not christianity. moreover, it doesnt matter how many christians are committed to that consciousness. as long as they adhere to anything that is in christianity, they will be adhering to a religion.
Quote:But even then.. Religion is more than is followed today. The council of Nicea was not a good thing to happen to Christianity, I agree with that.. To many fine lessons were abandoned in those sessions. But the council was held to converge what was considered a too divergent group. Constantine didn't care about what was put in the holy books. He didn't know theology. He really didn't care! He wanted a unified church that would fit in his empire, what their message was he didn't really care about. You suggest he decided what was put in, but judging on what we know of the council this is not true.
council of nicea decided what to put in, and what to put out, and 4 major books came out as thus from that council. all else was forbidden afterwards, and in the following centuries, under penalty of death. a lot of persecution happened as a result.