₦airaland Forum

DeepSight:
Brilliant. Brilliant. Brilliant.

Where have you been.

Have you heard or read of the Demiurge. Because part of what you described aligns with that.

FreeIgboho / Tctrills. Within this write up there is much that should enlighten you on the history of the Bible.

Thank you Sir. Of course, the Demiurge is incidentally the false god that Christians worship today.

The Apocryphon of John reveals to us how he trapped the divine spark of humanity into this wanton flesh that craves constant but can never be satisfied. That's why we are consumed by greed, selfishness, and vanity.

Everything I've said here is not new to people who've delved deep into the history of the Bible. It disappoints me that so-called Christians, with all their pretense to search for God and study him deeply, haven't cared to research all these readily available facts and information.

Dtruthspeaker:
I believe all you are saying is that you substance and align with Christ.

Because
"He does not believe that does not live according to his belief. Sigmund Freud

However, like you I see that the word "Yahweh" seems to be attached to a Canaanite god. Maybe very bad people created this in their bid to insalt God. But it is clearly understandable why people may not want to align with the name

You're mostly correct.

I align with Christ, but it's the Christ who liberates consciousness from authoritative religion, not the one who enforces it while demanding mindless worship.

Christianity today is in shambles because it has buried this version of Christ under the theology of priestly hierarchy and control.

I suppose your instinct to question the identification of Yahweh would be regarded as gnosis (illumination) in my own worldview, so I guess that's a good thing. So I will just tell you to open your eyes and realize that the rabbit hole goes much deeper than you imagine. Christianity in the normal sense we were brought up to believe in is a perverted version of the real thing, sold to us by dishonest people for the sake of politics.

I still have more to say on the topic so you can keep reading if you're interested.

This will be my first entry into this lengthy elaboration of my faith. There'll be more to talk about later as the days go by.

Let's start by talking about the Bible.

Whether we like it or not, we simply cannot deny the fact that it is arguably the most powerful and influential book in the history of mankind, and for this very reason it is so disheartening that it is also the biggest weapon fashioned by ignorant souls and all types of snake oil salesmen and charlatans against Christianity itself. Political opportunists masquerading as theologians took the liberty to mutilate and pervert the true narrative of the gospel systematically, deliberately suppressing the original gospel narrative that was predominant in the early church.

It all started with the Council (or Catastrophe rather) of Nicea. When Constantine emerged as Roman Emperor circa 324, he came to meet an empire that was fractured with multiple religious traditions, and in spite of countless persecutions and sabotage efforts, Christianity remained as popular as ever by the early 4th century, and even spread its tentacles much further. The religion had already been officially legalized through the Edict of Milan in 313 CE, but when some factions in the church started preaching about Jesus not being co-eternal or consubstantial with God, Constantine possibly saw this as a threat to split the Christian community that he was trying to use as a cohesive, unified force or unit to consolidate his Roman Empire.

So with this, it's safe to say that the Council of Nicea was politically motivated. It wasn't driven by the true quest for truth or knowledge. I want everyone reading this right now to take note of this because I'll show you why it's very important later at the end of this write-up. Constantine was just looking for imperial unity among the Romans that would ensure their continued domination over everyone else as a global force. He needed to ensure that they had a religious identity, established through institutional monopoly of the Catholic Church. Incidentally this would crush spiritual diversity for centuries. The best demonstration for this can be found within the concluding lines of the Nicean Creed itself:

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church. We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look forward to the resurrection of the dead, and to life in the world to come. Amen.

And if you read the entire creed in its entirety, you'll notice that it oddly places a lot of emphasis on salvation through being a believer and an active member of the church, introducing the Orthodox doctrine where submission to ecclesiastical authorities is emphasized over liberation through direct spiritual insight, the latter of which was the more popularly understood path to salvation among the earlier Christian sects. Obviously, I'm sure this strategic emphasis didn't happen coincidentally. The most effective way to consolidate power is by establishing a hierarchy and letting the people around you know who is boss. Hence, the establishment of church "fathers" and "patriachs". This would prove to be useful to Constantine for imperial power.

To achieve this, Constantine and his fellow bandits had to suppress any and all preachings and doctrines that would go against this special narrative they crafted to serve their political ambitions. Countless religious books and texts that were affiliated with Christianity, but contrasted with the accepted narrative were cast out and forbidden. The preachers of these forbidden gospels were persecuted and killed. This culminated in the Library of Alexandria being burnt down, destroying countless religious manuscripts. The so-called "church fathers" at the time then began their evil campaign against the gospel, brainwashing the masses against religious texts that threatened their institutional authority. To their credit, their plan succeeded, because the tree of mendacity they planted still reaps fruit even to this day. And the rest is history.

Or is it...?

Thankfully, universal truth stands undefeated because you cannot hide it completely, no matter how long you try. December 1945 came with a huge breakthrough that would send ripples throughout the religious community: the discovery of religious codex in Nag Hammadi, Egypt. These texts, probably hidden and preserved to the best of their capacity by ancient Christians, were revealed to be Christian scriptures excluded from inclusion in today's Bible.

Going through the texts, it's easy to see why they were censored with so much fervor. Funnily enough, it reveals that even in its heavily redacted form, the Bible still contains relevant insights from the true gospel that so-called men of "God" today have continuously misunderstood or obscured, knowingly or unknowingly. The Nag Hammadi texts served as undeniable proof of the sophistication and diversity of early Christian thought, which the so-called "church fathers" obviously found inconvenient to their narrative structure of divine hierarchy. If you read them in conjunction with the current Bible, you will realize that orthodoxy as we understand it today, was actually a minority position that has been forced on the mainstream through nefarious brainwashing.

One of the most prominent doctrines in the early church before it was defiled by the Romans is COSMIC DUALISM. Essentially, this doctrine presents a flawed and perverted material world that serves as a prison for the divine soul. True salvation involves acquiring divine knowledge that allows the spirit to escape from this material trap and return to its true divine source. I'll quote some passages from these texts to illustrate. You can find these texts at gnosis.org

It happened that the realm (aeon) Wisdom (Sophia)
Of conceptual thought (Epinoia),
Began to think for herself,
She used the thinking (enthymesis)
And the foreknowledge (prognosis)
Of the Invisible Spirit.
She intended to reveal an image from herself
To do so without the consent of the Spirit,
Who did not approve,
Without the thoughtful assistance of her masculine counterpart,
Who did not approve.
Without the Invisible Spirit’s consent
Without the knowledge of her partner
She brought it into being.
Because she had unconquerable Power
Her thought was not unproductive.
Something imperfect came out of her.
Different in appearance from her.
Because she had created it without her masculine counterpart
She gave rise to a misshapen being unlike herself.

Sophia saw what her desire produced.
It changed into the form of a dragon with a lion’s head
And eyes flashing lightning bolts.
She cast him far from her,
Outside of the realm of the immortal beings
So that they could not see him.
[She had created him in ignorance.]
Sophia surrounded him with a brilliant cloud,
Put a throne in the center part of the cloud
So that no one would see it.
[Except for the Holy Spirit called the Mother of the Living]
She named him Yaldabaoth.
Yaldabaoth is the chief ruler.
He took great Power (dynamis) from his mother,
Left her, and moved away from his birthplace.
He assumed command,
Created realms for himself
With a brilliant flame that continues to exist even now. (The Apocryphon of John)

The world came into being through an error. For he who created it wanted to create it imperishable and immortal. He fell short of attaining his desire. For the world is not incorruptible and the creator of the world is not incorruptible. (The Gospel of Philip)

But if you want to dismiss what I'm saying because it's not from the scriptures you're used to, then let me surprise you because even booke from the Bible supports this narrative.

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.” (John 18:36)

Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. (John 8:32)

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. (2 Corinthians 4:4)

Tying it back to what I said in my first post, the god of this world is not the true God. He is Yaldaboath: a deformed entity that revels in ignorance and deceit. The true God resides in the divine Pleroma beyond this physical earth and he is called the Invisible Spirit, or the Monad.

The problem of evil was the biggest obstacle to my Christian faith until I came across these texts, and suddenly all the things that didn't make logical sense to me back then started to become clear. A God of infinite love cannot endorse genocide, slavery, infanticide and every other evil acts, and demand mindless worship all at the same time. The Bible today has become the biggest vehicle for sharing ignorance to innocent people, brainwashing them to believe nonsense. When you factor these deleted books back into the equation, the problem of evil suddenly has a reasonable explanation: the god of this earth is a tyrant that thinks he's the ultimate creator and he represents ignorance and megalomania.

in a twisted way, it also made me understand the hypocrisy of people who call themselves Christians today. They're the splitting image of their god: fickle-minded, self-obsessed, ignorant, selfish and plagued by delusions of grandeur.


Addendum: this entire write-up should raise pertinent questions about the motives behind the Nicean Council. It definitely wasn't guided by the quest for spiritual knowledge, so on what basis do we write off the deleted books of the Bible? That's a very important question I think we all need to answer.

I'll stop here for now.

MaxInDHouse:
You got it all wrong!
Jesus is the spirit Yahweh used as His representative throughout the Old Testament so whoever thought Jesus and Yahweh aren't in harmony has missed a lot regarding Bible knowledge!

Òtítọ́ nìyìí o.
Sùgbọ́n Ọlọ́run tòótọ́ ni Yahweh, Jésù sì ni ẹnìkan ṣoṣo tó fi ọ̀rọ̀, èrò àti ìṣe jọ Yahweh pátápátá!

Ahn ahn Pastor Maxwell.

But I haven't even started telling the rest of the story na. I'm still going through the next couple of posts I have ready, sitting on my laptop. I haven't told you why I believe they're not the same. Why so defensive already?

Ṣe o mọ ọlọrun paapaa?

WeirdAlien:
Tell us more about your beliefs. Perhaps we could learn from them.

Thanks. I'm coming to that. Got held up with something yesterday but I'm preparing my follow-up posts.

plaetton:
It is not my job to educate you on this forum on the subjects of microbiology, biochemistry, DNA replication or Protein Synthesis. These are complex disciplines themselves with a lot of branches and sub-branches.

My dear.
You're a jjc in this debate.
Many many years ago, we trashed out these issues on this very forum.
The problem I have is when you yourself have insufficient knowledge on a subject , you expect that it is the obligation of your debate opponent to teach you that subject.

If you want to understand Protein Synthesis and how it is intertwined with evolution and natural selection, the information is fully in the public domain.

I repeat, it is not my job to make you understand it.

Are you always this condescending? Sir, I wasn't asking you to give me basic lessons in biochemistry. I was only drawing your attention to the fact that there is an obvious gap between the way our brain works at molecular levels and how we make decisions or exhibit complex behaviors. If you have a way to bridge this gap, then I'll be glad to hear it. And how does protein synthesis explain how information from the environment becomes encoded or how consciousness is able to access non-experiential knowledge? I genuinely want to know.

Just so you know, I'm equally not obligated to accept your lazy hand-waving as a convincing argument. Once again, if you can't sufficiently explain the mechanism, I don't understand why you can't just accept that you have limited knowledge on the subject.

plaetton:
I disagree.
For example. Atom is the smallest indivisible particle of matter.
That is the simple, elementary definition of an atom.
Now, just because I offer that simple definition does not oblige me to give you a more detailed degree course on atomic theory.
You have schools ,science books, Google and chatgpt easily available tools to enrich your knowledge on the subject.

Yes, the atomic structure is well-documented. It is also teachable, but neither of that is the point. What you've missed here apparently is that the mechanisms that are responsible for instinctual behavior are largely unexplained at the fundamental level and so therefore, are not readily available in standard evolutionary literature. So practically, you're just assuming the existence of comprehensive scientific understanding where there is none. How do complex behavioral algorithms emerge from molecular processes? How do organisms access environmental information they've never encountered?

Are we going to sit here and pretend like these puzzles have been solved?

The problem with you reductionists is that your intellectual cowardice always seems to elude you lot. When it comes to evolution, Google, ChatGPT and all the other resources you half-heartedly name-dropped only document the statistical link between behaviors and reproductive success, not the actual mechanisms through which the information about the environment is encoded in genetic sequences and accessed by our consciousness.

I'm going to go out on a leg here and assert here that you haven't even properly examined the so-called explanations you've been lazily citing because if you truly did, I don't think it should cost you anything to just articulate them, even if in just two short paragraphs.

plaetton:
The reason we give these simple answers are based on elementary understanding of the slow ,complex and tedious process of evolution.

Surely sire, you don't expect me to give a PhD level lecture on how survival instincts are hardwired into genes of living species.

There is no such thing as a ' suitable ' answer.
Answers have to have core scientific basis in order to be considered as plausible.

Now, if you have a good, scientific explanation for how little puppies find their mother's ripples, then please share it. We would all be certainly enriched by the knowledge.

But this is a double standard. You can't seriously resign yourself to giving "simple answers" and still be demanding scientific justification from other people. It's either you explain the mechanism or just admit that you're ignorant.

...my approach to it is highly unconventional, haha.

For instance, I completely reject the Yahweh deity worshipped in the mainstream. To me, he's a fraud and deceiver and he's the one Christ came down to preach against. This doesn't make me an unbeliever though. I still insist that I'm a Christian anyway, because that's literally what I am: a believer of Christ.

I'm sure I've already confused people with my first paragraph and so this is why I've decided to create a thread to discuss what Christianity actually is, because many people think they know what it is, when they actually don't. Everything I will say here is not necessarily strange or original per se, but the average Christian in the mainstream probably (and ironically) considers all of it to be blasphemy. At any rate, I don't see it being spoken about much on here and so I'm writing all this for anyone who, like I once was, is currently filled with nagging questions about his/her faith that just won't go away, no matter the amount of apologetic gymnastics.

Questions will be appreciated all the same. My response time might be erratic because of my irregular schedule, but I'll try my best keep up.