The Ooze - The Origin of Christianity (09-10-11)

[timishardcore]

Great show.Should have gotten up and called in.

[beastxeno]

@timishardcore At the end of the show, we started in a direction which I feel still demands exploration.. So if Chickenwings is up to it, and you'd like to join is we could do a second part.

Thanks for tuning in regardless man.

[timishardcore]

@beastxeno Love to my friend.

[02Blackbeard]

@beastxeno What was that at the end of the show? Remind me.

[Gathoo666]

whats the name of the song in the beginning?

[beastxeno]

@Gathoo666

Bonsai by Ian Somers. One of the most incredibly talented guitarists ever, too bad he'll probably remain unknown. I've known Ian since I was a young teenager, back then and still now; Ian has an ability to mesmerize people with his playing. This man rightfully should be aspiring teenage guitarist's hero, somewhere in 'mundane metropolis'. It doesn't matter how good you really are...

[Gathoo666]

whats the name of the song in the beginning?

[02Blackbeard]

2. It is no doubt rather difficult (impossible?) to establish objectively what happened in history. And Yes, the "winners" tend to write an official version of history which often smacks of the pseudo. I guess we have to compare as many sources as possible. But how certain can we be?

I think we need to know, so that means being gnostic, rather than agnostic, in matters of religion. I want to move from uncertainty to certainty/and that which is axiomatic (as far as that is possible). Levels.

[02Blackbeard]

Picked up the last 10 mins. OK, it's an interesting puzzle. But from a spiritual point of view no religion which is based on supposed historical happenings and some necessary belief in the salvific efficacy of the same is worth investing in. What is highly likely given one set of presuppositions is highly unlikely given another.

Anyone following Christianity today has to see things from a gnostic and theosophical point of view. The pseudo-historical is then converted into esoteric principles.

[beastxeno]

@02Blackbeard I'm not sure here.. your comment is either brilliantly insightful or widely irrelevant. I think it should be considered the prior. I'm curious of two things here.

1. What religion isn't based on supposed historical happenings? Does this not render all religion unworthy of investing in?

2. Can't all 'history' really be viewed as pseudo-history? There is an old expression, the winners get to write history; how does that play into it? Isn't an introspection of it then esoteric?

[beastxeno]

@02Blackbeard I'm not sure here.. your comment is either brilliantly insightful or widely irrelevant. I think it should be considered the prior. I'm curious of two things here.

1. What religion isn't based on supposed historical happenings? Does this not render all religion unworthy of investing in?

2. Can't all 'history' really be viewed as pseudo-history?  There is an old expression, the winners get to write history; how does that play into it? Isn't an introspection of it then esoteric?

[02Blackbeard]

@beastxeno 1. For Roman Catholics and Evangelicals it is absolutely necessary that the tomb was empty because Jesus had risen from the dead. A real historical Jesus had to be crucified because only a real life (historical) incarnate God can take away the sins of the world by his death. If it were ever proved that Jesus did not exist, or that he was very different from the way RCs and Evos have generally thought of him, then Christianity (of that sort) falls like a pack of cards.

Contrast with

[02Blackbeard]

@02Blackbeard ...cont....

this, Hinduism. No Hindu really cares whether the wars of the Mahabharata really happened or not. It could be all mythology, but that is no matter as Hinduism is a religion based on the esoteric understanding of myths, and not a blind belief in historical happenings.

In normative Christianity only Jesus is God, or Son of God, whereas in Hinduism we are all gods (asleep or awake). Christianity is about the eternal breaking into history in a unique way 2000 yrs ago.

[02Blackbeard]

@02Blackbeard ...cont...

For Hindus the gods are continually incarnating, or Brahman is continually manifesting. Unorthodox Christians of an esoteric stripe would have a view closer to that of eastern religion.

[02Blackbeard]

Picked up the last 10 mins. OK, it's an interesting puzzle. But from a spiritual point of view no religion which is based on supposed historical happenings and some necessary belief in the salvific efficacy of the same is worth investing in. What is highly likely given one set of presuppositions is highly unlikely given another.

Anyone following Christianity today has to see things from a gnostic and theosophical point of view. The pseudo-historical is then converted into esoteric principles.

[satanicinternational]

Awesome.

[DarkF00L]

No promises, but I'll do my best to make it. Hope all is well, Beast!

[beastxeno]

@DarkF00L If you can make it cool.. Just swing by and extending the good wishes is awesome.