Folliw the words and examples of christ and only christ.

There are texts of the New Testament that pre-date the Roman Catholic Church. So the words of the Messiah have been preserved. There have been alterations to the New Testament texts over the years -- ie, in many of the translations put out in recent decades. It usually involves changing a word here and there, but having a significant impact upon a doctrine. The King James Version (while not a perfect translation) is one of the best translations, that does not have these deceptions.

The major corruption by the Roman Catholic Church, in terms of the Biblical text, was the decision to declare the writings of the false apostle Saul/Paul as "inerrant canon" and to include them in the "Bible".

I never understood why people automatically turn to the Christian God when choosing to believe in a higher power. People will look at all religions, and then go "nope none of these make sense I don't believe in God". Is it not possible to believe in a higher power without religion.

As for me personally. I am not 100% sure what I believe. I think at the moment, reptilians are demons. Or demons are reptilians. However you want to look at it. I think I have met Satan himself in a dream. He was a 7 foot tall crimson reptilian.

I also believe I have met the goddess Sophia herself in a dream. I think that Satan might be the God in the bible or Yahweh. I think Jesus and Sophia were paired in the plethora. I think Yahweh is the demiurge.

I think Sophia fell and Jesus came to save her.

I think we are Sophia. The bride of Christ. I think life is one big love story.

Anyway yeah this probably didn't help you at all

What are your thoughts on hell

Well just because you click on those videos in particular their frequency doesn't make it more true. It means the idea is popular.

Close...

Tell me what ya got

So, long story short. Imagine the main source of consciousness that powers everything, god, created all of this and each one of us has a little spark of that consciousness in us. God is "asleep" kind of like how when we dream most of the time we are not aware our singular consciousness is controlling EVERY aspect of that dream. Now when god created this universe out of himself he created some fail safes for his experience experiment. Sophia imho is a mother figure he created to nurture the planet and humanity ORIGINALLY... Keep in mind baphomet put through the one of the knights templar cyphers is sophia... The father figure being this yahweh or cheif archon. Both are "gods" "angels" "deities" or whatever you want to call them but them being part of the original consciousness makes them part of our "subconscious" and its why the sacred masculine and sacred feminine are being pushed away.

Its said that when lillith and samael reunite this universe ends. This reality. Lillith and samael are thought to be the masc and fem that make up baphomet. I think that they are two separate parts of the main godhead that were manipulated into a "divorce" in order to keep the main god head from waking. After all if you were an elite in this reality and your own god. Would you want this dream to end?

Okay I could only skim through at the moment, but this sounds pretty awesome. I'll probably reply again later today

Soultip: truth and by extension the true God are not hard to grasp. Truth is simple, do good things, strive to create, transmute negativity, find beauty, have faith in the Father, and love like there’s no tomorrow.

Thats the whole wide matrix busting story.

So although other chapters or different scenes might be interesting, and might even be really close to the truth, they aren’t the real real real super duper truth from above, and just like a movie, we don’t fall in love with the characters anyway because they arent real. So instead just kind of enjoy the show on the side, hug your family, that kind of stuff.

You already have your soul, as someone else said, it doesn’t need saving, especially not from Christianity - your instinct is correct, listen to it.

I wish you the best of luck :)

I'm a fan of eastern Orthodox. There are a number of flavors of it but it dates back to early Christianity, before the papacy set up its own overarching monarchy.

Eastern orthodox contains most of the humane good stuff of Christianity, and not much of the going-to-hell-crown-of-thorns violence of later Christianity.

It's calming instead of confrontational and overbearing.

Look into it. It really is nice.

Hey, I'm going to speak with a priest about becoming an eastern orthodox Christian so it's cool to hear the kind words in this sub.

I have ton a lot of research in this area. Yes, many false doctrines and practices have been brought in to corrupt the true teachings and religion given to us by the Heavenly Father and Messiah. In a nutshell, the Messiah did not come to found a new religion. He inteneded a continuation of the "Old Testament" religion, with some modifications.

As proof for this, the Messiah said this in Matthew 5:17-18: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

First off, no serious historian doubts that the Messiah, "Jesus" of Nazareth existed. He was clearly a real man that lived. I firmly believe that the accounts in the books of Matthew and John, and also Mark and Luke (although these two authors were not apostles) are true. I also believe that the Old Testament writings are all genuine and true.

The first major deception that perverted the true teachings of the Messiah are the false teachings by Saul of Tarsus (aka Paul), who is a false prophet and fake "apostle". There were only 12 true apostles, no more and no less. This is confirmed in Revelation 21:14, which describes the walls of the new Jerusalem as having “twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” And Mathias was the replacement for Judas, not Saul/Paul. Saul was a jewish (Edomite) Pharisee who switched tactics from overt persecution of the followers of the Messiah, to a tactic of infiltration and subversion from within.

Saul taught MANY doctrines in direct opposition to those taught by the Messiah. The most important was Paul's false teaching that "the law has been abolished" (Ephesians 2:15) and "we are no longer under the law" (Romans 6:14).

This is of critical importance because the Messiah taught that obedience to the law is the requirement for salvation. In Matthew 5:17-18 the Messiah states: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." And He specifically said that we must obey and keep the commandments in order to obtain eternal life, as he told the rich man in Matthew 19:16-21 who asked him what he should do in order to have eternal life, saying "if thou wilt enter unto life, keep the commandments". And in Matthew 7:21-23 the Messiah said, "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven".

The second major area of deception are all the false doctrines and practices brought in by the Roman Catholic Church, which have absolutely no basis in the Old Testament or the teachings of the Messiah -- including changing the Sabbath to Sunday, "cancelling" all the Old Testament feast days and instituting new "holidays" (eg, Easter, Christmas), praying to and worship of Mary, veneration of saints and statues of saints, the office of the Pope, etc.

No serious historian or scientist thinks the bible is 100% genuine and true

As I indicated in my post, I reject the writings of Saul of Tarsus. And while I think that the books authored by Luke (who was not an apostle, but merely a follower of Paul) are not "inerrant canon", I think that they are largely historically accurate.

The Bible is a historical record that has been show time and time again to be historically accurate.

Well then you can't have properly researched it. The bible repeatedly makes historical errors, some minor such as names of enemy generals (though they confuse Assyria for Babylon) and others major (the age of the earth). Also biblical historians don't accept the story in exodus

Names are often altered when translations are made. When names are "translated" from one language to another, they are often transliterated (ie, attempt to convey the SOUND of the name into the new language). For instance, the real Hebrew name of the is not "Jesus". Of course, it was not written that way, and it did not sound that way when pronounced. His real name was (transliterated) "Yahushua", which is the same name as "Joshua" of the Old Testament. See here in Strong's Concordance for proof ("Jesus" is Strong's Greek word #2424): https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=G2424&t=KJV

And per that link, this name is from Strongs Hebrew word #3091, which is transliterated "Yĕhowshuwa`":https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=H3091&t=KJV

And my other points? This isn't just transliteration but completely wrong names

Census didn't give a shit about your ancestral home so requiring Joseph to return is completely made up

I edited my post to address the age of the earth.

But that's also just wrong. We evolved over a long period of time. How do you explain the other types of homonids before sapiens?

Also could you please not edit it so massively? It makes it frustrating to actually reply to

The theory of evolution is absolutely false. There is no genuine evidence to support the theory of evolution. For instance, there are no genuine "transitional fossils" in existence. The evolutionists have only put forward hoaxes and frauds in terms of the "missing link" (ie, ape-human "hybrid"), such as "Nebraska man" and "Piltdown man".

We have evidence of humans far predating the supposed creation of man. Also why would God do such a bad job in designing us?

I'd recommend actually reading books presenting evidence for evolution

First off, carbon dating has been show to be massively unreliable. And dating of human remains by the "layer" of soil found is based on a presumption of the "age" of that soil, and also extremely unreliable and wrong.

As I explained in the post above regarding the age of the earth, the earth is older than 6,000 years. There could have been men on the earth for many tens of thousands of years prior to Adam and Eve, with those human civilizations destroyed in a great cataclysm.

Again, what books supporting the theory of evolution have you read?

Fact remains we weren't created and if we were then god is imperfect

Also on the theme of the bible being inaccurate you haven't addressed my other points that prove it isn't accurate. Maybe start with the census point

I went to public schools. I had the theory of evolution shoved down my throat my entire life.

The physical universe is proof that a Creator must exist. The physical universe is finite in both space and time. It has not existed forever. It had a beginning. The physical universe cannot have existed forever, or else it would now be in an infinite state of disorder, per the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

The extreme complexity of the universe and life (DNA, make-up of complex organisms, etc) cannot possibly have just "poofed" into existence by "random chance". It must have been by design and creation.

Again have you read any books supporting evolution?

Also are you denying that the biblical idea of the census is wrong?

Wow, random question on the census. Nice. Actually, yes, I would agree that the census is wrong. God's commandments are always right.

I went to public schools and universities. Didn't I have to read a biology textbook in high school that pushed the theory of evolution down my throat? Did I also not have to read many other books as part of going to public schools/universities that pushed the theory of evolution? I did.

Outside of that, I have not read (of my own choice) more books supporting evolution. I think I had enough of that garbage pushed on me by the government and public schools.

So the bible isn't historically accurate? Thanks for the clarification.

This 'garbage' is actually backed up by evidence unlike your book written by random people in the desert

I don't believe you are engaging with the right mindset. Read a book, perhaps one of Dawkins that lays out the evidence for evolution and get back to me. If you refuse to then there's no point continuing to discuss it with you

The Bible "isn't historically accurate" because it doesn't support taking a census? Really? Wtf

The theory of evolution is a total fraud. There is absolutely zero evidence to support it. Zilch. Only lies and frauds from the evolution propagandists. The theory of evolution is not science. It is a fraud pushed by atheists to deceive the masses of people and cause them to reject God.

The census as described in the new testament is nonsense since the Romans didn't care about ancestral home. Or do you deny this?

So you are not willing to actually discuss this. Shame for you.

Of course the Romans did not follow the laws of the Old Testament or the Israelite religion. How does that allegedly prove that the Bible "is not historically accurate"?

No. The idea that the Romans cared where your ancestral home was is ridiculous. They didn't. That is the innacuracy I am referencing

I'm not following your argument. Could you explain a little more?

Ok. So in the new testament Joseph/ mary travel to Bethlehem because it's Joseph's ancestral home. The romans wouldn't have cared about going to your ancestral home so the bible claiming they needed to is incorrect. That's before we get into the discussion of whether there actually was a census then

But the Romans didn't write the Bible. Israelites did. And it did matter to the Israelites.

No. You don't get my point. The bible suggests the romans needed them to return. The only reason to return is to tie it into prophecy.

Also tell me why the bible can't agree on Joseph's father

The extreme complexity of the universe and life (DNA, make-up of complex organisms, etc) cannot possibly have just "poofed" into existence by "random chance". It must have been by design and creation.

Isn't it interesting that these same rules don't apply to your god? Some might even say it's special pleading.

There must have been SOME entity or force that has existed forever. There can never have been pure nothingness. Otherwise, there would be nothing to have caused the physical universe to come into existence. This "entity" that created the physical universe (ie, "God") has therefore existed forever. He exists outside of time (and space).

Christians are mentally ill lmao

How so?

Well, if you are a catholic true believer and accept transubstantiation, then you are a cannibal.

I'm not a Catholic. Catholicism is a pagan cult that perverts the true religion of the Messiah and God, and introduces all sorts of occult and false doctrines, rituals, and practices.

For instance, there are no genuine "transitional fossils" in existence.

You're showing your ignorance.

If you're going to try to be an apologist for Christianity, I would highly suggest you work on your game. You're using some of the worst apologia possible.

Hardly.

. Saul was a jewish (Edomite) Pharisee who switched tactics from overt persecution of the followers of the Messiah, to a tactic of infiltration and subversion from within.

I've suspected as much, given his backstory and the fact he never knew Jesus. I'm gonna give his words a second look.

You are welcome. The main modification that the Messiah made to the "Old Testament" practices was that his death on the cross cancelled the need for animal sacrifices. He was the ultimate "sacrificial lamb".

There may be some others, but in terms of number it is not many. Most of the "Old Testament" laws, statutes, and practices were to remain in effect.

If one had to obey the commandments to be saved then why did Jesus tell the thief on the cross that he would see him in paradise?

What does true even mean?

It might be a better question to ask "what was the original form of Christianity?"

If you asked me that, I'd say go back in time and look at where/how it originated. You definitely want to look at Christianity before the time of Constantine.

With this thought in mind, it makes you wonder about some of the genuine early Christian writings like the Dead Sea scrolls. My guess is that Rome took a religion and pimped it out to make it serve the needs/desires of an Empire.

Real Christianity is probably quite similar to Gnosticism, hasn't got so much "obey authority" message and a lot more about how the universe works and our own relationship with the Divine.

It has occurred to me that if the demons exist, which I am also starting to grasp and believe - then naturally so must our Father.

This part is funny. Not because I'm laughing at you, but because I know some people will read the word "demon" and just shake their heads. But if you made a sci-fi movie about non-corporeal aliens exerting telepathic influences on certain people for whatever reason... oh yeah that's totally cool.

Same things, different language used to describe them, totally different reaction.

What makes you believe that it has to be Christian teachings? You may actually be chasing something that doesn't exist. I understand wanting to know the unedited version but following it blindly seems very ironic.

You can't just take the text as holy and discount your own reasoning.

You've come this far out of the dark to cover your eyes and start walking? Keep questioning.

I've looked into all sorts of religions for answers.. Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, shamanism, north American Indians, taoism, Judaism etc...... here's what I've found, there are two levels to every religion, the main level is for the "average customer" it has alot of truths , lessons, history, tools of control.... then there's a second level. . I struggled for a long time to find a word for it but aldous Huxley called it the "perennial philosophy" or the esoteric side, metaphysical side... from Wikipedia

The Perennial philosophy (Latin: philosophia perennis),[note 1] also referred to as Perennialism and perennial wisdom, is a perspective in modern spirituality which views each of the world's religious traditions as sharing a single, metaphysical truth or origin from which all esoteric and exoteric knowledge and doctrine has grown.

The Perennial philosophy has its roots in the Renaissance interest in neo-Platonism and its idea of The One, from which all existence emanates. Marsilio Ficino (1433–1499) sought to integrate Hermeticism with Greek and Jewish-Christian thought,[1] discerning a Prisca theologia which could be found in all ages.[2] Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463–94) suggested that truth could be found in many, rather than just two, traditions. He proposed a harmony between the thought of Plato and Aristotle, and saw aspects of the Prisca theologia in Averroes, the Koran, the Cabala and other sources.[3] Agostino Steuco (1497–1548) coined the term philosophia perennis.[4]

I was split on whether or not this truth made me happy or sad as well, in the end I'd say happy? Because tbh I felt like I'd exhausted every possible avenue and ultimately I'd have to die to get any inkling of truth. Last year it all came to a head and slapped me in the face, all the years of reading started fitting together like Lego blocks. I don't really like to talk about the series of "synchronicity 's" that happened, but let's just say I was getting more or less live feedback from this pursuit of knowledge. The Perennial philosophy is everywhere and it's beautiful and it's getting easier to discuss with people because it is pouring out of everything. Recommended reading : the gita (mine has a forward by aldous huxley) , dune 1-6, hermetic stuff, gnostic stuff, Aristotle, Plato, all those old fellas knew it, Philip k dick ' s exegesis, trapdoor to heaven, psychedelic philosophers all seem to mostly get it, the law of one , the holographic universe by Michael talbot, r/holofractal , r/higher understanding , r/cst , SACRED GEOMETRY, I could go on. Hopefully I've given you some stuff to ponder! and by you, i mean me in another time/space/memory complex! All is one!

Maybe you need to reexamine this whole situation? Does your soul need saving? From what? You need to realize your trying to fill the holes in something that never held water to begin with. Religion is a means of control over the masses used to keep them in line and cause them to shun those who break taboo.

I highly recommend Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor by Paul Stephenson.

Your mind will be blown as to how what we call "Christianity" is a smorgasbord of existing pagan religions and how nearly all traditionally "christian" symbols have pagan origins. fascinating scholarly examination of Constantine's imperial ideology. The author meticulously examines artifacts, murals, sculptures in great (at times too much) detail to describe how Constantine projected his power and wanted to appear to the masses. There is a great discussion of various religions competing with Christianity, the ideology of the imperial cult, and how Constantine co-opted the existing pagan symbolism and iconography into his new "christian" religion in an attempt to unify the empire.

Early Christianity, like current Christianity and most other religions, evolved out of the diffusion and competition between many belief systems and cultures. The messiah whose life story is a metaphor for the annual cycles of the earth and sun is a universal archetype in ancient religion. I don't know how one could objectively set a point at which it became "real" and then ceased to be.

I watched this Yale series of classes on early Christianity...I thought it was pretty good for the historical new testament and the authors

Tons of information was lost when the Library of Alexandria was burned down way back in the day.

Demons don't exist, in all likelihood. Maybe some malignant forces, but not women enties that can be directed, etc.

To claim knowledge of God is blasphemy. Religion, by its own codes, is blasphemy. Believe whatever you want, but the moment you feel you can push it on others, that you possess secret knowledge of deity, you're wrong.

Definitely agree with your second statement, but I think it's naive and unrealistic to just assume that controllable negative entities aren't possible.

I can agree with that statement.

I perceive your worldview as a some of kind theistic agnostic (there is a god or gods but we cannot truly fully acknowledge it). Am I right?

Anti theist agnostic/deist if so..

Religion, and the justifications that come with it, are bad. Belief in something isn't inherently wrong. But the REAL fact is , we don't know, there's Is zero concrete proof. Logic, and even science allow for some degree of intelligent design, or creation/settlement/simulation and other theories. I can accept that. What I will NOT, is charlatans claiming to speak for any gods. Fuck , I don't even care if you say you're inspired by, or interpret a message, etc. but to claim knowledge of the will of the divine?

Even most of the revered prophets were hailed by intermediaries, NOT direct contact with the divine. If you say god said to me "it's ok to do war stuff", etc, you're almost certainly not worshipping what you think you are, or what the majority of "Christians " supposedly believe in.

Honestly though... it's Intresting how much the god emperor figure matches a specific notorious figure from specific "chapter" in a rather popular and controversial book in most American households.

Who knows, but if I see you on the other side, so be it.

Utter rubbish.

You can take your pedo cult elsewhere, thanks.

Still...rubbish.

Long story....but the short version is that there were dozens if not hundreds of different early christian sects with varying interpretations on the meaning, nature, and existence of Jesus. Despite popular belief that the following is a "myth" (thank you Dan Brown), Emperor Constantine essentially picked a particular form of Christianity that fit his existing cult of Sol Invictus and vision for a unified empire (One God, One Empire, One Emperor), and he co-opted many existing pagan traditions/symbols into his new "Christianity." Once Christianity became a state-sponsored religion and its doctrines were codified in the Council of Nicaea, state sponsored bishops began to persecute "heretics" and "blasphemers" (i.e. those who had a different opinion on the nature and meaning of Jesus). By the time emperor Theodisius took power, the bishops actually had influence over the emperor's conduct. They continued to violently persecute and eradicate all "heresies" and ensure compliance with official doctrine. An interesting side effect of this was that many priests and missionaries, in their attempt to "convert" the "pagans" would up selling them their same "pagan" religion, but not wrapped in christian language. THis is the reason almost all of the christian holidays coincide with existing pagan celebrations and why christians imported and co-opted pagan symbol (the fish, the wreath, the evergreen tree). The formerly roman practice of "deifying" important public officials was simply transmogrified into the canonization process for "saints."

In short, the original meaning and message of Christianity was co-opted and substantially altered to serve the ends of a totalitarian political regime.

Hey OP, u/xleb1 wrote about Eastern Orthodoxy and I would echo his words. It's a very beautiful and organic tradition that I would highly recommend you look into. My advice is to read the writing of the early church and to visit as many different traditions as you can.

Real christianity doesn't exist. Find me one person who follows all of the contradictory teachings of the bible without picking and choosing, and ill eat my hat.

If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, 12then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show mercy."

Deuteronomy 25:12

There is no 'true' way to do religion. It's all so cherry pickable you can make a justification for anything. Anyway you do it there's always going contradictions.

Eye for an eye? Or turn the other cheek? You decide!

It's complicated.

Short version: is to develop a deep, meaningful and private relationship with God, thus becoming a better version of self. Its a inside-out process, not a enforced process of indoctrination and/or behavior control.

There's many layers to it and I glad you decided to take this first step towards the light.

Almost like that.

But in Christianity, its not some generic and/or impersonal higher power, it's not "The Force" or "something out there". This could make the person generically spiritual with some degree of theism incorporated in his worldview, imho.

In Christianity, God is a personal being - with intellect, emotions and moral values, somewhat defined as the highest conceivable being, the Creator of all reality - the unmoved mover of Plato. Also - a pivot point of Christianity is that humans are imperfect (i.e, sinful) and cannot repair that broken bond with with the Creator without the help of a redeemer - Christ. If one think that he/she can, by his own means achieve that status, that is not Christianity, as Christ himself stated that he was the way to the Father.

I hope this helped to clarify my take on it.

There is a difference between Christianity the religion and true Christianity which is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. I mean like I literally talk to Him and He talks to me. Seek and ye shall find. Ask God to reveal Himself to you. He will.

The real Christianity is Catholicism.