(Original post by James Stewart)
Wise One has reduced it to a simple statement. But that is like saying the Venus de Milo is a beautiful statue. The real point is - yes it is a beautiful statue, but does anyone know how to make one?
Facts... Yes. What facts? It's about the triumph of common sense over promoted 'facts' presented through the dogma of religion. The facts would be: Either Jesus Christ is god and rose from the dead or he isn't and didn't. Either the Koran is a book from heaven filled with god's exact words and delivered to a holy prophet called Mohammed or it isn't. Either Jewish people are the sacred chosen people of god or they aren't.
Dogma and politics. Oh you bet! What I have been trying to do is get people to argue from a basis of something more than just the broadly-known propaganda pushed to everyone as official religions. It would be great if you could find archeologists that if you looked into deeply, DID NOT receive funding or support from SOME religious body or other. Most archeology can be argued to have been 'spun' or angled in some way - even if you consider that so-called aetheists are published by large commercial pubishers who have conducted market research indicating there is an 'aetheistic person' market too! At some point one has to make a personal and individual judgement about which 'authority' has the best basis of credibility. That is my view, at least.
Look, I'm not pushing any one particular belief system other than having people think over the things we have access to as 'facts' - namely, the books, the histories, the commentaries, the cultural traditions, the science, EVERYTHING we can lay our hands on, to consider something as important as how man interacts with the divine or more-than-human.
Some of the critics of what I have posted appear to believe that I am making very broad or casual statements and not citing 'authorities' and 'facts' and somehow putting forward some rare and uncommon and implausible ideas in the process...
In fact I deliberately refrained from quoting 'authoritative commentaries' in order to directly quote straight from primary sources: Plato (Timaeus and Critias), for example - and pointed to key political identities that are conveniently forgotten BY THE ALL THE MAIN GROUPS PUSHING ANCIENT POLITICAL AGENDA THAT STAYS WITH US TO THIS DAY: Caesar, Cleopatra, Rumi, Molon.
The ROMAN Catholic church would not like to remind itself of why it is ROMAN. Arabs do not like to remind themselves they were slaves and owned by Pharaoic dynasties. Jewish people do not like to be reminded that as far as facts go, no archeologist anywhere claims to be able to demonstrate as a scientific/archeological fact, that 'Moses' led anyone away from Pharaoh through the Red Sea, either at the time commonly supposed, or at any time at all!
There is nothing unknown or contentious in what I have been pointing to -and yet not one single person has even suggested they have a single clue about the connection - and especially the political connection linking Caesar, Cleopatra, Christians, Arabs and Jews. Politics is about power, and power focusses around wealth.
Cleopatra supplied all the FOOD for Rome. Cleopatra had a son by Julius Caesar (Caesarion - whose true historical fate is not known to any accepted authority). Mary's uncle was Cleophas, literally from the House (family) of Cleopatra Ptolemy - lived in that physical house and had her son educated there while he lived in Egypt. It is entirely possible - although I am not saying there is any proof of this - that Jesus was Cleopatra's and Caesar's grandson. In which case he could have utilised the lingering (and still quite strong) political faithful of the dead Caesar in Rome, to try to assume political power there. He could have used the royal descent from Cleopatra to de-throne Herod, who was afterall, well-known not to be exactly directly in line to the royal claim there. Everybody knows Herod set out to KILL some child who he believed was about to be born the real royal heir... The political agenda of the Sanhedrin and the Roman commanders would have been to ensure their own position of power by getting rid of anyone who might have claimed direct descent from Caesar. AND THAT WOULD THEN BE A VERY GOOD REASON WHY THEY ALL ASKED JESUS CHRIST WHERE HE CLAIMED TO GET HIS AUTHORITY FROM: CAESAR OR GOD... (See Luke Chapters 20 - 21; makes much more intersting reading when you visualise the possible political dimensions.)
And in all events, it makes much more sense to me, simply from an ordinary person's perspective, that god might have wanted to have his son turn up in the Royal House of the East (Cleopatra) and the Imperial House of the West (Caesar), rather than be some nobody. No disrespect to the 'nobodies' of the human race...
The so-called Flood Story of Noah is claimed by Egyptian priests archiving histories at the time of the Greek Solon - to have been at least nine thousand years old the first time it was chronicled by anyone, and to have happened (cataclysimic flood) periodically many times since in varying strengths of destruction. And that would fit into archeological facts about such floods. But it would then contradict the widely supposed Jewish timelines as to the Flood and the Genesis of moral civilisation. It would also tend to contradict any idea that Semitic people invented written language: and all of that in combination, would fit into the archeological facts regarding Mohenjo Daro and THAT region being the origination of civilisation and the type of alphabet we use in the West.
A 'temple' is NOT the main holy area; the 'adytum' is. All Royal Houses have an adytum. Even the Windsors use an adytum at the time of coronation and annointing of their representative as the Regent. Everyone in the so-called Holy Lands would have known that the seat of real power is the adytum, in which a holy book or scroll originating from the god who taught mankind civilisation, its moral code, and writing, is kept, the custody of which is in the hands of the royal authority. The simple people - peasants and slaves - accepted the imperative of owning such a book or scroll.
Whether there is any such thing left in the world as a book or scroll that actually contains any original words at all from the real (if that they were) beginnings of such holy texts seems unlikely if you consider that the great Library of Alexandria (the main place that kept originals and accurate copies of this type of thing) was known - especially by people in the region at the time - to have been completely destoyed several times.
It seems odd to me, that the Koran fails to say anything about the political driving forces of the 'Birth of Christ' historical moments, and yet is has an extensive lot to say about Christ as if it recognises that it is something of significance. It strikes me as hardly convincing as 'a work of god who knows all things' that it is so oblivious to the political implications of Jesus being the ACTUAL royal inheritor of power in that region.
Whereas the Roman Catholic Church does have extensive documentation to the effect of what I have said, and only refrains from making it too well known BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE ALL OF THIS 'SCION OF DAVID' stuff. But they too have a political agenda - at least they don't hide it if you enquire.
The Egyptian Coptic high priests' main religious artifact, claims to be the very birth documents of Jesus as being the grandson of Caesar and Cleopatra.
The Middle East is a region riddled with highly dubious sacred sites and some very uncivilised and questionable locations: there are places where blood rituals of animals or people occurred that today are the location of holy rituals. The Yazidi sect for instance, believes that Satan can be rehabilitated and - may I go on? They worship Satan as the angel who handed down the Koran (on the rock where humans were sacrificed to the Devil) because Satan was closest to the throne of god and heard and saw the things of god most nearly. Satan's rendition of the 'words of god' include equivocations meant to test man - since Satan asked for permission from god whether he could test the divine spirit in man. Moreover the Yazidis believe that Satan himself could achieve some reprieve from god if he succeeds in conning enough humans into worshipping falsely.
However, it may also be, that sophisticated orators, in order to seed doubt and fear of certain tribal groups, spread rumours of evil and secret practices such as blood sacrifice. It is certainly true that Appolonius Molon, a sophisticated and clever political strategist, WAS THE FIRST PERSON EVER to spread antisemitic sentiments - he was a Greek and he was Julius Caeser's teacher (an important one of them anyway).
I'm afraid I have to go back to the thread title, in saying that in amidst all this immense overburden of ideas and beliefs, and so many varieties and wide disparaties of beliefs, that the only true religion that man can logically have - is to seek truth and to worship it as of the best function to man. I'm sure it is possible to decipher the truth that YOU as an individual can accept as being satisfactorily proved to your own mind - but I will not offer any particular authorities or data beyond saying that the complexities are extremely numerous. There are real political drivers - which have largely been avoided in modern discussions. There are complications regarding scientific archeology. There are psychological drivers that each person has that may serve to push them to have more interest in sacred feelings, or less, or more interest in scientific fact, or less, or more agnostic or more aetheistic bases for ideological satisfaction.
However a brick wall is the standard of truth I will not try to proceed beyond for a personal need to be intellectually right with my own sophistry: if I bow too vigorously too close to a brick wall, my head hurts. The brick wall obviously exists to a level of functional certainty and presence that is very palpable to me. I am not an aetheist about the functional presence of a 'too close brick wall.'
Personally, I am also a keen student of the life of Julius Caesar, and I am internally a very aggressive person when it comes down to it. I would recommend that anyone who comes upon such as I am in real life could do a lot worse than hope in a loving and a forgiving god. I have been a brick wall to people who have hurt themselves very badly for want of some intervention by a god acting on their behalf who could stop me if I went against them!
But I get my desire to see good done from the palpable reality of feeling good when you seen your fellow man assisted for their abundant benefit and well-being.
God is obscure and difficult to approach in the extreme. And there are many pretensions to words that are divine. Psychopathic ideas that wrench the heart can seem by their tumult to be 'divine...' But the sensible trail of the divine among men is obvious when you grasp a true example of it - even thought it is intangible and a particular sentiment only and not a hard external thing even though it is partly generated in the neuro-chemistry - and here is one: Joy to the World, and Peace to All Men of Goodwill.