The real Jesus, the real Mary, Gnosis, the Archons, and the world's first major smear campaign

[onawah]

The late Sir Lawrence Gardner, who had access to the Vatican library, said the same that another prisoner took his place, and that Jesus was not crucified, but he did endure the scourging.
He left the Holy Land and went on to teach in other parts of the region.
Mary Magdalene and Jesus parted as it was not thought to be safe for her to stay with him.
She sailed to France with Jesus's brother James, and she lived in a cave and also taught anonymously for some years..

Posted by John Hilton (here)
>"Jesus survived the crucifiction"

Forgive me if this has already been mentioned but, according to the Farsight Institute (which, by the way, I don't fully trust), a drunken patsy was crucified in place of Jesus.

[Eagle Eye]

Posted by onawah (here)
The late Sir Lawrence Gardner, who had access to the Vatican library, said the same that another prisoner took his place, and that Jesus was not crucified, but he did endure the scourging.
He left the Holy Land and went on to teach in other parts of the region.

It is mentioned that in the day of crucifixtion, an anonymous person was there holding the cross for Jesus, but those (who later modified the bible) erased the part where this man took the place of Jesus and was crucified instead of Jesus. He was Simon of Cyrene. If you search about this man, you will find out that he was on a mission in that day and was prepared for that.

[RunningDeer]

Knights Templar Confirms Vatican is Covering up Bones of Jesus Christ (3:09:00)

December 9, 2024
Danny Jones

Timothy Hogan is the Grand Master of the Knights Templar. He is also a Past Master within several different spiritual traditions, including many bodies in Freemasonry & of Rosicrucian lineages.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-T38tBm54vs

OUTILNE



00:00 - Becoming Grand Master of the Knights Templar

07:41 - Freemason initiation process

19:11 - Ancient flying crafts

25:18 - Freemasonry's Egypt connection

35:28 - Mysteries of the Osireion temple

38:39 - Egyptian pyramid chemical factories

44:47 - The 6 arks of the covenant

51:48 - Original story of Noah

01:02:05 - Why Jesus was arrested

01:09:26 - Biblical texts no one wants to talk about

01:21:37 - How Ancient Egypt influenced all religions

01:35:50 - Chinon Parchment: Napoleon's raid on the Vatican Archives

01:49:26 - Sacred geometry in the Notre-Dame

02:01:00 - Emerald Tablet & the philosopher's stone

02:07:39 - New evidence for electricity in the pyramids

02:21:44 - Ancient precision machines

02:28:12 - Historians are looking for Atlantis in the wrong place

02:47:29 - Ancient resurrection ceremonies

02:56:46 - The bones of Jesus Christ

[norman]

Posted by RunningDeer (here)

Knights Templar Confirms Vatican is Covering up Bones of Jesus Christ (3:09:00)

December 9, 2024
Danny Jones

Timothy Hogan is the Grand Master of the Knights Templar. He is also a Past Master within several different spiritual traditions, including many bodies in Freemasonry & of Rosicrucian lineages.

I think he said the Templars are hiding bones of Jesus, not the Vatican.

This 2015 Forum Borealis interview with Tim Hogan goes into very much more detail of the interrelations around the Templars. The Cistercians and the Sinclairs being of particular interest to myself right now. Justin Trudeau's mother was/is a Sinclair.


For some reason, my usual Podbay platform link is a dud so here's a podcast addict link instead:

Forum Borealis - Timothy Hogan - Covert History of the Knights Templar


or
https://podcastaddict.com/episode/ht...castId=4187402

[Bruce G Charlton]

This sort of discussion needs participants to be clear about their fundamental assumptions, before there is any point in discussing historical evidence.

If the assumption is that it is not possible Jesus resurrected to eternal life and ascended to Heaven - because resurrection is impossible; then there is no point is discussing evidence; because if resurrection is assumed to be impossible, then Jesus could not have resurrected, then all evidence must be mistaken, delusional or dishonest. It can't be true - by assumption.

If it is genuinely assumed that Jesus could have resurrected then a discussion of historical evidence is possible - although not really relevant to most Christians.

Speaking for myself, I am not at all confident about historical evidence as such. Historians are always changing their views, and almost everything about the remote past seems very uncertain to me. Certainly I would not be happy to risk the whole of my spiritual life on any historical evidence and its interpretation.

This is what is meant by that much derided term "faith". Properly speaking, Christian faith means that an individual personal is convinced in a direct and intuitive way that Jesus was resurrected. This is, indeed, close to the heart of being a Christian - not the whole thing, but essential to it.

So there is not much point for me to discuss evidence either - because for myself the knowledge of Jesus's resurrection is rooted in spiritual knowledge not historical evidence. This does not convince other people - of course! - but faith cannot (or should not) be secondhand. That it does not convince other people is ust the way things are for all fundamental beliefs.

Metaphysics, the primary kind of knowledge concerning the nature of ultimate reality, is rooted in assumptions - not evidence; because metaphysics dictates what counts as evidence, and how it is interpreted. Metaphysics comes first, and all other forms of knowledge (science, history, all empirical disciplines) comes after and is built on metaphysics.

This is why salvation is an individual matter of faith - each must reach this decision for himself, and from himself.

[norman]

I didn't want to say this, honest . . .

My faith isn't via a Mithraian Roman compendium of it's twisted version of what it is to love and belong to Christ. 'Christ' was a huge threat to them and it took them 300 years to eventually pull off an evil genius way to solve their problem.

[other theories are available]

[shaberon]

Posted by Bruce G Charlton (here)
This sort of discussion needs participants to be clear about their fundamental assumptions, before there is any point in discussing historical evidence.

If the assumption is that it is not possible Jesus resurrected to eternal life and ascended to Heaven - because resurrection is impossible; then there is no point is discussing evidence; because if resurrection is assumed to be impossible, then Jesus could not have resurrected, then all evidence must be mistaken, delusional or dishonest. It can't be true - by assumption.

If it is genuinely assumed that Jesus could have resurrected then a discussion of historical evidence is possible - although not really relevant to most Christians.

Speaking for myself, I am not at all confident about historical evidence as such. Historians are always changing their views, and almost everything about the remote past seems very uncertain to me. Certainly I would not be happy to risk the whole of my spiritual life on any historical evidence and its interpretation.

This is what is meant by that much derided term "faith". Properly speaking, Christian faith means that an individual personal is convinced in a direct and intuitive way that Jesus was resurrected. This is, indeed, close to the heart of being a Christian - not the whole thing, but essential to it.

That is correct, and explains why I cannot be a Christian.

This "faith" is based on approximately four statements in "biographical" narratives that appear to be additives, that are not present in the original Sayings Gospels.

Faith is not Gnosis, it is Pistis. The meaning of it was shifted to fit this requirement -- beforehand, it would have more of the connotation of "convinced by". The scarcity of knowledge of the resurrection event is far less convincing than the chances of a historically valid person. The most challenging reply is Islam which denies the resurrection because it denies the crucifixion.

I can easily believe he "went to Heaven", but not in such a melodramatic way compelling obedience to this or that dogma, as they have become.

I would think the "real" Jesus is the historically-verifiable one, and, I think there is enough to say there was such a person, but most of the story is missing.

It's a bit intimidating that an assumption that something "could" happen is enough to reject all evidence.

That is why the Romans thought it was superstition. It's weird, and it caused people to stop flipping a coin in Apollo's cup on principle, which is rude.


I don't know if there is a consensus to this thread as a whole; but yes, I would say the "assumptions", perhaps what I would call Axioms, underlie everything that spills forth from the human mind, and, it's best to clarify these as quickly as possible. For example, I consider Heaven and Hell as an axiomatic fact in nature, differing only slightly in detail from any idea about them, so it would be a waste of anyone's time to sit here and tell me "there's no such thing". Because of this underlying axiom, I have no conversation that is not based in a drive towards one and avoidance of the other.

There may be a surprising amount of similarity between me and the "broad values" of many Christian folk, even though I specifically disbelieve in theological Jesus. I look at this as each is able to pursue his preferred liturgy in his private time. In turn, I can only reply in kind to Orthodoxy, because, as a visitor, I like their service and most of what they have to say, I'm just not a convert and don't take Eucharist. That is fair. They are non-Zionists who are forced to tolerate me unless I start committing crimes. That is why I am willing to speak for them in their absence.

What I would grill them on is not the secondary issue of Christology, but, the primary issue of Pneumatology. The Orthodox interpretation is going to tell us the Sophia -- Wisdom of Jesus was "of Jesus", which means it must be male. What is this Holy Spirit or Hagia Sophia. Our question would be, is not Wisdom oceanic, a quality that could be instantaneously identical among many people, thus, a distinct entity and therefor -- female?


That seems to be frowned upon as a bit of a heresy to them.

That's where we become substantially different. I can work around the gaping cavity of no theological Jesus easily enough, but, right there, our views and practice of spirituality work differently.


The Romans, similarly, are different by decree, by altering the Nicene Creed and saying the Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son, and I don't darken their door.

The Greek Gnostic doctrine is Pistis Sophia, it just has no congregation or intact line of transmission, for historical reasons.

That makes three systems centered on Jesus, segregated by three kinds of Spirit, which is disregarding the Mormons or whoever didn't really have anything to do with it. Overlooking that Rome kept fixating on the crucified "Incarnation" and not until the 1200s did it occur to them "...incarnation of what?"

If the mission of Jesus was to re-instate the Order of Melchizedek, and remove that of Levi, I would be on board with that.

[norman]

Posted by shaberon (here)

If the mission of Jesus was to re-instate the Order of Melchizedek, and remove that of Levi, I would be on board with that.

The Order of Melchizedek is still going very strong but it's even more inverted and fake than anything the Romans mass produced for the masses.


"The lie is different at every level".

[gini]

'The Noble Lineage of Jesus Christ' - ROBERT SEPEHR
-

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6JyRUQoGFvk

27 Nov 2024
The bloodline of Jesus traced through the Odinic and Davidic Dynasties of Europe.

Robert Sepehr is an anthropologist and author
(books also available through other book outlets)
http://amazon.com/Robert-Sepehr/e/B00...

How Christ Became King
• How Christ Became King - ROBERT SEPEHR

The Lost Gospel of Thomas
• The Lost Gospel of Thomas - ROBERT SE...

Secrets of Esoteric Christianity
• Secrets of Esoteric Christianity - RO...

Gnostic Order of the Essenes
• Gnostic Order of the Essenes - ROBERT...

The Trump Bloodline
• The Trump Bloodline - ROBERT SEPEHR

[Bruce G Charlton]

@Shaberon - I have concluded that Christianity can be understood as a Second Creation - which is Heaven, "accessible" via resurrection, which is a choice. This choice became possible by the life/work of Jesus Christ - and was not possible before then.

As such Heaven is not for everyone, because it is an opt-in; Heaven must actively and personally be chosen.

I would guess (by your post script) that you personally do not want resurrected eternal life in Heaven; which is a place of eternal and divine persons; characterized by a love that is inter-personal, and a life that includes continued participation in divine creation.

This is a very different aim than that of the "Eastern" religions and spiritualties such as Hinduism and Buddhism.

Because God the Creator is good and our loving heavenly parent/s - on the whole and in a broad sense, most people get what they want after death - at least that is what they subjectively experience.

At any rate, heaven is not imposed on anyone - neither is hell (which is another choice) - and neither is reincarnation, Nirvana, Paradise, Hades/ Sheol or the other things that have happened, or may happen, after biological death.

[onawah]

See the comment on the youtube page:
"At 25 minutes into the talk:
"there were three who always walked with the Lord Mary his mother the sister
of his mother and Miriam of magdala known as His companion in Brackets coinus"
and "for him Miram is a sister a mother and a wife again the word coonis"
(It goes on to explain that "coonis" means to mate with.
So what this is saying is that one of the women who always walked with Jesus was the sister
of his mother, and that he had sex with her.
In other words, his aunt!
Since when did Jews marry and have sex with their aunts??
That is a kind of incestuous relationship which is clearly forbidden to Jews.
Did no one else pick up on this??????? "
QUOTE=gini;1647009]'The Noble Lineage of Jesus Christ' - ROBERT SEPEHR
-

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6JyRUQoGFvk

27 Nov 2024
The bloodline of Jesus traced through the Odinic and Davidic Dynasties of Europe.

Robert Sepehr is an anthropologist and author
(books also available through other book outlets)
http://amazon.com/Robert-Sepehr/e/B00...

How Christ Became King
• How Christ Became King - ROBERT SEPEHR

The Lost Gospel of Thomas
• The Lost Gospel of Thomas - ROBERT SE...

Secrets of Esoteric Christianity
• Secrets of Esoteric Christianity - RO...

Gnostic Order of the Essenes
• Gnostic Order of the Essenes - ROBERT...

The Trump Bloodline
• The Trump Bloodline - ROBERT SEPEHR[/QUOTE]

[gini]

"Since when did Jews marry and have sex with their aunts??
That is a kind of incestuous relationship which is clearly forbidden to Jews.
Did no one else pick up on this??????? " Quote Onawah post 691

Thanks for bringing this up.Yes i noticed it ,and take it as just another theory about Jesus' relationship with Magdalena based on reinterpretation of words & translations .
Personally i dont think its accurate but there is still a lot of mystery around that relationship so speculation is sometimes all there is.

[4got2call]

"God the Creator is good and our loving heavenly parent" Ponder, if you will, the mind-set that not only believes that, but will filter all of what is perceived of His creation through that filter. Then look into the Khazar enterprise before the military collapsed its global system over the past 7 years and what the Khazars managed to instill in most of the masses over millennia about "authority" and God and our place in His creation.
At some point, you have to start to feel it as a sovereign free soul: that nagging feeling that much of the Christian mind-set is about obedience to a father figure and compliance with a number of rules which have as their reward a heaven that is only meant for those who obey that figure.
Ponder that for a few days and see what comes up from deep within your intuition - which is your soul.
You might discover the impetus behind the editing of the Bible that made much of it into a manual that... well, created the slave mentality of obedience and compliance that was intended.

[shaberon]

Posted by norman (here)

Posted by shaberon (here)

If the mission of Jesus was to re-instate the Order of Melchizedek, and remove that of Levi, I would be on board with that.

The Order of Melchizedek is still going very strong but it's even more inverted and fake than anything the Romans mass produced for the masses.

Do you mean ones that have copied the name, like Knights Templar?

In these references I am never talking about any modern equivalently-named organizations.


In this case, I mean a pre-Israelite one, removed and replaced by the Levites, and, via Jesus or some means, has the aim of replacing them back. The one that is actually in the Bible. Are you saying that Biblical Melchizidek is in power? Or that someone wrote a book?

[norman]

Posted by shaberon (here)

Posted by norman (here)

Posted by shaberon (here)

If the mission of Jesus was to re-instate the Order of Melchizedek, and remove that of Levi, I would be on board with that.

The Order of Melchizedek is still going very strong but it's even more inverted and fake than anything the Romans mass produced for the masses.

Do you mean ones that have copied the name, like Knights Templar?

In these references I am never talking about any modern equivalently-named organizations.


In this case, I mean a pre-Israelite one, removed and replaced by the Levites, and, via Jesus or some means, has the aim of replacing them back. The one that is actually in the Bible. Are you saying that Biblical Melchizidek is in power? Or that someone wrote a book?

I'm not sure I really track all your definitions there but the Order of Melchizedek I'm referring to is the one that's sitting on top of the Order of the Phoenix and the Order of the Golden Dawn and is currently coordinating the transition from "Dark to Light". "The Great White Brotherhood" is somewhere in that zone of manipulation too but my grasp on the GWB is still too fuzzy to state anything definitive about it.

[onawah]

Just to be clear, the report wasn't suggesting that Magdalene was Jesus's aunt, but that Mary of Bethany was (being his mother's sister) and that he married her and she was one of two wives and sexual partners, Magdalene being the other wife and partner.
(Which I find highly suspect.)
It was not suggested that Magdalene was a blood relation to Jesus.

Posted by gini (here)
"Since when did Jews marry and have sex with their aunts??
That is a kind of incestuous relationship which is clearly forbidden to Jews.
Did no one else pick up on this??????? " Quote Onawah post 691

Thanks for bringing this up.Yes i noticed it ,and take it as just another theory about Jesus' relationship with Magdalena based on reinterpretation of words & translations .
Personally i dont think its accurate but there is still a lot of mystery around that relationship so speculation is sometimes all there is.

[gini]

Its confusing ,but i think youre right. (its because at 24 min he says'"Miriam his sister,mother & wife ', -referiring to "Miriam of Magdela'" )

"Just to be clear, the report wasn't suggesting that Magdalene was Jesus's aunt, but that Mary of Bethany was (being his mother's sister) and that he married her and she was one of two sexual partners, Magdalene being the other wife and partner.
It was not suggested that Magdalene was a blood relation to Jesus." Quote Onawah post 696
-

[shaberon]

Posted by Bruce G Charlton (here)
@Shaberon - I have concluded that Christianity can be understood as a Second Creation - which is Heaven, "accessible" via resurrection, which is a choice. This choice became possible by the life/work of Jesus Christ - and was not possible before then.

As such Heaven is not for everyone, because it is an opt-in; Heaven must actively and personally be chosen.

Okay, so you mean it is inaccessible to Jews, because they personally reject the Messiah.

Sheol or "the grave" denotes the primitive Hebrew afterlife, so, I am not sure when any spark of heaven may have entered their minds. Maybe they were over-interested in law. They believed there was a proper way to do things on earth, and that's it. In that case we can Judaism credit to the extent it is better than nothing, it is better than not having any guide or regulation on mundane order Something is either missing, or, is not obvious from the beginning of it. So we could say there is at least something that got into the Christian message, which honors Heaven, and therefor carries a sort of animating goodness that the Sadducees lacked.

I would guess (by your post script) that you personally do not want resurrected eternal life in Heaven; which is a place of eternal and divine persons; characterized by a love that is inter-personal, and a life that includes continued participation in divine creation.

This is a very different aim than that of the "Eastern" religions and spiritualties such as Hinduism and Buddhism.

That is roughly correct. Heaven is what I would call a Staging Ground. The main difference being the eternality of it. I view myself as coming and going from it while making a Mountain of Bones bigger than a Million Mount Merus. I am working on the scale of Infinity. In this view, it is best that beings at least seek Heaven for any reason.

The Veda and Zoroaster are both doctrines of Heaven; Judaism and Christianity are both influenced to some degree by Zoroastrianism, There are arguments that Jesus's personal heritage was Persian. Islam clearly focuses Heaven and I have personally been invited into its catecheumenism and I studied the creed for a while, and, I realized if I did it, I would be committing Shirk, which means nothing to me personally, but it does mean I would be insulting them in their own house, and I don't want to do that. So I'm not sure I could participate in a Mosque the same way I can be partially involved with an Orthodox Service.

Overall, I have to be ready to find people of diverse backgrounds, who take this seriously in some way, if they can show me something good coming from it, then I will absolutely back down and never lift a finger against them. The same is true for an atheist if you at least value the corresponding mortal principles.

There are, of course, those who use the names and words for other purposes, and that is another story.

All of our Sutras are based in Heaven Worlds, but that is not what is called permanence. Our main operation does translate as Gnosis. I believe it is similar to Hesychasm, it just goes a lot farther. So, there are a lot of general similarities, but no, under the hood there are differences in spiritual practices.

[shaberon]

Posted by norman (here)
I'm not sure I really track all your definitions there but the Order of Melchizedek I'm referring to is the one that's sitting on top of the Order of the Phoenix and the Order of the Golden Dawn and is currently coordinating the transition from "Dark to Light". "The Great White Brotherhood" is somewhere in that zone of manipulation too but my grasp on the GWB is still too fuzzy to state anything definitive about it.

Oh. I have specific refutations against Golden Dawn from its formative stages.


"Great White Brotherhood" is not from Theosophy. The idea of "secret governance" comes from Synarchy and morphed into a serious belief about Agartha the underworld, and this is what is more commonly known as Fascism.


To take it back, the real Order of Melchizidek ruled Jerusalem in the early days of David and Solomon, which does not constitute Judaism per se. In fact the only Books that were relevant or extant in this time were Psalms and a bit of Kings. The true religion would be in the Psalms.

This changes with Elijah ca. 900 B. C. E. which is Yhwh = Judaism as a tangible sect. At the time, Levites were scribes. Over generations, they became the actual order of priesthood. Melchizidek was Shem, the Semites or followers of Shem are the Mandeans. If Jesus was baptized by John, he was the same.

If no order of Jesus converted and replaced all the Jews, I won't say it was because he was an actor.

I won't trust anyone who goes around using these names. They're a bit off, to possibly way off. You might just succumb to psychosis or sorcery (hypnotism). Who knows. I don't think anything like that is particularly legitimate. It is one thing, maybe, to do something sort of honorarily, and another to go running off the deep end with it.

[onawah]

But considering how unclear the whole report centering around Jesus is, I am taking it all with a handful of salt.

Posted by gini (here)
Its confusing ,but i think youre right. (its because at 24 min he says'"Miriam his sister,mother & wife ', -referiring to "Miriam of Magdela'" )

"Just to be clear, the report wasn't suggesting that Magdalene was Jesus's aunt, but that Mary of Bethany was (being his mother's sister) and that he married her and she was one of two sexual partners, Magdalene being the other wife and partner.
It was not suggested that Magdalene was a blood relation to Jesus." Quote Onawah post 696
-