A little while ago I got on the article " Jesus a Jew? "again in a comment to the effect that Jesus was not a Jew.
So this time I answered:
"If Mary was Jewish and gave birth to Jesus, he was also a Jew. In any case, any common definition.
It makes me feel like I said, do not care if Jesus was a Jew or not.
For Christians who want to distance themselves from Judaism, which may play a role. But: What is this?
There is overwhelming evidence that Jesus was a Jew. Why would he have us renew the "Old Covenant" should, he would not have been?
It does not dare to make a clear turn away from the Old Testament (which is obviously not so easy), herewith the Mosaic faith, but the love Jesus, whom you would like to have a non-Jews. I feel that as childish.
The way it is, all Christians and Muslims are Jews. Or, if you, or more precisely, Subjuden.
But that many of them can not stand, so they then cultivate anti-Jewish sentiments. I can not do otherwise than to be quite simple, really ridiculous, View.
So the Jews always sits at the longer lever.
Happens to Christians and Muslims right. Ultimately, they want it no other way. "
One may call me for the final statement as malicious. You are welcome.
Because then I would know but like to me, what it, regardless of whether Jesus was a Jew now (both in terms of his descent from a Jewish woman as well as his faith), or may not care less, should be illogical.
For Muslims, the Subjudentum is indeed such an extent that almost all assume the circumcision ritual.
For Christians, the Mosaic books are part of their Scriptures.
I can very well understand, probably I was doing just that schepp laughs himself as a Jew about such half Seppel. How should you take such people also seriously?
You do not dare to be a real Jew, or do not want to be for some reason, that makes half-Jew, Subjude.
Sorry, your child Christ and Muhammad: To see Loser.
Without having even much of the Jewish faith left: I must state that this is clearly logical in itself, as your zwerchen derived Subglaubenssysteme schlichtemang.
But I have therefore no pity for you. Because you are your own fault. And you could change at any time, your putting off your faith.
The truth is sometimes painful. I gave you your nonsense, however, not taught. So be pissed on if you like, but please do not apply to me because I tell it like it is.
Or, fair enough, you just pissed at me, as it were, Faith instinctual discharge.
This will help you out of it, not out, but it may at least alleviate the pain that your reality now times brings with it.
- Advertisement -
Tags: Abrahamitismus
Is there really blame?
If the debt is not itself part of the man-made religion and religious constructs in order to rule by the few for sacred or eleuchtet holding, on the large herd their unconscious lambs?
Is not blame the sale of their own, individually unique divine self?
If it is not part of the immanent Herrschaftskontrukte on earth to subjugate - already in the spirit - of individuals?
Who looks at fault than real, noted in my opinion. not that he keeps Even small with such ideology construct!
There is no guilt.
There are "only" responsibility!
Self-responsibility, as well as foreign or neighbor-responsibility. This can be perceived - and should necessarily, because otherwise you going into dangerous waters thoughts - or not.
The freedom of choice.
You should definitely live in self-responsibility towards life, think, feel, decide to be.
Who cultivates it to the championship, making debt - no matter what arts - to the ridiculous phrase, which is like a sand castle in the flood zerrieselt and rinsed in the vastness of the sea life away.
It is up to each self.
@ Dude
The Abrahamites want to be guilty. Otherwise, they do not believe it.
In fact even from the beginning. Erbschuldig each.
Maybe that some people are indeed only one purpose in life, to be at least guilty, otherwise they are able to recognize no meaning, no explanation in itself.
Yes, and not only the Abrahamites but also any trailer manmade religion religious constructs (which is also the belief about money or atheism, etc. miteinschliesst), the exact order, individually unique in denial of their own individual divine self in the absolute Divine itself, Religio (reverse link) with the source or to make it impossible for themselves own!
For me, pure nonsense of the unconscious, by the nose out and departed into the trap ...
If there is no guilt - and this was indeed very well argued by you, should there be more remorse for wrongdoing?
@ Dude
"... The exact order in denial of their own individual divine self in the absolute Divine itself, an individually unique Religio (reverse link) ...."
Forgive dude, but what you mortise there is also no more than bullshit. If you ever see in you the individual divine self, why is it still a rear connection required? And if you refuse any man-made religion, for what do you think then your own specific religion, because you're a human being? In addition, you lend thee of those from whom you hold nothing, the word "Religio" from.
You speak also still a divine "thing" if I can remember what you "father-mother-It" call. Where do you get the assurance that your of you and thought to be divine self, a separate "father-mother-It" has to have a role model? If your mind is in deep sleep, so does your consciousness to the only emptiness. An emptiness can not be a "father-mother-It", because a void has no tangibility. If she had one, then it would be something corporeal. After death there is nothing corporeal, because then it is only nothingness. No more having to go to the toilet that is truly divine. Only from this kind divinity, most fear, because they feel nothingness as nothingness. Drum trying out of nowhere to make a "father-mother-it" kind of thing. For only in the physical thinking the man accustomed to the physical life feels comfortable.
Since it must still be something that this person thinks, to which I am finally back must connect. Just need, you have nothing. The rational-oriented man that speaks on only. But exactly thus it acts as a last vernunftunbegabt completely and that makes such a person finally to a completely ungodly thing.
Do you know what a Nus or a Numen? You could also call the God particle. Or as a nothing of particles that live nowhere. From which one can learn a lot. And I can tell you from "Religio" keep nothing. You do not need a "father-mother-It" to know that they exist. They are simple, although it does not exist actually and fully enough for them to be aware of their divinity.
@ Thomas
"... Should there be more remorse for wrongdoing?"
It Goes Without Saying! Who recognized that he has not it taken or fails to respect themselves or others responsible, it must necessarily be self (be) -reuen because you just fall in otherwise questionable thoughts constructs, ie the self-justification is all wisdom.
And this self-self-on-the highest-socket-place, wrong doing nice talking or even ignoring borders on Illuminati fantasies ...
Haschmech
"Forgive dude, but what you mortise there is also no more than bullshit."
The telling of all DU to me after from you in the last few months here mainly still whisked shit-looking tower gets ready?
* * Gröhlprust
You know well that I you - as well as your thoughts - once highly valued and recognized, but You knock the barrel really the ground.
But I'm going exceptionally, nonetheless a.
"If you ever see the individual divine self within you, what is then a return link necessary?"
Anyone have dahindümpelt in the quantum computer is still not free, so can never even be entirely sure footloose and fancy free, alsomit is the individual Religio the A & O.
"If you refuse any man-made religion, for what do you think then your own specific religion, because you're a human being?"
The individual Religio my self with the source, independent of all external, grafted belief constructs. It is unique, and must always be different given the simultaneous oneness and difference of all individuals from individual to individual.
The phrase "Religio" and the "divine thing" * lol * reading on again, what I have written above.
Hint: Absolutely!
"Where do you get the assurance that your of you and thought to be divine self, a separate" father-mother-It "must have a model?"
The Absolute self - God the Father, mother-I-du-we - is the all-perfection beyond the quantum computer.
Within the quantum computer can get something to absolute perfection never even to the highest closely as possible to 100%.
The Absolute - the source of all being and life - is the essence of life, and no "there" there is no life, just as a quantum computer.
"After death there is nothing corporeal, because then it is only nothingness."
Yes for those eternal light, life, self, then, deny, and you can tell the last time.
I remind you: "Holistic nihilism in love and AWARE ...." (Seen in full when you click on my name above;-))
Pure, Unconditional, period-free and non-polar consciousness is beyond reason, logic, emotion, thought, ...
Nothingness is the denial of the source and its own!
You walk just a very dangerous path, my dear ...
To be or not to be!
So come back down from it, otherwise there's one of me on the Nus. ;-)
After all there - "Just need, you have nothing." - I agree with you fully.
It's all in or when free will.
Greetings from the light of the sun ...;-)
"... Should there be more remorse for wrongdoing?" Thomas
Of course not! Guilt, shame and remorse are the lowest frequencies in which a person can tick. It has been recognized that what you previously thought was right and his motto is incorrect, you can reorient and select other beliefs. But it is pointless to even incapacitating, "repent" something from the past. The only binds to the undesirable condition and brings it into the present. Nurch by acceptance can neutralize these past and not just select a different state, but by change the past. Literally.
I agree Dude, that there is no guilt, actually. But "really is what works" and therefore there is blame in this area of consciousness. It is not truth, but a reality. I agree Dude also the case that it comes to responsibility - is where I consider responsibility as the ability to be able to respond to the self, the self that he described as "religio", ie as the link to the whole individual - individual responsibility the one is. Is this Once connected, you have in fact they no longer mention how Haschmech stated. Then one is easy - but never in the "nothing".
I also think that "foreign responsibility" is impossible. How can we take responsibility for all the universes? Of course, this finding does not rule out that one wants to caring for others (take care, take care - there are no better words ...). The best thing you can do is to unfold itself and thereby serve as an example. Knowledge, insight and understanding each must experience for yourself ...
It is true that Christians and Muslims a "sub-Jews" are. Christians have it anyway failed to separate from the Old Testament, which is full of revenge and guilt and to focus on the New Testament, which proclaims the "love as the sharpest sword". But of course, any institutional religion charlatanism, which only has one purpose, to dominate others. I agree with Osho, who said: "Who wants to give me a faith that is my enemy."
Not only the religions, but any kind of rule, have the extremely practical mental tool "faith" hijacked and abused for their purposes. This is perhaps the biggest obstacle for the contemporary man that he can no longer believe in fact to himself and his own desires and preferences. Instead, he is littered with "foreign faith" and if he is naive enough to believe he just that. If he's still some "healthy instincts", has an aversion to any kind of faith developed. This is the insight "I know that I think" so to speak basic knowledge on earth.
It's odd that hold this Neolithic cults so long ...
Lisa
First of all thanks for the good wishes for 2013, and I love to send you back. Hope your holidays were refreshing and relaxing. :-)
Now to repentance. This is my opinion unebdingt needed to self really acknowledge wrongdoing in the past, and therefore the basis for the future - to have to act just right, and thereby also nothing to regret - in the same or similar situations.
Now for the foreign responsibility:
"I also think that" foreign responsibility "is impossible."
Of course you can (and should) do not impose a single little man in charge of the whole universe, as far as we go d'accord.
But the foreign responsibility I said, again is related to the personal action.
Some concrete examples of this (including as regards repentance):
If I am an accountant with the Mafia, and have no idea what machinations I cover it, the sponsors and their servants are naturally kindly disposed towards me graciously whether the good service that I do for them, there are - as in ignorance whether the correlations my deeds - nothing to repent and fremdzuverantworten nothing.
As soon as I got recognized for what evil reign construct I work there, and this blanket order and protect the reliability (and foreign responsibility) must come to clear decisions for the future; So to return to the Sauladen the back and not to work for them.
It's the same when I buy products of crime syndicates such as Nestlé and Apple.
Only when I know how much suffering and evil these satanic constructs havoc on the world, I may regret my former deeds (Buy their products or work for them at a good price), and thus the foreign responsibility I against all the exploited people, as well as nature, have not noticed by buying their filth before, just perceive now and in the future, and then make appropriate decisions. Say Jobs proclaim and buy any more orders.
Hope it's clearer now what I mean with the eminence of repentance and foreign responsibility.
Best regards from Dude
@ Dude
Some of your riposte against Lisa seems illogical.
I want to make it first briefly: How could I, even if I accepted the principle of repentance as useful to regret that I did not know unfüglichen act as unfüglich?
Even assuming the principle which would possibly even make sense, I had grossly negligent, selfish not want to see ousted who I supported there.
You did not have at least made clear.
You might see it differently.
Magnus
Sorry, but after the third reading your comment, I do not really understand your question.
@ Dude
If I did not know that, I worked as an accountant for the Mafia, I, again, with the above possible restrictions, even assuming that the reliability principle, nothing to regret.
Aha, now yes.
So to stay with the example.
If I did not know that the Mafia murdered man washes money extorted protection money and still practiced more dishonorable and dishonest machinations, I am indeed according to the principle - also Ignorance of punishment not (which I do not think so much) - but guilty in the sense of participation in a criminal conglomerate, but since I know nothing about it, just in this sense in my opinion. not criminally liable.
How can one speak of something guilty of the man - agierend always to the best of my knowledge and belief - so far did not know?
Once you so recognized, however, or there was a taken place from the outside, and it is simply ignored, or simply takes note and still carries on, as if nothing, you will - because of the evil machinations aware - even guilty.
Thus, it is meant to repentance.
Hope it is now easier to understand.
Best regards
@ All
Actually, again a discussion that belonged started from here (I reserve the right, still do).
Lisa writes:
"Guilt, shame and remorse are the lowest frequencies in which a person can tick."
And (I leave that to the revaluation of pasts now times out yet, it seems Lisa was Nietzsche's Zarathustra well understood):
'I agree Dude, that there is no guilt, actually. But "really is what works" and therefore there is blame in this area of consciousness. It is not truth, but a reality. '
Now, I know most objected that also control self-pity and heartache not just increased frequencies. Perhaps when one gets drunk and slaps pointless because Borussia Dortmund lost.
And, yes, the nail on the head hit: Just like Lisa derived, guilt is a reality here.
It is easy DA for many people!
Nor to the vibrational levels.
The recognized revaluation of pasts allows another now and hereby also expands possible futures.
Now you, Lisa, as clearly as you can show that what Nietzsche said, I wonder just why you formerly him as a "borderline" means.
And on the other hand others I guess much lower if only they knew how to reach me less (which may well be me of course), as "enlightened".
Power but for now nothing.
I spend alone for Bedenk you would like to Old Fritz still underestimated.
I hinwiederum other.
Can you get me a - start with, and full throttle - one hit in the face?
We exchange the above (January 29, 2013 at 18:12) "guilty" if you please by "responsible" button!
I maintain repentance is counterproductive and binds to the desired state and no longer keeps him so active, so to speak. All monuments testify! It does not matter whether you have it traded in a conscious or unconscious state. If you do not want it anymore, you have to neutralize it through acceptance and looking away from it. What is important is the finding in the present. Important of all is only the present.
I Nietzsche once called BPD because he, as far as I know, did not do the last step and the last step is to understand himself as a (sacred) Creator. Or did he do it? Then I take the BPD back immediately ...
@ Lisa
Nietzsche was regarding his creativeness truly not uncommunicative.
He spoke not only about being flown by Zarathustra one thousand miles of what previously was called poetry, but said also: ". I have made mankind with the Zarathustra the greatest gift that has been given her so far" (At least content this is likely to be correct memory quotation.)
Also, there is a passage - I do not remember which later works - where he speaks of how it was, his hand to press millennia as on wax.
Nietzsche knew how Cervantes Also, the first thing he had created, he was a (sacred) Creator. Cervantes said at the end of his Quixote of the coming centuries ...