Wholeness

[Fixed_Cross]

To be fair, I think that the person-hood of Christ defeats the purpose of religion as it had been until then, and created a new purpose to it which in the long run is running into lack of meaning.
All pagan gods are not physical, they are built it seems of value-giving power without physical boundaries. A god can not be sacrificed, and we do not sacrifice to humans, at all.
Abraham was tempted to sacrifice to the gods of the Old Testament (which number at least 10), which is also, to himself, to his own greater destiny. This was one of the most radical kinds of occurrences in paganism.
But the Jesus offering is far more radical, it was a man sacrificed to other men, or even, a god sacrificed to men. This places gods below men, at service of men, which is in the old sense completely unreligious, blasphemous pomp, from old perspective, and that of the Athenians who foolishly, tragically, and with no choice in the actual matter, killed Socrates, indeed a blasphemous pomp… yet, it was possible. There was fruit in it, so it grew into a tree.

The Jesus offering takes away the power of men to sacrifice themselves to themselves, to forge their own spiritual exaltation, war their own devil. This is why Michael William Denney, a Bible student in youth knowing Greek and Latin, was told by an entity claiming to be Odin that Jesus was a coward.
Like all of us, he was shocked by the announcement; how can that act be cowardly? But this entity claiming to be Odin went on to explain; it is because it is not what a warrior does. A warrior operates on equality of terms. A warrior will never seek to take from another warrior his right to his own destiny, liberation, and to the meaning of his own sacrifice.
Odins weapon is the spear, and the spear was cast by heathens over the heads of armies they faced, to welcome them into their world, which included Valhalla for all braves killed in action.
That is a larger universe than what the Christ provides.
Christ has wrought immensely powerful spirit by this blasphemous sacrifice of god to man, reversing the order into a demonic one to be fair, aesthetically at the least, and the result of this is mostly scientific, because this man-centeredness isolated humans from the earth and taught them to isolate the earth from itself as it were, in portions; a strong magic! That I do not deny. On the contrary. But it has accompanied mankind in a time when a world of new unhappinesses was unrolled. New loneliness and meaninglessness, new weakness and new doubt, so much burdens and transmuters of the mind that the taste for the ancient love of Earth for its creatures, was forgotten.
Jung does not return to this ground. He is the one who is astute enough to speak “friend”; but he does not enter the gates. Because he was in Central Europe in the early 1900s he went through all the rituals and theatrical enactments, but he did not crawl into a swamp. He did not run through the forest barefoot in the night because of pure instinct - the is more the domain of Wilhelm Reich, another of mr. Freuds students.

[Fixed_Cross]

I think what is very important to establish actually is whether or not Jesus of Nazareth existed in real life.

There is no question that if he did not, the power of Christ is still real. But what is it precisely and how is it related, especially important, to Jesus.
Is it related in fact to a figure called Jesus at all. Or is it a power that exists independently of that which is spoken of by the four gospels.

If Jesus was real, the world is a far crazier place than pagans would presume. There would be no sense, basically. The most obscenely unnatural stuff could happen and be of benefit, whereas the most natural and healthy pleasant suff could be evil, for example. But more so a god was killed by god so that man could be healed from sin - but the plan didn’t work. This is most puzzling of all to a pagan. Most of the time when gods make plans, they tend to work, especially if there is no other god to stand in the way? But no. Mankind become even more unrepentant and selfish and invented things like intercontinental slavetrade which was explicitly done in name of the sacrificed god.
I think the presumption that Jesus did not exist, which would be reflected by the apparent fact that Nazareth wasn’t a town until well beyond Jesus’ supposed lifespan, is safer, also considering the consequences of the religion that was based on him.
Something was accomplished by the creation of Christianity. A great magical circle was drawn around mankind, isolating animals and most gods. Something was done to the harvest cycles of the spirit. It came to stand all in service of an entrepreneurial context; most of all what Christians have accomplished is the transfiguration of matter. Science.

[Fixed_Cross]

It is almost impossible for me to not think of such magic as performed in name of the Nazarene, as pertaining to a very real God. But what if the act of having people believe in this heady miracle simply amounted to the establishment of a psychological (psychic, psychoid) configuration which is aimed toward the presupposition of a deity which thereby comes to exist magically, and becomes capable of performing real life miracles through the combined cathartic passionate forces of human devotion, in which I 100 percent believe as transmittable through will…questionmark?
The magic worked because it is part of the Egyptian ritual, but it worked so incredibly weirdly and explosively thwarting- and destructively because it was just not an actual god, but a notion. Something very Greek. A sly story, ingeniously drawn from a cup of bad mead one summer night in an Adriatic tavern. A sailor who had learned of Hebrew religion on his trade faring ventures and slept with a … sex worker… who told him the story of the slain Osiris -
yeah no, that doesn’t play. It is too well put together from the Hebrew and the Egyptian strands both, and fits too well within other solstice myths of sacrifice. All that is new about it is the human aspect; the fact that it was supposed to have been literal, rather than a symbolic protocol of ritual or habitual re-enactment as previously, sacrifices were prescribed. It was a sacrifice to absolve of all other sacrifice
but, sacrifice is what gives joy in pagan religion.
Jesus did take that away from us. And so the earth grew barren, where fertile meadows were ploughed now the stream had dried and dust was in mens mind.
Paganism is necessary for wholeness. I believe it. Even for American wholeness - American Christians beautiful beings, because they are free. But they need paganism below their Christianity - they need the Indian. Y’all need the medicine man because thats what you are, America - the shaman.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Fixed: Your comments deserve a proper response, that I may have to postpone tomorrow, since ill have to review before explore them tangentially.

At least as a partial respone, since they do cover an implicitly wide array.
Thank You.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

I do indeed look at at in terms of the expansive roll out of faith from the point of view of a continuum from very early paganism on the literal sense into the more figurative essential content, within which the vessel of god has progressed.

Such development retroactively presents markers which aubsume the idea of good and ‘His’ relation to ‘goodness’ as a prescribed method to attain salvation, in it’s earliest form

That such naive prescription was possible as key to establish the Platinism of the earliest type of. duality , was motivated by the gradations which were implicit in the slow acquisition of prescribed. Platonic ’ love ', however , that continuum was established on basis of.various ideas.

So in that sense, the central question is the psychologically derived dynamic, which is appropriate fittingly, as below that level of doubt, relating to sacrifice generally, and self sacrifice particularly.

For holding the ideas separate, Jesus pays the ultimate sacrifice of a reduction into the most basic level that subsists, to establish a fearless attempt to deal with the belief in the value of human life-for which god can sacrifice Himself-creating a reasonable effected field of energy-. ’ T he soul or , spirit of a holy God, who is one God, yet manifesting in three persons, the trinity is a testament to that.

The son falls, but by that fall , the expulsion from paradise becomes a learning experience, and a transition toward excusing father, Odin, from self recrimination in the matter of procreating an objective, toward further human development.

Generally, God has to sacrifice the dual nature that he shares on the extended scope.

Jung does not deal with the soul in this manner, he’s psychological symbols are far less literally fermenting, he is far human to allow this distinction.

The progression of the developing soul does not allow cracks of doubt to appear because the progression forward increases the following gaps to widen, thereby. by disseminating the contextual meaning of the substantially with which Christianity became increasingly preoccupied.

Descartes’s doubt became the ontological marker which signaled religious literacy with the challenge to re-form the archaic ideas that analogously had to mirror.

Withi. that parallelism, the sacrifice of the continuity of the ideal, circular tautology, within which and about which the self of the profane and the divine were familiar connected, had to be placed on a different plateau. , then the magical.

What was Jung’s solution? To avoid an infinite collapse, he re- converted the archaic and the progressive objectivity, fermenting the idea that the Creation could incorporate the newer evolutionary basis within that of the old testament value of a literal sacrifice .

The self needed to avoid sacrifice it’s self to attain incorporation within the higher conscious manifestation, it needed no transifionary steps to over come the gaping realities of ever wide ing, emerging doubt, but presume the oncoming existential presumption of the basic literal evaluation -of the word of God, was Good.

That Man was ready to assume that goodness, was a sine qua non, and that goodness overcame the essential doubt which has arisen.

The goodness was proved by that singular demonstration which drew a magic circle between the divine
infancy and sacrifice through progressive symbolism.

The redemption got rid of the need of atonement, and that changed the essential marker for comprehending the continuation of evaluating the multiplicity of a prior continuity of identifiable markers of the personalify6 of God.

God had to sacrifice Its self as the logical result of a process, understood as introjective identification: as effected by Jung’s re-integration of Jesus’ held back differential treatment, so that sins, albeit guilt could be forgiven. ; which formerly only a magical mystery could invoke.

Sexual guilt in particular, became the most spectacular literal symbol to be disassembled, and it STILL remains in a suspended, animated contention.

[felix_dakat]

@Meno_

Jung said,

"Thus a certain solitude and isolation are inescapable conditions of life for the well-being of oneself and of the other, otherwise one cannot 144/145 sufficiently be oneself. A certain slowness of life, which is like a standstill, will be unavoidable. The uncertainty of such a life will most probably be its greatest burden, but still I must unite the two conflicting powers of my soul and keep them together in a true marriage until the end of my life, since the magician is called ΦΙΛΗΜΩΝ and his wife ΒΑΥΚΙΣ. “I hold together what Christ has kept apart in himself and through his example in others, since the more the one half of my being strives toward the good, the more the other half journeys to Hell.”

~~Jung, C. G…"

The multiplicity comes in synch with a continuous stream of conscious realization, perceived as either effected , or, effecting the substance
; instilling either an autonomous reduction of impressions-representations, or- determined by higher ordered inscribed offerings from modeled, objective criteria.
{Not intuiting unconscious presence that demands a progressive tendency

To reassemble , or, revise within missed gaps which may pull in unaccounted for possible actualities. }.

This is why intuitive continuities invite a more appealing source , especially within French literature, and philosophy.

The deeper disconcern implies a mathema-theical, major fissure, that topically throw the either/or of semantic illusion into the doubt, by which they can over come the doubt that arises, …

Holding it separate, as Jesus did, creates an uncertainty at the most basic possible level, that only magic can compensate for, ergo , the multiplicity inherent in the ego.

Conflating them, creates a possibility and hope, for a restructuring , albeit, with familiarity with the alternative.

Yes. Jung was all about the conjunction of opposites. In the above excerpt it is about uniting consciousness and unconsciousness, the animus and the anima, the heroic ego and the shadow. Jung thought that traditional Christianity had severed wholeness into the Christ and Antichrist figures. Individuation for him meant bringing them together. Rather like Blake’s marriage of heaven and hell.

[felix_dakat]

@Fixed Cross

These are profoundly interesting notions, from not only Jung but Meno too, but/and they are intra-Christian/Platonic notions; a soul-straddling duality between good and evil is always implicit.
Even though such duality is important, it does not, in my own psyche, encompass reality. It is just one of its axes.

Let me offer a definition I once gave of magic which received clear praise from fellow magicians;

• Magic is beyond the distinction of the psychological self and the physical other. This duality is ultimately an illusion. Magic changes the configuration of this illusion, making it less and less illusory until finally it dissolves and ones notion of oneself is the same as ones notion of first principle.

This is what I practice when I practice magic. “Black magic” derives from this main definition; where one is capable of such unifying configuration of identity, one is capable of transgressing the limits of identity. One can actually possess another person. And often, this happens between people who aren’t aware that it is happening, not through magical intent but because, this is what reality is like. Fluid patterns, the strongest consistency serves as a mould for all others; this consistency is such as god, scientific truth, logic itself; philosophy is another contender to the throne, a David to many Goliaths.

Aren’t there different levels of magic? And if so, what are they, and what level have you achieved?

[felix_dakat]

@Fixed Cross

To be fair, I think that the person-hood of Christ defeats the purpose of religion as it had been until then, and created a new purpose to it which in the long run is running into lack of meaning.
All pagan gods are not physical, they are built it seems of value-giving power without physical boundaries. A god can not be sacrificed, and we do not sacrifice to humans, at all.
Abraham was tempted to sacrifice to the gods of the Old Testament (which number at least 10), which is also, to himself, to his own greater destiny. This was one of the most radical kinds of occurrences in paganism.
But the Jesus offering is far more radical, it was a man sacrificed to other men, or even, a god sacrificed to men. This places gods below men, at service of men, which is in the old sense completely unreligious, blasphemous pomp, from old perspective, and that of the Athenians who foolishly, tragically, and with no choice in the actual matter, killed Socrates, indeed a blasphemous pomp… yet, it was possible. There was fruit in it, so it grew into a tree.

The Jesus offering takes away the power of men to sacrifice themselves to themselves, to forge their own spiritual exaltation, war their own devil. This is why Michael William Denney, a Bible student in youth knowing Greek and Latin, was told by an entity claiming to be Odin that Jesus was a coward.
Like all of us, he was shocked by the announcement; how can that act be cowardly? But this entity claiming to be Odin went on to explain; it is because it is not what a warrior does. A warrior operates on equality of terms. A warrior will never seek to take from another warrior his right to his own destiny, liberation, and to the meaning of his own sacrifice.
Odins weapon is the spear, and the spear was cast by heathens over the heads of armies they faced, to welcome them into their world, which included Valhalla for all braves killed in action.
That is a larger universe than what the Christ provides.
Christ has wrought immensely powerful spirit by this blasphemous sacrifice of god to man, reversing the order into a demonic one to be fair, aesthetically at the least, and the result of this is mostly scientific, because this man-centeredness isolated humans from the earth and taught them to isolate the earth from itself as it were, in portions; a strong magic! That I do not deny. On the contrary. But it has accompanied mankind in a time when a world of new unhappinesses was unrolled. New loneliness and meaninglessness, new weakness and new doubt, so much burdens and transmuters of the mind that the taste for the ancient love of Earth for its creatures, was forgotten.
Jung does not return to this ground. He is the one who is astute enough to speak “friend”; but he does not enter the gates. Because he was in Central Europe in the early 1900s he went through all the rituals and theatrical enactments, but he did not crawl into a swamp. He did not run through the forest barefoot in the night because of pure instinct - the is more the domain of Wilhelm Reich, another of mr. Freuds students.

Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, man and myth, rebooted civilization. Now it’s getting another reboot. Who are the prophets of the coming eon? I count Jung among them. 2020 seems to be a pivotal moment in the turning of the age.

[felix_dakat]

@Fixed Cross

I think what is very important to establish actually is whether or not Jesus of Nazareth existed in real life.

There is no question that if he did not, the power of Christ is still real. But what is it precisely and how is it related, especially important, to Jesus.
Is it related in fact to a figure called Jesus at all. Or is it a power that exists independently of that which is spoken of by the four gospels.

If Jesus was real, the world is a far crazier place than pagans would presume. There would be no sense, basically. The most obscenely unnatural stuff could happen and be of benefit, whereas the most natural and healthy pleasant suff could be evil, for example. But more so a god was killed by god so that man could be healed from sin - but the plan didn’t work. This is most puzzling of all to a pagan. Most of the time when gods make plans, they tend to work, especially if there is no other god to stand in the way? But no. Mankind become even more unrepentant and selfish and invented things like intercontinental slavetrade which was explicitly done in name of the sacrificed god.
I think the presumption that Jesus did not exist, which would be reflected by the apparent fact that Nazareth wasn’t a town until well beyond Jesus’ supposed lifespan, is safer, also considering the consequences of the religion that was based on him.
Something was accomplished by the creation of Christianity. A great magical circle was drawn around mankind, isolating animals and most gods. Something was done to the harvest cycles of the spirit. It came to stand all in service of an entrepreneurial context; most of all what Christians have accomplished is the transfiguration of matter. Science.

The historical Jesus is a mystery so great that it calls the adequacy of the standard methods of historical research into question.

The destruction of the library at Alexandria was chief among the crimes that brought Western Civilization into darkness.

Western Civilization has always been as much pagan as it is Christian.

The expansion of the magic circle seems like a plunge into chaos to the conservative mind.

Birth, death and rebirth belong to the Tao=Horus= Logos. It comprehends all though none can comprehend it. Yet can we participate in it.

Humans knew how to play the game of life before they knew the rules.

Inarticulate knowledge encompasses articulate knowledge. The neural structures that keep us alive are unconscious.

Jesus epitomized the hero with a thousand faces. His story cannot be separated from the understanding it’s tellers.

[felix_dakat]

@Meno_

I do indeed look at at in terms of the expansive roll out of faith from the point of view of a continuum from very early paganism on the literal sense into the more figurative essential content, within which the vessel of god has progressed.

Such development retroactively presents markers which aubsume the idea of good and ‘His’ relation to ‘goodness’ as a prescribed method to attain salvation, in it’s earliest form

That such naive prescription was possible as key to establish the Platinism of the earliest type of. duality , was motivated by the gradations which were implicit in the slow acquisition of prescribed. Platonic ’ love ', however , that continuum was established on basis of.various ideas.

So in that sense, the central question is the psychologically derived dynamic, which is appropriate fittingly, as below that level of doubt, relating to sacrifice generally, and self sacrifice particularly.

For holding the ideas separate, Jesus pays the ultimate sacrifice of a reduction into the most basic level that subsists, to establish a fearless attempt to deal with the belief in the value of human life-for which god can sacrifice Himself-creating a reasonable effected field of energy-. ’ T he soul or , spirit of a holy God, who is one God, yet manifesting in three persons, the trinity is a testament to that.

The son falls, but by that fall , the expulsion from paradise becomes a learning experience, and a transition toward excusing father, Odin, from self recrimination in the matter of procreating an objective, toward further human development.

Generally, God has to sacrifice the dual nature that he shares on the extended scope.

Jung does not deal with the soul in this manner, he’s psychological symbols are far less literally fermenting, he is far human to allow this distinction.

The progression of the developing soul does not allow cracks of doubt to appear because the progression forward increases the following gaps to widen, thereby. by disseminating the contextual meaning of the substantially with which Christianity became increasingly preoccupied.

Descartes’s doubt became the ontological marker which signaled religious literacy with the challenge to re-form the archaic ideas that analogously had to mirror.

Withi. that parallelism, the sacrifice of the continuity of the ideal, circular tautology, within which and about which the self of the profane and the divine were familiar connected, had to be placed on a different plateau. , then the magical.

What was Jung’s solution? To avoid an infinite collapse, he re- converted the archaic and the progressive objectivity, fermenting the idea that the Creation could incorporate the newer evolutionary basis within that of the old testament value of a literal sacrifice .

The self needed to avoid sacrifice it’s self to attain incorporation within the higher conscious manifestation, it needed no transifionary steps to over come the gaping realities of ever wide ing, emerging doubt, but presume the oncoming existential presumption of the basic literal evaluation -of the word of God, was Good.

That Man was ready to assume that goodness, was a sine qua non, and that goodness overcame the essential doubt which has arisen.

The goodness was proved by that singular demonstration which drew a magic circle between the divine
infancy and sacrifice through progressive symbolism.

The redemption got rid of the need of atonement, and that changed the essential marker for comprehending the continuation of evaluating the multiplicity of a prior continuity of identifiable markers of the personalify of God.

God had to sacrifice Its self as the logical result of a process, understood as introjective identification: as effected by Jung’s re-integration of Jesus’ held back differential treatment, so that sins, albeit guilt could be forgiven. ; which formerly only a magical mystery could invoke.

Sexual guilt in particular, became the most spectacular literal symbol to be disassembled, and it STILL remains in a suspended, animated contention.

Jung said he didn’t believe, he knew. His was a religion of experience not faith. We can experience the images of the primordial psyche whether we believe in them or not. To do so is to get in touch with the deep self–that which creates us. It’s the way of gnosis not faith.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

@felix dakat

@Meno_

I do indeed look at at in terms of the expansive roll out of faith from the point of view of a continuum from very early paganism on the literal sense into the more figurative essential content, within which the vessel of god has progressed.

Such development retroactively presents markers which aubsume the idea of good and ‘His’ relation to ‘goodness’ as a prescribed method to attain salvation, in it’s earliest form

That such naive prescription was possible as key to establish the Platinism of the earliest type of. duality , was motivated by the gradations which were implicit in the slow acquisition of prescribed. Platonic ’ love ', however , that continuum was established on basis of.various ideas.

So in that sense, the central question is the psychologically derived dynamic, which is appropriate fittingly, as below that level of doubt, relating to sacrifice generally, and self sacrifice particularly.

For holding the ideas separate, Jesus pays the ultimate sacrifice of a reduction into the most basic level that subsists, to establish a fearless attempt to deal with the belief in the value of human life-for which god can sacrifice Himself-creating a reasonable effected field of energy-. ’ T he soul or , spirit of a holy God, who is one God, yet manifesting in three persons, the trinity is a testament to that.

The son falls, but by that fall , the expulsion from paradise becomes a learning experience, and a transition toward excusing father, Odin, from self recrimination in the matter of procreating an objective, toward further human development.

Generally, God has to sacrifice the dual nature that he shares on the extended scope.

Jung does not deal with the soul in this manner, he’s psychological symbols are far less literally fermenting, he is far human to allow this distinction.

The progression of the developing soul does not allow cracks of doubt to appear because the progression forward increases the following gaps to widen, thereby. by disseminating the contextual meaning of the substantially with which Christianity became increasingly preoccupied.

Descartes’s doubt became the ontological marker which signaled religious literacy with the challenge to re-form the archaic ideas that analogously had to mirror.

Withi. that parallelism, the sacrifice of the continuity of the ideal, circular tautology, within which and about which the self of the profane and the divine were familiar connected, had to be placed on a different plateau. , then the magical.

What was Jung’s solution? To avoid an infinite collapse, he re- converted the archaic and the progressive objectivity, fermenting the idea that the Creation could incorporate the newer evolutionary basis within that of the old testament value of a literal sacrifice .

The self needed to avoid sacrifice it’s self to attain incorporation within the higher conscious manifestation, it needed no transifionary steps to over come the gaping realities of ever wide ing, emerging doubt, but presume the oncoming existential presumption of the basic literal evaluation -of the word of God, was Good.

That Man was ready to assume that goodness, was a sine qua non, and that goodness overcame the essential doubt which has arisen.

The goodness was proved by that singular demonstration which drew a magic circle between the divine
infancy and sacrifice through progressive symbolism.

The redemption got rid of the need of atonement, and that changed the essential marker for comprehending the continuation of evaluating the multiplicity of a prior continuity of identifiable markers of the personalify of God.

God had to sacrifice Its self as the logical result of a process, understood as introjective identification: as effected by Jung’s re-integration of Jesus’ held back differential treatment, so that sins, albeit guilt could be forgiven. ; which formerly only a magical mystery could invoke.

Sexual guilt in particular, became the most spectacular literal symbol to be disassembled, and it STILL remains in a suspended, animated contention.

Jung said he didn’t believe, he knew. His was a religion of experience not faith. We can experience the images of the primordial psyche whether we believe in them or not. To do so is to get in touch with the deep self–that which creates us. It’s the way of gnosis not faith.

But to know is a sine qua non for the clergy’s under standing, a geometria, for the propagation of the faith.

There is no propagation of and for the faithful, without the symbolically reduced original depth of primal literal interpretation by Jesus in those early times.

Jung did not try to undermine the miraculous, he just represented it within a changing mileau.

[felix_dakat]

"What’s Happening in the Stars Right Now: An Online Event with Richard Tarnas – April 23rd, 2020

youtube.com/watch?v=8RTpTo1ZMEc

To Tarnas the planets have archetypal personalities. He interprets the solar system like a dream. One is whole to the degree that one aligns oneself with the meaningfully re-enchanted cosmos.

[Fixed_Cross]

@Meno_

I do indeed look at at in terms of the expansive roll out of faith from the point of view of a continuum from very early paganism on the literal sense into the more figurative essential content, within which the vessel of god has progressed.

Such development retroactively presents markers which aubsume the idea of good and ‘His’ relation to ‘goodness’ as a prescribed method to attain salvation, in it’s earliest form

That such naive prescription was possible as key to establish the Platinism of the earliest type of. duality , was motivated by the gradations which were implicit in the slow acquisition of prescribed. Platonic ’ love ', however , that continuum was established on basis of.various ideas.

So in that sense, the central question is the psychologically derived dynamic, which is appropriate fittingly, as below that level of doubt, relating to sacrifice generally, and self sacrifice particularly.

For holding the ideas separate, Jesus pays the ultimate sacrifice of a reduction into the most basic level that subsists, to establish a fearless attempt to deal with the belief in the value of human life-for which god can sacrifice Himself-creating a reasonable effected field of energy-. ’ T he soul or , spirit of a holy God, who is one God, yet manifesting in three persons, the trinity is a testament to that.

The problem here is, especially since Jesus most, most likely, if not certainly, never really existed, is that it warps the idea of self-sacrifice and makes it into something no human (except some Philippinians) would enact that model, so self-sacrifice effectively remains privilege of the state-God.
Do you see my concern?
No one actually went through that experience, so it is very unfair to give it as an example to people. Not to mention it is not a very wholesome example in general.
And it has no bearing on what sacrifice meant to pagan societies and individuals.

This different is so great as to discontinue the line of development of the notion of God, as I see it - I do not see a continuum between the pagan Gods and the Christian God - rather I see a deliberately forged break in the tie between Gods and men, forged so by Roman wizards -
Rome, large as it was, needed to do away with European peoples religion and invent state-religion. It had to do this in order to survive.
The result was an obscuring if not downright breaking of the tie between humans and gods.
This at the very least goes for Occidental Christianity.
Eastern Orthodoxy has somehow managed to maintain a living divinity, as I said earlier, I think because it is in its rituals, both Zeus-worship and a subterranean mystery religion.
I take such notions among other places from the Church of the Sepulchre in Jerusalem.

The son falls, but by that fall , the expulsion from paradise becomes a learning experience, and a transition toward excusing father, Odin, from self recrimination in the matter of procreating an objective, toward further human development.

Odin is not the creator of the world, not the creator-god. Pagans do not have such deities, pagan deities come into being just as we do, just at an earlier stage.

Odins son Baldr was slain, as are all Sun Gods, but Odin, unlike the Christian God, was slain himself as well; it is a cyclical, eternal world, whereas Christianity presents us with a straight and limited line; physics vs metaphysics.

Generally, God has to sacrifice the dual nature that he shares on the extended scope.

Again here, the difference is in the meaning of the God. The Christian God exists to serve man, the development of mankind. Odin, and Zeus, they exist for themselves. Mankind is not crucial to their meaning. They are beings unto themselves ,which is what makes it possible to actually worship them. A man can not sincerely worship a God whose task it is to serve him.

Jung does not deal with the soul in this manner, he’s psychological symbols are far less literally fermenting, he is far human to allow this distinction.

The progression of the developing soul does not allow cracks of doubt to appear because the progression forward increases the following gaps to widen, thereby. by disseminating the contextual meaning of the substantially with which Christianity became increasingly preoccupied.

This makes me think I have missed your earlier point.
Ill have to … stare at this for a while.

Descartes’s doubt became the ontological marker which signaled religious literacy with the challenge to re-form the archaic ideas that analogously had to mirror.

Withi. that parallelism, the sacrifice of the continuity of the ideal, circular tautology, within which and about which the self of the profane and the divine were familiar connected, had to be placed on a different plateau. , then the magical.

What was Jung’s solution? To avoid an infinite collapse, he re- converted the archaic and the progressive objectivity, fermenting the idea that the Creation could incorporate the newer evolutionary basis within that of the old testament value of a literal sacrifice .

Yes - all this is respectable and intriguing and even genius and brave as an intellectual development, but it has nothing to do with the actual living Gods. Who are far less complex in this sense - their complexity is an Earthly one, in the sense of runes, mysteries, the open-ended mind. If. may coin a term.
The Platonic-Christian mind is a closed loop, and all such developments as you identify take place in order to deal with the unresolvable issues such a loop brings about.
Why Christian sacrifice is so much more brutal and absolute and desperate, and why it doesn’t work as a blessing like pagan sacrifice does - the value is forced into a path rather than that it is allowed to make its own path and thereby, open up the world on that day in a certain way, produce freedom, happiness, personal power, a wholesome love of ones own ground.
Which is lacking in Christianity, this love of ones ground.

The self needed to avoid sacrifice it’s self to attain incorporation within the higher conscious manifestation, it needed no transifionary steps to over come the gaping realities of ever wide ing, emerging doubt, but presume the oncoming existential presumption of the basic literal evaluation -of the word of God, was Good.

That Man was ready to assume that goodness, was a sine qua non, and that goodness overcame the essential doubt which has arisen.

The goodness was proved by that singular demonstration which drew a magic circle between the divine
infancy and sacrifice through progressive symbolism.

Yes but - it didn’t work.
Man became ever more cruel and detached form his ground.
In desperate need to evince his notion of Good, he began to orchestrate the great purge of value from Europe; as he wanted only that which confirmed to him the absoluteness of Good of the intention of the creator of the world, where such confirmation will never be found. As there is no such creator, in the first place. The world came into being out of necessity, not out of moral will.
These are important arguments, and they suggest Christianity is not capable of sustaining itself as it completes depleting the world - it is such a devastating religion because it wants what it can never have, it demands to have what cant exist.
This is not sustainable in thew long run.

The redemption got rid of the need of atonement, and that changed the essential marker for comprehending the continuation of evaluating the multiplicity of a prior continuity of identifiable markers of the personalify6 of God.

God had to sacrifice Its self as the logical result of a process, understood as introjective identification: as effected by Jung’s re-integration of Jesus’ held back differential treatment, so that sins, albeit guilt could be forgiven. ; which formerly only a magical mystery could invoke.

No, because the idea of Sin did not exist in paganism. There is no need for the redemption of the soul for the sin of being a natural being.
There is no continuity from paganism into Christianity in this regard either - pagans know only their values, and they know they need to fight for them on this earthly plane to be worthy of them.

This worthiness is not “Good” in the moral sense, it is simply good in the experiential sense. Its good to be with ones gods. Very good indeed.

Sexual guilt in particular, became the most spectacular literal symbol to be disassembled, and it STILL remains in a suspended, animated contention.

Yes, and it is this particular form of guilt which as we speak is shaping up to be the lever that is about to introduce a new paganism.

[Fixed_Cross]

But, Meno, I can see you are working a crucible here of considerable importance.
Basically I think you are looking at how Jung fails in such a way to completely destroy the meta-physical hegemony over religion that he reveals the possibility of not failing; of pushing through - which would not amount to a mere return to olde paganism, but to wreak a marriage, a cathartic fusion, between the fruit of the completed Christian tract (basically, current seeker-thinkers) and the truths that underlie paganism.

This is very interesting. It is also what my own work is, but your field is not occultism and nonmetaphysical logic but rather, philology, literary-historical archaeology. Which means that you can not, as I can, dismiss metaphysics in favour of a proud newborn method, but must transform metaphysics from within, bring it to life, make it from a kind of cruel factory into a kind of wounded, crumpled but living dragon, which can then span its wings across millennia to become glorious. You have done to language what Heidegger felt necessary but certainly could not undertake - language as our dependency on god as the implied syntactic hegemon.

[Fixed_Cross]

@felix dakat

@Fixed Cross

These are profoundly interesting notions, from not only Jung but Meno too, but/and they are intra-Christian/Platonic notions; a soul-straddling duality between good and evil is always implicit.
Even though such duality is important, it does not, in my own psyche, encompass reality. It is just one of its axes.

Let me offer a definition I once gave of magic which received clear praise from fellow magicians;

• Magic is beyond the distinction of the psychological self and the physical other. This duality is ultimately an illusion. Magic changes the configuration of this illusion, making it less and less illusory until finally it dissolves and ones notion of oneself is the same as ones notion of first principle.

This is what I practice when I practice magic. “Black magic” derives from this main definition; where one is capable of such unifying configuration of identity, one is capable of transgressing the limits of identity. One can actually possess another person. And often, this happens between people who aren’t aware that it is happening, not through magical intent but because, this is what reality is like. Fluid patterns, the strongest consistency serves as a mould for all others; this consistency is such as god, scientific truth, logic itself; philosophy is another contender to the throne, a David to many Goliaths.

Aren’t there different levels of magic? And if so, what are they, and what level have you achieved?

Heh, thats always the question you hope someone is gonna ask. Yet the answer is of course restricted heavily, because, as most religious ethics prescribes, what is between god(s) and oneself must remain there. It is the most intimate experience, sharing of which would open one up to endless possibilities of being influenced.

I do not believe in an objective order of rank entirely as all powers branch out into different kinds of contexts, so there is no true integration into a pyramid. But of course there are objective stages of revelation. I believe Ive reached, through the early fanatical practice of Zen (6hrs-whole days for half a year at age 21) and subsequent complete psychological immersion in Kabbalah and White Magic, a consciousness “above the Abyss”, which I can access at all times if I put enough sacrifice into it. What this practically means, you’ll have to divine from the general drift of my posts, because as with many things psychic as well as social and political, to speak them literally is to give them away.

As far as matters such as levitation and time-travel go, I think they are possible and I have an idea of both, but I can not practice the former, and the latter Ive done a few times in terms of information (which may be the only form of time travel possible) contingently on some deep operation which requires it; all magic is contingent on values. “White Magic” in Alice Baileys terms, is the form of magic which as a principle operates only for the benefit of All; it has been my guideline basically for my own safekeeping, not knowing what I am as I was before I saw Athens, Sparta, Delphi and roamed the cliff of Poseidon and then saw my own homeland with new eyes and so was granted knowledge of my own gods. Since then Ive been absorbed by the magic of the runes.

[Fixed_Cross]

@felix dakat

@Fixed Cross

I think what is very important to establish actually is whether or not Jesus of Nazareth existed in real life.

There is no question that if he did not, the power of Christ is still real. But what is it precisely and how is it related, especially important, to Jesus.
Is it related in fact to a figure called Jesus at all. Or is it a power that exists independently of that which is spoken of by the four gospels.

If Jesus was real, the world is a far crazier place than pagans would presume. There would be no sense, basically. The most obscenely unnatural stuff could happen and be of benefit, whereas the most natural and healthy pleasant suff could be evil, for example. But more so a god was killed by god so that man could be healed from sin - but the plan didn’t work. This is most puzzling of all to a pagan. Most of the time when gods make plans, they tend to work, especially if there is no other god to stand in the way? But no. Mankind become even more unrepentant and selfish and invented things like intercontinental slavetrade which was explicitly done in name of the sacrificed god.
I think the presumption that Jesus did not exist, which would be reflected by the apparent fact that Nazareth wasn’t a town until well beyond Jesus’ supposed lifespan, is safer, also considering the consequences of the religion that was based on him.
Something was accomplished by the creation of Christianity. A great magical circle was drawn around mankind, isolating animals and most gods. Something was done to the harvest cycles of the spirit. It came to stand all in service of an entrepreneurial context; most of all what Christians have accomplished is the transfiguration of matter. Science.

The historical Jesus is a mystery so great that it calls the adequacy of the standard methods of historical research into question.

We need indeed look a it through the lens of greater occultism; I recommend strongly you read the book “Jesus: Last of the Pharaohs” by Ralph Ellis.
It posits that Jesus is indeed the son of Joseph and that Joseph is from a lineage of Pharaoh blood that was hiding out with the big Egyptian war going on, and that “carpenter” is a translation of an Aramaic word for builder, which was a simplification of the Egyptian word for architect, and furthermore that the Pharaohs were the cosmic architects. The whole thing is an archaeological study, beautiful reconstructions of time that was formerly dust, it is as compelling a story of a living human Jesus Ive ever read.

Western Civilization has always been as much pagan as it is Christian.

This is equally true on Sunday, Monday, Tiwazday, Wotansday, Thorsday, Freyasday and Saturnday.

The expansion of the magic circle seems like a plunge into chaos to the conservative mind.

I would see it doesn’t only seem as such, but truly means such a thing. Chaos must then be transformed into a beast, lets say a horse, and then this horse must be taught to be a vessel.
Honour must be established between the lower, fearful-conservative mind which has its roots in the past and the will, which has its roots in the future; in the idea of it at the least. Which is all it ever is. This, ground in something that only it can make real, is what I know as free will.

Birth, death and rebirth belong to the Tao=Horus= Logos. It comprehends all though none can comprehend it. Yet can we participate in it.

Humans knew how to play the game of life before they knew the rules.

Many want life to be encompassed in one rule, many in no rules at all.
But the rules are definite and somewhat complex and have to do with energy, and with the ole’ ‘master-slave’ polarity, which is one of the axes next to good and evil - the slave is the shadow, for all intents and purposes; and the slave is often the master.

[Fixed_Cross]

lol - therefore can only information be time-traveled; because the future is an idea.

But DNA is information.

It seems a ridiculous thing, time travel, as it completely negates billiard-ball physics. But Einsteins cosmos does not really suggest an origin of time or a direction that is absolutely implicit in existence; it suggests that the universe is a kind of surface, spread out over an object which includes time as a whole, and has a structure that we can only take part in, not comprehending it.

Occultism is a way of navigating this object, and to be the kind of master some guy called “Babaji” is supposed to be, would probably mean to actually be hip with that object rather than with objects in time-space.

[Fixed_Cross]

Babaji

Jesus, that guy is also relevant to the historical Jesus.
Ok, so there is a gap in the accumulative Biblical story of Jesus, of when he was a teenager to when he was in his 30s.
The story goes, he went on a pilgrimage, and reached the Himalayas. He was there taught by a yogi who is a high master deva who has committed to carrying this Epoch with us, alive through millennia.
He has taught Jesus, as well as a man called Lahiri Mahasaya, who taught a stern, almost Schopenhauerian yogi, Sri Yukteshwar, who taught the venerable Paramahansa Yogananda, who came to America, and created what is now known as Ananda or the Expanding Light, which is where on one of my travels the wind swept me, and I learned yogic meditation, and found that the heavens are quite a bit more powerful than I had imagined.

Yes, the Lahiri Mahasaya shrine. Yes…
How my back ached!
How stiff I was, and yet I persevered…
I had after all persevered in Zen.
Yoga is quite another thing.
Zen goes beyond existence and non-existence. Yoga goes into God.

[felix_dakat]

youtu.be/uWaeqeIi82g

[felix_dakat]

@Fixed Cross

@felix dakat

@Fixed Cross

I think what is very important to establish actually is whether or not Jesus of Nazareth existed in real life.

There is no question that if he did not, the power of Christ is still real. But what is it precisely and how is it related, especially important, to Jesus.
Is it related in fact to a figure called Jesus at all. Or is it a power that exists independently of that which is spoken of by the four gospels.

If Jesus was real, the world is a far crazier place than pagans would presume. There would be no sense, basically. The most obscenely unnatural stuff could happen and be of benefit, whereas the most natural and healthy pleasant suff could be evil, for example. But more so a god was killed by god so that man could be healed from sin - but the plan didn’t work. This is most puzzling of all to a pagan. Most of the time when gods make plans, they tend to work, especially if there is no other god to stand in the way? But no. Mankind become even more unrepentant and selfish and invented things like intercontinental slavetrade which was explicitly done in name of the sacrificed god.
I think the presumption that Jesus did not exist, which would be reflected by the apparent fact that Nazareth wasn’t a town until well beyond Jesus’ supposed lifespan, is safer, also considering the consequences of the religion that was based on him.
Something was accomplished by the creation of Christianity. A great magical circle was drawn around mankind, isolating animals and most gods. Something was done to the harvest cycles of the spirit. It came to stand all in service of an entrepreneurial context; most of all what Christians have accomplished is the transfiguration of matter. Science.

The historical Jesus is a mystery so great that it calls the adequacy of the standard methods of historical research into question.

We need indeed look a it through the lens of greater occultism; I recommend strongly you read the book “Jesus: Last of the Pharaohs” by Ralph Ellis.
It posits that Jesus is indeed the son of Joseph and that Joseph is from a lineage of Pharaoh blood that was hiding out with the big Egyptian war going on, and that “carpenter” is a translation of an Aramaic word for builder, which was a simplification of the Egyptian word for architect, and furthermore that the Pharaohs were the cosmic architects. The whole thing is an archaeological study, beautiful reconstructions of time that was formerly dust, it is as compelling a story of a living human Jesus Ive ever read.

Western Civilization has always been as much pagan as it is Christian.

This is equally true on Sunday, Monday, Tiwazday, Wotansday, Thorsday, Freyasday and Saturnday.

The expansion of the magic circle seems like a plunge into chaos to the conservative mind.

I would see it doesn’t only seem as such, but truly means such a thing. Chaos must then be transformed into a beast, lets say a horse, and then this horse must be taught to be a vessel.
Honour must be established between the lower, fearful-conservative mind which has its roots in the past and the will, which has its roots in the future; in the idea of it at the least. Which is all it ever is. This, ground in something that only it can make real, is what I know as free will.

Birth, death and rebirth belong to the Tao=Horus= Logos. It comprehends all though none can comprehend it. Yet can we participate in it.

Humans knew how to play the game of life before they knew the rules.

Many want life to be encompassed in one rule, many in no rules at all.
But the rules are definite and somewhat complex and have to do with energy, and with the ole’ ‘master-slave’ polarity, which is one of the axes next to good and evil - the slave is the shadow, for all intents and purposes; and the slave is often the master.

Ralph has also uncovered evidence for the New Testament Saul (St Paul) in the historical record, a discovery that brings with it several new accounts of the life of Jesus. Saul, the inventor of Christianity, was actually Josephus Flavius, a well-known historian. Jesus was the governor of Tiberias and owned a castle there; and he may have died during the siege of Jerusalem in about AD70, rather than AD 33 - crucified along with two of his compatriots.

Ellis, Ralph. Jesus, Last of the Pharaohs (Egyptian Testament Series Book 1) . Edfu Books. Kindle Edition.

At first glance Ellis’s hypotheses do not seem historically plausible to me, however that the pharaohs and Jesus are instances of the same archetypal hero narrative is evident.