Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)
Metaphors: Apocalypse/Revelation at the End of Time
Contents
End of Time: The Experience of
Timelessness
Apocalyptic interp. overarches
Kingdom, Cross interp.
Importance of the apocalyptic story
framework in Christianity
Metaphoric theme: Messianic Secret
Jesus' prediction of coming kingdom
of God correct, esoterically
My next wine will be in kingdom of heaven
Day of wrath, narrow aversion of
control-loss disaster
The Revelation, Apocalypse, and
Last Judgement
>I
think time had vanished
Your words
exactly match: "[an antique car] from a better, vanished time; I fire up
the willing engine, ..." (Red Barchetta, song by Rush) -- sung
"better, ... [vanished
time]"
http://www.egodeath.com/rushlyrics.htm#xtocid22978
>and
history was just imagination.
Your
personal history as well. Present
mental constructs are certain, but all else at all times is only a *claim* made
by *present* mental constructs pointing to an alleged past (personal and
collective). I have a cartoon *now*
about an alleged yesterday, but is yesterday believable based on a cartoon?
>There
was also a lession that if I came to face the things that God told me when
sober, I'd experience the immense fear and the demons again. I used to wonder what this teaching was
exactly because I could not put it in words. It was just a way of seeing the
world, an experience of moksha. But so many things seem to fit so nicely into
your theory.
There is
good reason to fear -- fear control being effectively removed from out of your
mental hands upon seeing how the origin of thoughts and will-movements acts of
its own accord from outside (or underneath) the mind's supposedly sovereign
control center.
I'm sure
the mystery religions knew this intensely and practically, if not quite as
theoretically as we are coming to. We
now have very experienced trippers with little philosophical/mythic modelling
of their experiences, and we have philosophers but with little natural,
first-hand grasp of the experiences and especially of that altered mode of
cognition. My thinking, theory building
and mythic construction/exegesis, proceeds from that mode of cognition (I learn
to imagine myself in it).
>Are
you going to write a book on the cybernetic egodeath theory?
At least a
comic book. That is what's needed.
> You
must have an IQ of 160 or something to construct a theory this comprehensive,
My
practical intelligence is not high, since I'm floating off in theory so
often. I've been surrounded by fully
intelligent people and concluded what matters is dedication and
imagination. I do think I have more
imagination and more manic, flighty, abstract thinking. My mundane practical intelligence may be
lower. My aptitudes were tested as
high, across the board. Many
intelligent people appear to me to be unoriginal, unimaginative, but I don't
really dare to judge -- what do I know about them?
>yet
written almost as lucidly as possible.
Wilber is exceptionally bright and writes well so that's where you two
are alike.
I
literally grew up reading Wilber as his books came out, so my thinking should
be compatible with his and is bound to not directly conflict. Everything I write will naturally tend to be
compatible with integral theory.
>You do
have differences in your way of approaching your subjects
I bow
before "way of approach".
Approach, spin, style, is everything.
It's what thinking, enlightenment, communication are all about. Someone could publish many key ideas I'm
gathering, but who is about to come up with the same style, spin,
approach? It's a battle of the poets at
this point. Who can express the essence
best?
>but I
don't think you have anything to worry about not comparing your theory to
others'. There will be someone who will do that nitty-bitty job. You just relax
and take care of the core.
That is
totally what I need and want to hear.
When a book comes out that is uncomfortably great and bumps against the
theory I've been pulling together, I worry about my originality, but say
"excellent -- one less area for me to have to labor in, so I can
concentrate on the Core and use this new book for support." (Such as Jesus and the Lost Goddess, or
Psychedelic Sacrament, or Strange Fruit.)
If I never get around to polishing my work, that's fine as long as other
people can build on it. I am a
frontiersman.
I must be
Mr. Core in the area that I am, the crossroads and nexus of ideas that I
embody. This means cartoonish mental
constructs, entheogens, loose cognition, non-sequential determinism with single
preexisting future, loss of sense of control, sacrifice of
ego-as-false-sovereign, Christian revelation, acid rock allusion recognition,
...
I have to
learn to pretend to be a man of my time, to pretend to be who I in fact genuinely
am. Then I will find the core that
others who discover this zone are bound to also discover. Certainly, if I die, someone else will soon
write the same theory, but I don't trust them to do a good job.
I'm a poor
book author, but I guarantee certain essential content. Most important is a comic book. Ease of use is *everything* -- there is
nothing, without ultimate ease of use -- a tangibly obvious theory made
stupidly simple, as it potentially is.
All *too* simple for the Greeks -- delusion of ego had the chance of a
snowball in Hades in that Hellenistic world.
My whole theory is kindergarten to them. I'm a Dark Ages ignoramus, a laughingstock to them. Aliens?
The Greeks!
>Wilber
has written a lot on spiritual evolution. You have concentrated on formulating
what this cybernetic egodeath is about in the first place.
The
transition from the egoic worldmodel to the post-egoic worldmodel is just one
transition of many, in Wilber's model.
All I care about is this one transition and I go deeper into this
subject than Wilber. I think this is by
far the most remarkable transition/transformation of them all, in the whole
area Wilber covers.
So
naturally I'm choosing this to focus on, just as the Greeks and Christians
focus on the dying/rising god concept as the center of religion. I'm following up Watts' work, which focuses
more than Wilber on the main act in all this developmental drama.
>Are
you planning to write on the possible consequences of the lightning-fast
enlightenment on the "collective consciousness" of people with
predictions on future vision-logic developmental stages?
I have
pointed out that due to the rational and explicit and potentially simple nature
of the egodeath theory, this knowledge as a theoretical model could spread
instantly, thus changing many of the ideas about spiritual discovery or
revelation. This is like a simple
secret which you either know or you don't -- as the Valentinian Gnostics
thought.
It may be
too much for some minds, to suddenly learn the Theory in full while in loose
cognition. Secrecy and stages are
supposedly to soften the transition in the transformation.
I should
be more worried about killing the collective ego. What is to stop egoic society from collapsing, when people no
longer take moral agency seriously? I
ask not because I care about propping up society that's built on a lie, a
collective legal deceit, but simply because I am trying to lock onto the
theory. Why was there the death penalty
for revealing the mysteries? To
preserve society based on a legal fiction of sovereign moral agency, and keep
that democratic society from collapsing?
It is
noteworthy that Alcibiades not only revealed the mysteries without authority,
but that he was anti-democratic.
Perhaps revealing the mysteries kills ego and kills legal agency and
kills democratic society, threatening to lead to a purely power-based
king-driven system. Determinism /
fatalism on the metaphysical plane can be used to justify unfreedom
(oppression) on the practical plane -- such was done in the late classical era.
The liver
that was speared in Jesus and Odin and Prometheus is the organ of the will,
upon which the future is written. The
liver is the organ of prophecy.
Sacrifice the animal and inspect its liver to read the future. A spear through the liver is the time axis
inevitably killing the personal rulership of one's own will.
I *love*
this book cover by Leonard Doob -- can't get enough of it.
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0313263981.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
INEVITABILITY
Determinism,
Fatalism, and Destiny
*That* is
the language of the Greeks in the culture that gave rise to the dying/rising
savior godmen who provided a way to transcend cosmic determinism.
>I'd
love to see your work integrated into Wilber's in a meaningful way. I presume
that to be quite hard for him because he's been so ignorant on psychedelics for
so long
Wilber
should cover entheogens seriously soon -- but in conjunction with encountering and
transcending determinism? frozen time? block universe? The Rock Universe? Greek myths? self-control cybernetics and breakdown of the strange loop of
control? A portrayal of what loose
cognition concretely feels like?
Specifics about vision logic?
>but
hey, never underestimate the power of both denial and the will to seek. Doesn't
your theory, in a way, present the ultimate truth of ego?
I've
thought of the right way to put it.
This theory I'm gathering and expressing and packaging for ergonomic
distribution is the highest knowledge and the most certain knowledge; it's as
certain as anything and its coherence of some sort is proven in some way by its
killer psychological effect of complete ego death.
When you
have danced with ego death and have experienced control puppethood and
sacrifice of ego-as-controller, when you have been forced to participate in the
crucifixion of the pretender to the throne, the false sovereign ego, no one can
deny that experience, that Truth. Is it
"just a theory"? Something is
wrong with calling the life-and-death experience of ego death "just a
theory". The theory is, in some
limited sense, "absolutely certain".
The
deluded aspect of ego dies, and the mind is coerced into willingly sacrificing
ego-as-false-sovereign as control is forcefully realized out of one's grasp.
>That
you have discovered a way to make science out of something that was thought to
be a mystical, non-scientific part of this weirdness we call life?
Any
philosopher of science will tell you that the idea of "science" is a
nebulous cloud of dubious and disproven claims. Let us instead talk of "theory" and "model
construction" -- an approach in some of my favorite Philosophy of Science
books.
More than
a scientist, mystic, entheogenist, or philosopher, I am a theorist -- a model
builder. I seek to assemble a plausible
theory that is also an ergonomic technique of combining theory with experience
to create an instant and complete kind of ego death in which theory builds up
experience to the infinite peak, and experience builds up theory to the
infinite peak.
It is odd
or ironic that I've been wanting the Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet book for a
couple years, and for some impenetrable reason -- feeling bad about so many
unread books in my library -- I never got it.
One has to draw the line somewhere -- but I made a mistake in not
scooping it up immediately. It seemed
just a little too much like just yet another book to gather with the various
so-so books on Jesus as shaman, Jesus as magician (I don't have that one),
Jesus as wisdom teacher.
From one
perspective, given that the Jesus figure was designed to absorb all possible
desirable figures into one, the apocalpytic prophet role is just yet another role
piled on the heap, sucked into the all-absorbing catholic black hole of the
universal Jesus figure of 313 CE.
However,
insofar as Jesus was a Jewish messiah type of figure born from the Jewish
quasi-political mythic context of around 200 BCE to 200 CE -- and Jesus was
very much based on that type of visionary Jewish messiah and apocalyptic figure
-- his main, primary theme is the apocalyptic prophet theme. That is the most overarching, structured,
story-like theme.
The healer
theme and miracle-worker theme and wisdom teacher theme are clearly present,
but they don't make for such an interesting story playing out. The apocalyptic prophet theme is excellent
for constructing a story that plays out over time. It makes a great framework into which to plug the other
mystic/mythic allegorical themes.
Across all these small-scale and large-scale themes is the no-free-will
idea and the intense entheogenic mystic altered state, heavily allegorized and
metaphorized.
Reading
Christian doctrine is more profitable for me now than ever, since grasping the
importance of the apocalyptic prophet theme.
I just wasn't seeing this large-scale theme before -- I was only
recognizing and successfully decoding mythic regions that turn out to be within
this newly visible overarching theme.
These individual successful decodings now can all fit together into the
overarching "single developing story" dimension that runs throughout
much of the canonical scriptures.
Part of
this understanding depends on appreciating the extent to which the Old
Testament (Jewish scriptures) were continuously interpretively developed, and
that this interpretive development naturally led to the Jewish messiah figure,
which continued to develop into the Jesus Christ Jewish messiah figure.
Such
interpretation was always contentious, with aggressive allegorization and
counter-allegorization between Jewish groups, with very tricky mixtures of
literalist thinking and high mystic metaphorical thinking. Confusing artificial poles, often mystically
clever but often harmful, were invented, including the metaphors of:
o "Jews" versus "pagans"
o (deluded literalist) "Jews" versus
(enlightened) "Israelites"
o "Jewish apostates and idol
worshippers" versus "prophets"
o (deluded/condemned) "temple Jews"
versus (enlightened/saved) "Essenes"
o "Jews" versus "gentiles"
o enlightened "followers of the
messiah" versus deluded "haters of the messiah"
o and eventually, (enlightened)
"Christians" vs. (deluded) "Jews".
The
apocalyptic framework wholly came together for me when the Dale Allison 2-week
online Q&A seminar was announced a week or two ago.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/allison-seminar
This
framework of interpretation, in terms of mystic entheogenic allegory and
no-free-will philosophy, went beyond the "what does Kingdom mean"
idea. The broad apocalyptic framework
enabled plugging in all the more piecemeal mythic elements which I had
successfully made sense of.
The key to
this framework coming together over a few days around 3/21/03 was based on
applying my theory of myth-religion interpretation to Dale Allison's
understanding of the Jesus figure as mystic apocalyptic prophet; that is, the
whole *apocalyptic* dimension.
The
turning point was when I began to read his two articles:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/files/HELL.PDF
(case-sensitive) - Jesus and Gehenna
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/files/IdeologyandApocalyptic.pdf
- Liking and Disliking the Apocalyptic Jesus
Allison
woke me up to the specifically apocalyptic dimension; I only had the raw
"kingdom of god" idea before, and some other isolated elements, but
not what I now consider to be the overarching framework in which the
"kingdom" idea is presented in the Gospels and Revelation. I really had not considered the apocalyptic
aspect, just the teaching about seeing the kingdom of god -- not the
idea-matrix including the two ages...
I had
unsystematic isolated fragments of the apocalyptic metaphor-space, not even
identified as such.
"apocalyptic" or "millenialism" is a great label for
the metaphor-set. I have a medium-high
breakthrough -- I didn't realize how much structure was missing -- Freke &
Gandy know nothing about the apocalyptic idea.
Canonical
Christianity seems to be based heavily on the Jewish apocalyptic mythic
(mystic, metaphor) framework, while Gnostic Christianity is more inclined to
mythic frameworks based on astrotheology and wisdom teachings.
The days
between 3/21 and now were particularly stressful, and I couldn't understand
why: that this really would end up adding up to a major falling-into-place of
an overarching framework that brought the previous successful interpretations
into a much more organized story-arrangement.
My core theory isn't affected, but my comprehension of the canonical
Christian mythic story has made a breakthrough:
From
11/14/01 (discovered the no-free-will interpretation of separate mythemes such
as "kingdom of God" and "Crucifixion")
to
3/21-3/25/03 ("apocalyptic prophet" as overarching framework for
no-free-will interpretations of Christian elements)
Comparable
to 12/12/87 (initial no-free-will insight)
versus
1/11/88 (complete block-universe framework).
I believe
I picked the date 11/14/01 to represent the week-long unfolding of the
breakthrough because on 11/14, I was first able to post and think the recent
ideas richly, with a firm grasp of their extent.
It was
exciting how large of an expanse of metaphor structure became visible and
perfectly fit with the no-free-will model; it fell into place effortlessly by
interpreting in terms of no-free-will; if I didn't have the notion of
no-free-will as a guiding axiom, I wouldn't have been able to suddenly and
immediately make sense out of the whole range of "apocalyptic" myth
elements. This demonstrates the
practical efficacy and explanatory utility of the no-free-will axiom.
The fact
that I was able to make coherent sense of apocalyptic via no-free-will
interpretive axiom strongly suggests that the apocalyptic ideaset is indeed
keyed to that axiom and that in that sense the axiom is "right" and "true".
Consider
canonical Christianity from a pure mystic point of view; consider the meaning
of Jesus as apocalyptic prophet, and what the apocalyptic prophetic myth system
is about.
A theory
of the Cross myth, even with a theory of kingdom of god/heaven myth, is nothing
more than a couple isolated fragments, if not treated as parts of overarching
general theory of apocalyptic myth.
Apocalyptic is the overarching framework, which I didn't have and didn't
see. I owe so much of this insight to
Dale Allison. Almost should post a
thanks to him, more than a discussion.
I had
pieces before: chaos-monster, kingdom of heaven, -- what's new? two ages, age to come, son of man, choice
between the kingdom and gehenna (aligning on J's side or on Satan's side against
God).
Assessing
when the peak was in scholarly breakthrough, and how high the peak:
First
(3/21/03) you have a couple ideas, seems no more so than usual. Then (3/25/03), many more ideas rush
together, it peaks, then soon after the peak you can identify when the peak
was. After the peak, there is the
confirmation and detail phase. I choose
the date 3/25/03 as the peak of my fully recognizing the specifically
apocalyptic framework which my previous ideas plug into, such as Cross,
sinlessness, kingdom, and the meaning-shift of the "good vs. evil"
axis.
I'm now
(4/1/03) in the confirmation and detail phase about the apocalyptic phophet
mytheme or rather, in this case, mythic framework.
The one
constant in mythic contrastive symbolism is emphatically not any particular
symbols, but rather, the "initially deluded, later enlightened"
primal contrast, which in the core theory is named "the egoic mental
worldmodel" and "the transcendent mental worldmodel", or
"egoic thinking" and "transcendent thinking". Metaphors for this standard transformation
include:
Initially
Caesar; later king Jesus.
Initially
this age; later the age to come.
Initially
king Saul; later king David.
Initially
Saul; later Paul.
Initially
persecute the holy ones; later promote the holy ones.
Initially
the dragon and goat; later the sheep.
Initially
the physical temple in Judah, later the spiritual temple in Israel/Galilee.
Initially
there is the father; later there is a son.
Initially
one is a son; later one is a father.
Initially
there is the firstborn son; later there is the lastborn son.
Initially
there is corruptibility, later there is incorruptibility.
Initially
there is perishability, later there is imperishability.
Initially
there is susceptibility to (ego) death, later there is non-susceptibility to
(ego) death.
How long
will meaning rapidly unfold? At some
point, one locks onto the main gist of the meaning, the big-picture story --
which takes some doing before you can dismiss the 99% floundering books and
find those few that really are attuned to the overall gist.
Popular
Christianity assumes a very different story than the whole Bible story studied
carefully, just as pop apocalypticism is very different than scholarly exegesis
of apocalyptic. It's all about the
overall system of meaning, and different interpretive mixtures of literalism
and allegory.
Mythemes
that are integrated by the framework of Jesus as Jewish messianic apocalyptic
prophet include:
Last
judgment
Second
coming
Parousia
Advent
Judgment
day
Dangling
over the fires of Gehenna
Those
that reject me
Those
that follow me
Elect
Perdition
Messiah
Throne
of God
New
heaven, new Earth, new Jerusalem
Tribulation
Washing
away sin in the blood of the lamb
Becoming
sinless
Conquering
(ego) death and perishibility (of egoic thinking-mode)
Millennium
Prince
of pride
Sorting
sheep from goats
Apocalypse
Revelation
Role of
eucharist and last supper in all this (sacred meals of visionary plants)
I want a
taller stack of eschatalogical and apocalyptic books, some "Jesus, king,
and kingdom" books, and a taller stack of books on Eucharist, Hellenistic
and Jewish sacred meals, feasts and banquet books, and Feasts of the Kingdom
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0788019414.
In
decoding the Christian mythic system, I'm no longer driven by uncertainty and
confirmation, but rather, the fun of completing and filling in the
meaning-holes.
It's
remarkable, the perfectness of fit, such as that the resurrected Jesus usually
reveals himself to people, who don't initially recognize him, in conjunction
with his giving them food or drink. Be
completely on the lookout for themes of meal, food, feast, banquet, dine,
dining, eat, drink, vine, wine, and cup, just as the standard meaning of
"king" and "ruler of this world" in myth-religion is
"beginning initiate".
Why did
the "Christian Jewish" and later "Jewish Christian"
apocalyptic-prophet mythic framework become the most popular, compared to other
metaphorical entheogenic mystic frameworks of the time? It was the one mystery religion that was
primarily styled as political resistance; Jews were popularly admired for
disparaging and resisting Rome and earthly rule over them by the System of
Empire.
Christianity
was the mystery-religion which was most fully styled as resistance to the
System of Empire. The political goal of
this flavor of mystery-religion was resistance to the system of empire; the
method was heavy dualistic polarized allegory and other nonviolent but
absolutely derogatory resistance to Empire.
Christianity
absorbed and integrated what made Dionysus/Pentheus myth-religion popular: the
contrast and conflict between themundane king vs. the godman became a popular style of allegory for ego vs. transcendent knowledge/experiencing. How to choose the favorite and most popular
allegory system? Pick a way that not
only allegorizes transcendence, but that also is socio-politically meaningful.
Given the
mythic thinking and political backdrop as I now know it to have been, why was
this myth system preferred to others -- the notion of resistance to Rome? The way Rome was mythically demonized? The downtrodden populace related to the way
the Jews resisted Rome and were squashed by it?
Why did
this story (the killed-by-Rome and the rising godman versus those literalist,
power-driven Jewish leaders who collaborated with Rome) resonate more with the
populace than the pagan godman mystery religions that were integrated into the
Roman polical system? Consider the
Dionysus myth and allegory based on resistance to king Pentheus and kingship.
The
present age is king Pentheus; future age is king Dionysus, the people's
king. The mythic framework of the elite
few, versus that of the downtrodden masses who are interested in political
resistance. Christianity was styled as
politically relevant; it is the one political-resistance styled
mystery-religion.
What is
the ultimate extreme endpoint of socio-political resistance to Empire, that can
serve to fully express mystic-state transformation? The Jewish apocalyptic prophecy mythic framework. This worldly empire will bite the dust any
moment; the good downtrodden wisdom teacher, healer, etc. godman will return as soon as the next
sacred meal of visionary plants, to do away with this worldly empire.
Instead of
an empire-neutral mythic framework, the populace wanted a resistance-themed
mythic framework. So Christianity was
maximized for adherance to the theme or overarching framework of
empire-resistance. The Gnostic
framework was in many ways weak as far as the theme of empire-resistance.
The
canonical framework is stronger regarding the theme of empire-resistance,
because it was that theme -- not astrotheology -- which uniquely made the
apocalyptic Jewish style of mystery religion hugely popular among the
downtrodden populace.
In
assembling a system of mystic-mythic-state allegory that is cast as
socio-political resistance to empire, the Jews around 200 BCE went much farther
than the Dionysus/Pentheus story.
Instead of just negatively casting the regional king, the Jewish
apocalyptic prophets negatively cast the entire system of Empire, in
world-sized, cosmos-scaled epic scope, not merely local scope.
As emperor
cult became cosmic in scope, the Jewish mythmakers escalated Dionysus-type
king-resisting divine figure to cosmic scope (from Mesapotamian myth-religion).
As soon as
the Roman era arrived, the Jewish political resistance myth was, specifically
pitted against the Roman empire; this allegorical equating of the negative with
the System of Empire was so extremely successful, the only solution the Roman
empire rulers could do was to co-opt the resistance. The resistance itself had co-opted and largely inverted emperor
cult -- forming an ongoing battle of co-optation and counter-co-optation,
inversion and counter-inversion.
The moment
the Roman emperor demanded worship (Nero Caesar), this immediately sparked the
formation of an anti-emperor, anti-empire mythic-religious symbolic
framework. As soon as the emperor
demanded to be worshipped as god, the Jewish religion of exclusive monotheism
kicked into gear to portray the emperor as pitted irreconcilably against the
one and only transcendent god.
Assertion
of the emperor's divinity and divinely ordained right of rulership
automatically and immediately gave rise to resistance, and symbolic-mythic
assertion led to symbolic-mythic resistance: exactly a counter-cult to the
emperor-cult.
When the
emperor claims that the gods will his rule, the one thing the downtrodden
populace needs the most is not mystic enlightenment (there was more than enough
of that, given the effectiveness of the entheogenic core mystery-religion of
the era), but rather, a god who was more powerful than the gods who ordained
the emperor's rule.
What was
needed by the populace wasn't godmen that would affirm the emperor and his
empire, but godmen who were expressly against the emperor and empire, with an
axis of godman and his followers equated with the positive army, and the
emperor and sanctioned godmen and their followers equated with the negative
army, in the allegorized final, ultimate mystic-state battle between the good
godman and his followers against the bad emperor and his followers.
This
resistance couldn't be dependent on physical resistance to the System of Empire
-- the Roman victory over the Jews established the futility of that way of
framing the resistance. It would have
to be only a mystic allegorical, or spiritual, form of ultimate resistance --
not literal physical resistance, which was proven to be less powerful than the
evil power of the System of Empire.
Ironically
and strangely, Eusebius' job for Constantine in 313 was to consistently select
those aspects of the Christian Jewish myth-system which were set against the
System of Empire, in order to effectively co-opt the popular resistance
movement. Mary Magdalene-oriented
Gnosticism was rejected because it was insufficiently set against the System of
Empire.
"So
you want a mythic framework that is shaped as empire-resistance? OK, the emperor will make this the only
permitted religion, and everyone must adopt this religion, as the emperor
himself frames it." This way, the emperor effectively co-opted and took
control of the highly popular anti-emperor styled mystery religion. In response to the anti-emperor flavored
mystery religion, the emperor says "Sure you can resist me; I will help
you -- you may resist me strictly in the way I say."
Mere
wisdom teachings of the Gnostics, mere enlightenment, and mere intense mystic
experiencing could never command popular allegiance, which is what was needed
for Constantine to co-opt and form a universally popular version of the core
mystery-religion. A strong (but safely
controlled) theme of nonviolent sociopolitical resistance was both most popular
and most effectively co-opted by the System of Empire which the resistance was
set against.
Best
suited for an enforced universal mystery-religion was a 2-level system with a
strong emphasis on the literalist lower level of meaning -- while retaining
enough of the higher level to be attractive to those who care about it -- with
a promise of resistance, albeit, like a trippy advertisement, a harmless
pseudo-resistance, a pseudo-rebellion that is commoditized, domesticated,
defused, and safely controlled by the state, which would otherwise be
challenged by this system which originally was a more potent resistance.
The theme of the 'Messianic Secret', like all religious themes, needs to be considered from the interpretive framework of "myth is metaphorical description of mystic experiencing".
Scholars reconstructing Christian origins need to focus on texts and need a conscious, explicit methodology for approaching texts, rather than defaulting to some familiar modern literalist methodology. A crucial factor is the issue of how one processes and interprets the texts; what kind of texts are these? They are Hellenistic double-meaning texts, with one layer of systematic network-meaning for the uninitiated, and another, different layer of systematic network-meaning for the initiated.
The question then becomes: What are the two systematic layers of meaning of the theme of 'Messianic Secret'? If we attempt to be serious textual scholars without looking for these two layers -- one for the uninitiated and another for the initiated -- then we're adopting a theory and method of interpretation that is counterindicated by what we know about Hellenistic literature and culture.
The 'Messianic Secret' theme represents the hidden nature of Heimarmene/Necessity/Fate, revealed after partaking of the Eucharistic meal at the Last Supper. During that meal, the disciples go from cluelessness to comprehension of Jesus' mystic kingship, and become apostles. On the road afterward, Jesus walked with two followers who didn't recognize him until he gave them something to eat. Only after he gave them something to eat did they perceive what was formerly hidden to them, Jesus the lord.
Prior to the last supper, the disciples are puzzled and clueless about the one they follow. What is puzzling, illogical, irrational, and inconsistent to the literalist analysis -- the reasons for the 'Messianic Secret' -- comes naturally to the analysis based on the interpretive framework of "myth is metaphorical description of mystic experiencing".
May be relevant:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Messianic+Secret%22
There are
two required halves of establishing the no-Jesus theory. One half is negative: showing that there was
no literal single Jesus, no single individual upon whom the Jesus figure
significantly depends. Doherty's book
The Jesus Puzzle concentrates well on establishing this, and the position is
also supported through a stack of other books.
The other
required half of establishing the no-Jesus theory is the positive task of
showing what the Jesus figure actually was about, if not simply a historical
individual. Research here is weak, and
is a higher priority than fleshing out what Doherty has sufficiently covered
and established already. Jesus was not
a literal single man, but was rather, an esoteric allegorical figure.
But what
exactly does that type of figure really mean to the Greco-Roman culture? What is the esoteric-only Jesus really all
about, that is so tremendously compelling, so tremendously coherent, that this
conception of the nature of the Jesus figure is far more convincing than the
literalist view of Jesus as an individual actual man? Developing a powerful and convincing explanation of a
super-compelling esoteric-only conception of Jesus requires deliberate work on
that problem.
A
discussion group that claims to be concerned with the themes in the book The
Jesus Mysteries, yet discourages idea development regarding the nature of an
esoteric-only conception of Jesus, is a disgraceful fraud and sham and cannot
possibly succeed at its supposed, stated goal of investigating the themes of
the book The Jesus Mysteries, which is concerned with trying to adequately
comprehend the esoteric-only conception of Jesus, and is not only concerned
with debunking the literalist Jesus.
The
character of researching and developing the esoteric-only conception of Jesus
is inherently different than the character of research that focuses on the
negative project of debunking the literalist historical Jesus. It is totally unfair and biased to insist a
priori that the same type of argument and research used for the negative,
debunking project also be required for the positive project of building up an
adequate esoteric conception of the Jesus figure.
The
positive project is difficult -- too bad.
Few people are capable of productively researching the positive project
-- too bad. There's a risk of
conversational chaos and low-grade spiritual postings -- too bad; the moderators
have to rise up to the occasion and develop new techniques for managing the
discussion -- or else they must admit that they are not willing to put in the
work to support the supposed, stated scope of their own discussion group.
The
positive project of reconstructing the esoteric conception of Jesus is not
optional, given that the stated goal is to investigate the themes covered in
the book The Jesus Mysteries and to figure out the real historical origin of
the Jesus figure.
All the
researchers burning mental calories with their nose pressed against texts don't
really care about understanding the origin of the Jesus figure. If they did, they would study and take
seriously the need to robustly and adequately investigate and reconstruct the
esoteric conception of Jesus. Short of
such work, one can only conclude that the researchers are firmly committed to
the historical Jesus assumption or to a 1-dimensional, reactionary broad-brush
debunking of Christianity as a whole.
Frauds and
poseurs, such scholars -- such discussion groups are a disgrace and prove all
the worst accusations about the denseness and blindness of scholars, sinners
who utterly miss the mark in their field of interest, making a colossal
category error of the first degree (failing to take esotericism seriously)
while claiming to be seriously motivated by and devoted to the objective search
for the historical truth.
Their
motif ought to be the James ossuary.
Let the James ossuary serve now as a symbol for how far off-base the
scope and methods and mentality of such scholarship is.
You've
tried the approach of being concerned with the James ossuary -- that was a
complete dismal disaster, and now it is time to stop evading the most important
task at hand, and take seriously at last the required and non-optional,
necessary project of idea development to fully reconstruct the Hellenistic
conception of the esoteric-only Jesus, guided by the way the Hellenistic world
actually thought, rather than how the literalist modern world is limited to thinking.
_________________
>>Why
would the 2nd-century fabricators of the Jesus life-story have him make such a
blatantly false prophecy, of his soon imperial parousia (second coming) during
the lifetime of the apostles, in glory and power, as God's designated emperor
of the kingdom of God?
For
mystical esoteric purposes in emphatic contrast to Ruler Cult, as a religious
and philosophical sociopolitical resistance theme, providing a sociopolitically
satisfying and meaningful version of the standard Hellenistic mystic-state
initiation framework.
As an
example of how esoteric mystic-state thinking is the only viable coherent
solution to understanding the Jesus figure, consider the common
"problem" that Jesus was profoundly wrong in affirming the immediate
arrival of the kingdom of God and his own imperial parousia (entry into the
city, received as king and savior/rescuer of the city).
When a
Christian initiate ingests the visionary-plant Eucharist at the agape meal,
which is a standard Hellenistic banquet based on 'mixed wine' and involving
philosophical-religious teaching and experiencing, the initiate experiences the
suspension of their own sense of control agency, and experiences being
controlled by a hidden, uncontrollable transcendent controller; they experience
and intuit the utterly hidden puppetmaster that injects our control-thoughts
and movements of will into us.
This
intense mystic altered state experience is metaphorically described as becoming
aware of the kingdom of God. This
experience of metaphysical puppethood renders practical self-control intensely
problematic and unstable, like a boat assaulted by a sudden storm.
Mental
stability as a control agent returns the moment the mind is given the divine
way of thinking, allegorized as the descending mind of Christ that pulls one's
spirit upward into the throne room of the invisible but felt and intuited
higher controller -- the One that is the prime mover standing over oneself,
oneself now recognized as a secondary-only controller.
The
initiate has entered the kingdom of God, brought into it by the arrival and
descent of the mind of Christ from the heavens, turning one's thinking around
in conversion and regeneration. The
second coming of Jesus as recognized emperor/king (parousia), designated visible
and perceived ruler arrived visibly (unlike the utterly hidden puppetmaster,
God), occurs in time, but only one mind at a time.
As Jesus
vowed to not drink 'wine' again until the kingdom of God arrives, so does the
follower of the way of Jesus not drink 'wine' again until the kingdom of God
arrives -- for them, individually and esoterically. The initiate has entered the kingdom of God, has met Jesus in his
parousia entry into his own kingdom, and so, the next time the initiate drinks
'wine', indeed it will be drunk in the arrived kingdom of God.
So
esoterically, the Jesus figure was completely correct in affirming the nearness
of his parousia (second coming) and the immediate arrival of the kingdom of
God, which happens as soon as one drinks the visionary 'wine' at the
Hellenistic banquet.
This
esoteric reading of Jesus as apocalyptic prophet is coherent and
unproblematic. The alternative is a
literalist reading, in which case Jesus was completely wrong and a false
prophet.
>>We
cannot prove nonhistoricity of Jesus beyond all doubt. It is merely *likely* Jesus never existed
because:
>>o There is no *real evidence* he existed
>>o The Jesus figure was *likely* a myth meaning
esoteric and sociopolitical things, based on the earliest versions of the myth
and what we know about the religious thinking at the time.
By my
definition and interpretation, it is certain that Jesus didn't exist. That is, it is as certain as anything can
be, that there were multiple partially Jesus-like men, none of whom towered
over the others to the extent that the Jesus figure is dependent upon him and
wouldn't have been possible without him.
Given that
there were multiple men serving as types upon which to construct the Jesus
figure, and not one lone unusual man who stood far apart, we know there was no
historical Jesus -- no single man upon whom the Jesus figure was based and
dependent.
Truly I say to you, I won't drink wine with you again until we have entered the kingdom of heaven.
Scholars are uncomfortable realizing, as I realized a couple years ago, that they cannot ignore the fact that Jesus asserted plain and clear that heaven was in fact just about arrived, that some people hearing him won't pass away before the kingdom of heaven arrives.
This is a rational metaphor puzzle which is quite easy for the holy spirit to solve. The kingdom of heaven arrives an hour or two after one drinks the psychoactive mixed wine and awakens to timeless determinism and one's own metaphysical impotence to create or change the future or to create one's own thoughts and movements of the will. The next time one drinks that wine, heaven-awareness, which is awareness of timeless block-universe determinism, will already be present.
Healing Miracles as Mystic-State Metaphors
The paralyzed man -- ego death is control-seizure.
The leper -- the mystic altered state shows skin moving around.
The blind man -- one awakens and looks with metaperception.
Possessed by a demon -- egoic free will is the demon to be cast out.
Now I uncover metaphorical theology in entheogen exegesis.
Consider
"it was a real fine line" in the Cheap Trick lyrics from Way of the
World (http://www.cheaptrick.com/theworld.html). Through this verse, there are climbing psycho violins combined
with psychedelic tape-based phasing:
Remember,
you were at work and then Friday at five,
I
remember, felt like a pawn, was I dead or alive?
I
remember, thought no one could hear me, I was goin' insane.
I
remember, it was a real fine line, now you've changed my life around.
Jewish
apocalyptic writings such as Revelation are a deliberate, clever mixture of
literalist politics with allusions to mystic altered-state phenomena: two
distinct domains of allegory interblended.
The book
of Revelation only has a couple Jesus references tacked on and functions quite
differently than the gospels or Pauline writings.
In the
orgasmic buildup of ego-death, particularly in its most striking and
distinctive form, which is control-loss panic, the mind's control-system
cybernetically trembles and short-circuits, self-destructs, and the physically
disastrous and destructive loss of control is very narrowly averted. In effect, the mind comes upon a choice
between acting out loss of control, or accepting a new way of thinking based
around no-free-will and frozen time.
This way
of thinking is transcendent or divine, and clearly maps to ideas about divine
or transcendent savior figures or archetypes, anthropomorphisms representing a
new way of thinking. This experience is
allegorized as judgement day, the day of wrath, the day of the messiah, the
final battle of good (transcendent-morality no-free-will thinking) and evil
(egoic moral freewill thinking).
It is
certain that the mind contains the intriguing potential to discover a panicked
choice between destructive personal loss-of-control versus being saved from
wrath by accepting a divine way of thinking.
This is definitive of the mystic altered state, in some sense.
Perhaps
the peak mystic state and enlightenment resulting therefore does not *have* to
include this control-loss panic or this sense of a choice between control-loss
versus accepting a divine worldmodel of time, space, control, will, and self. But the *potential* is a most interesting
fact, a datum that is discovered and calls out for explanation and in that
sense is "definitive".
I need to
write more about the mapping of altered-state control-loss to apocalyptic
myth-religion, but the above defines the scope well.
Seminar
with Dale Allison, author of _Jesus: Millennial Prophet_ begins Monday, March
24th.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/12924
This
scholarly discussion will be based around articles about Mr. Historical Jesus'
interpretation of Jewish apocalyptic, including:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/files/hell.pdf
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/files/IdeologyandApocalyptic.pdf
A glance
at those articles which reminded me to discuss the apocalyptic day of wrath in
terms of control-loss panic.
Some
people have noted the absence of a distinct actual historical Jesus in these
articles. The embarrassing problem with
succeeding at making sense out of the world of the historical Jesus is that the
literal historical Jesus falls out as extraneous, the leftover screw after the
curious kid has taken apart a device and put it back together. Many people had reasons, which we now know,
to almost inexorably coagulate a single historical Jesus from the many human
and mythic precursors.
Apocalyptic
writing is becoming better understood with respect to its *political*
allegory-domain, but not with respect to its other half, the intense
entheogenic mystic altered state metaphor/allegory domain.
>>Seminar
with Dale Allison, author of _Jesus: Millennial Prophet_ begins Monday, March
24th.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/12924
This
scholarly discussion will be based around articles about Mr. Historical Jesus'
interpretation of Jewish apocalyptic, including:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/files/hell.pdf
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/files/IdeologyandApocalyptic.pdf
The links
are case-sensitive. Correction:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/files/HELL.PDF
The Jesus
allegory is designed to be received and understood in two opposing senses: an
earlier, lower sense, and a later, higher sense.
The lower
understanding of Jesus and morality is that Jesus is a judge of each person's
moral soul after the person's bodily death.
According to the lower way of reading the Christian word-network, if the
person used their free will to perform morally good deeds (such as the good
deed of believing in the bodily supernatural Jesus as savior), Jesus will judge
them to be one of his followers/believers and will send them to heaven for
their reward of eternal pleasure.
If the
person used their free will to perform morally evil deeds, Jesus will judge
them to be a follower of the king of the devils, and will send them to hell for
their punishment of eternal torture.
This way of thinking accepts all sorts of ideas: free will, supernatural
miracles, the devil as an actual creature, heaven and hell after bodily death,
bodily resurrection, spirit creatures, the virgin birth, the bodily historical
Jesus who was miraculously resurrected, the historical Peter and other
apostles, precognition, the effectiveness of prayer, and the ability of ritual
sacrifices to cleanse moral impurity.
The higher
understanding of Jesus and morality is that Jesus is an allegorical figure and
avatar for that which completely controls our destiny in every detail. A person has no metaphysically free will,
and thus is incapable of moral action good or bad, and is exempt from moral
judgement.
The person
takes no moral credit for any of their own actions, but gives
that-which-controls-destiny -- God or Fate -- this credit, and considers any
punishment of moral guilt to be justly executed upon God himself, rather than
the person who is merely a helpless puppet that is completely controlled by God
or Fate, which is the almighty power that forces every action, every thought,
and every act of will into the person.
To learn
to think this way is to enter heaven, specifically considered as the kingdom of
God -- the mental worldmodel which considers God to be so all-powerful that
there is no room for personal moral responsibility or judgement of oneself as a
moral agent.
The higher
mind believes that living in the lower mental worldmodel is living in hell and
worshipping the devil. One is born into
hell but is lifted up into heaven during life, if ever, during the ego-death
experience in life.
To the
higher mind, to believe in Jesus is to believe in the principle of moral
exemption that follows from determinism.
The higher thinking considers the mind to be entirely a puppet/slave of
Jesus/God/Fate.
To the
lower mind, to believe in Jesus is to consider oneself a moral agent with
sovereign power that one directs toward confessing believe in Jesus. To the higher thinking, such a person only
claims to follow Jesus; they actually follow the devil, worship the devil, and
are a slave of the devil.
To the
higher thinking, to confess Jesus as Lord is to believe that Jesus on the cross
is a perfect allegorical representation of determinist morality in which God is
the only one deserving moral punishment.
To the higher thinking, Jesus on the cross is being justly punished for
God's universal guilt.
The term
"death", to the higher worldmodel, is ego-death, conceived of as a
transformation from freewillist thinking to determinist thinking. The term "death", to the lower
worldmodel, means bodily death. To the
lower thinking, Jesus on the cross is being punished for the guilt that
actually belongs to the person as moral agent, and since the person's
punishment has been suffered by Jesus for the person, one may be justly allowed
into heaven.
The lower
mind thinks the person is judged and sent to heaven or hell after bodily
death. The higher mind thinks the
person is judged by the light of the Holy Spirit during the ego-death in life.
"Eternity"
to the lower mind is a long time.
"Eternity" to the higher mind is the timelessness during which
determinism and the illusory, lying nature of ego are experienced.
A sinner
is a person who considers themselves to be a metaphysically free moral
agent. A saint is someone who considers
themselves to have no metaphysically free will, but to be a determinist
puppet/slave of the Ground/Goddess or the savior/God, or the Fates. The 'P' of the Calvinist TULIP mnemonic is
perseverance of the saints: once the mind learns and experiences how believing
in determinism cancels all sin and all one's believe in freewill moral agency,
the mind forever retains that view and cannot be lost in sin again.
During
entheogenic enlightenment about the emptiness of moral agency, one awakens to
God's ownership of all moral-type guilt: one awakens to the kingdom of
God. Those who don't recognize
determinism and its moral implications are asleep or dead in Satan's
kingdom. To awaken to the moral
principle of determinism is to become freed from slavery to the devil and
become a much superior kind of slave, a slave of the determinist morally
transcendent system called "Jesus".
Those who
think they wield the power of moral agency say they follow the system of Jesus,
but they follow the system of the devil.
They are followers of the law, "Jews" (speaking very
allegorically), attempting salvation from moral sin through superficial
following of the law of moral agency -- not just literally Jewish laws, but
rather, the type of law that is given to supposed freewillist moral
agents.
"Gentiles"
-- speaking allegorically -- are the determinists, who walk in awareness of
God's kingdom -- God's puppetmaster role and our relative moral role as empty
puppets.
A type of
hypocrisy would be to be enlightened about determinism but preach freewill and
coerce others into buying your increments of moral purification, for financial
profit.
What it
means to "worship the devil" and be "actually a follower of the
devil", a "member of Satan's kingdom", a "slave of the
devil", is understood by reverse parallel with the "kingdom of
God", "worshipping God", being "a true follower of God/Jesus",
a "member of God's kingdom", a "slave of Christ".
Someone in
the kingdom of God is a slave/puppet of God, having no moral power of their own
because no free will. God is the father
of truth about the metaphysical unfreeness of the will and the illusory nature
of moral agency. Through isomorphic parallel,
therefore, one who believes they have free will and are a metaphysically free,
genuine moral agent must be a follower and worshipper of the Devil, king of the
sinners, father of lies -- especially the lie of free will and its moral
implications and correlates.
The Jews,
actually the Jewish high priests, were not intended to be framed by the
storywriters. Jesus didn't exist, so
the Church has framed and persecuted them falsely all these years. In the end times, the Jews believe in Jesus:
that is, when the end of time is experienced, freewillists discover and become
believers in determinism and its moral ramifications -- the freewillists repent
of taking freewill as a metaphysical reality, and learn to see it as merely a
practical conventional illusion.
To
experience the moral ramification of determinism is to have moral guilt washed
away and lifted off your shoulders and placed instead where it has always
actually belonged: on God, or God's avatar on the cross.
In the
allegory from that Book of moral allegories, why did the morality-cleansing
priests want to kill Jesus? Jesus is
the entheogenic plant teacher who reveals, for free, determinism and its moral
ramifications -- thus permanently clearing all moral impurity, cancelling the
delusion of freewillist moral culpability.
That brings the temple system of incremental sin-washing crashing
down.
The
priests wanted to save their financially profitable system of
"masses", so to speak, cleansing an impossible type of moral guilt
through the ongoing spilling of blood.
This was a very clever allegory -- which the Catholic church quickly
used as an instruction manual for designing their own church. The Catholic priests hid away the
psychoactive true vine such as Amanita, and sold a false substitute pseudo-product
of moral cleansing through financially profitable endlessly repeated
blood-sacrifice (Jesus' holy human flesh) instead.
The Jewish
priests hid away the psychoactive manna that God had commanded to keep always
on public display, into the closed-off inner holy of holies -- and proceeded to
sell a fake kind of moral cleansing through ineffectual but financially
profitable endlessly repeated blood-sacrifice instead.
The
allegorical story was brilliant and especially, clever, even funny and humorous,
poking fun at how the mind takes freewill and the accompanying moral system as
a reality. But freewill and the sense
of being a self-steering sovereign individual is also valuable.
In the
sacred marriage, the freewill lower way of thinking (Sophia or Mary Magdalene,
or Simon Magus' prostitute Helen) is joined harmoniously with the determinist,
metaphysically higher way of thinking (Jesus and in a way, the goddess Virgin
Mary). See Freke and Gandy's books listed
at http://www.egodeath.com/christmyth.htm.
Christianity
as it has been predominantly known has been fully mistaken, because that is
only the lower half of Christianity.
What was missing is the psychoactive, true vine, and the higher half of
Christianity thereby revealed by the Holy Spirit residing in the vine.
Preliminary
notes written before the above:
There are
many things to explain about late antiquity, but solving these is solving some
other puzzle than the main one that we have received in Christianity as we know
it. Our puzzle: make universal clever
good sense out of "Jesus is the only way", "Jesus is Lord",
"Jesus is my savior", "ye are followers of your father the
devil".
The
attitude that allowed me to find solution: suppose it's all fiction. What would be the simple riddle pun joke
revelation puzzle meaning and point of such fiction, a system of fiction? The answer must be metaphysically
basic/simple. It must be a matter of
solving a Gordian knot, answering the gorgon's riddle.
There is a
choice: either some quite simple but clever explanation, or else you are left
with a totally baffling supernaturalist mess of notions. Theiring's theory of pescher interpretation
of the scriptures as political encodings of a historical Jesus movement is way
too complex and oversubtle.
The solution
must be slap-your-head simple solution that elicits a laugh. The solution is so very much *simpler* than
you expected. Determinism is revealed. Sins flow upward in an instant,
catastrophically shifting upward; the puppet strings come into view as sin/guilt
moves up them. As you feel your puppet
strings pulled in the entheogenic lesson, so do you feel your responsibility
lifted until you become an unresponsible puppet of god.
The two
systems of morality - the lower understanding of "the moral system of
Jesus", and the higher understanding of "the moral system of
Jesus". There are two different,
opposing systems of Jesus-centered morality, that were *designed* as two phases
in an encompassing system.
Clearly
see them as two extremely different systems, two "opposing" -- not
opposite, but perpendicularly different systems. Freewillist Jesus morality is not a mirror of the determinist
Jesus morality, but rather a "perpendicular opposite". These are two distinct and glaringly
different systems, but the two are designed as a pair.
There is a
Satanic version of Jesus-based morality, and a Holy Spirit inspired version of
Jesus-centered morality. Those who
assume the first system of Jesus are actually Satanic though they think they
follow Jesus. "You say and think
that you follow me, but you are no follower of mine. You are of the devil, father of lies."
The
Satanic interpretation of Jesus is held by those who are alive in the body and
yet are now in hell. Those who know the
higher system of Jesus-based meaning are heavenly, his, they are alive now and
are in heaven -- they live in consciousness of the kingdom of God.
In heaven
you are slave of God, Jesus being God's mythically visible avatar. By isomorphism, then, if you are not in
heaven and not a slave of God, you must therefore be a slave of the devil, who
is the king of hell - the king of lower morality. Jehovah, god of the "Jews" (freewillist moralists) is
the demiurge, the god of the lower system of moral notions.
Today I
fully ascend to heaven because I fully understand the "joke" that the
original Christians (or perhaps Orphic thinkers) had; I fully understand the
joke as joke, considering a 3-panel painting of Jesus in the sky with one arm
up, one down, sending the sinners (freewillists) to hell and saints
(determinists) to heaven -- there are two ways of reading this painting.
One
subject who participated in the Miracle of Marsh Chapel, Good Friday Experiment
with psilocybin, after the sermon by Howard Thurman, escaped from the
experiment. He entered Boston
University's School of Theology and was climbing toward the third floor and
climbed stairs to attempt to deliver a revelation to the dean. The revelation was merely about the good
news of the dawning of a millennium of universal peace -- not the entheogenic
deterministic revelation of sin cancellation.
So he was given Thorazine. He is
the only subject who refuses to discuss the experiment. This story has been suppressed from the
reports except for this from Huston Smith in the book Cleansing the Doors of
Perception: The Religious Significance of Entheogenic Plants and Chemicals,
2000, page 103.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1585420344
There are
two ways of reading the Christian word-network. After bodily death Jesus judges your actions and sends you to
heaven or hell. Jesus judges those who
measure morality by themselves as moral agents.
They go to
heaven or hell, or expect to do so, as a moral place for moral souls
(cybernetic homunculus steersmen, sovereign kings). The higher thinker knows that Jesus judges you by what *system*
of morality you believe in, not by what moral actions you did, and not by the
moral action of putting faith in Historical Supernatural Jesus.
There's
nothing morally wrong with the sin of believing in freewill and your own moral
power -- this delusion of personal metaphysical sovereignty can be considered a
gift that is the devil, a gift from God to himself.
Having
true faith or truly believing in Jesus means believing in determinism and its
concomitant trans-moral logic. If you
believe in determinism and its moral implications about who is actually guilty,
you go to heaven, giving all glory to god even as you declare God to be
all-guilty. Give God/Ground/Fate what's
his: all the glory and all the guilt in the world he all-powerfully authors,
controls, and creates.
I ascend
today -- but the soul is always lower than the spirit; to enter the kingdom of
heaven you leave your inherently freewillist soul behind. It's logically consistent to say you leave
your soul behind. The soul doesn't
ascend to heaven. It vanishes, or is
seen never to have existed. Yet it is
right to say it ascends to heaven. We
here discuss the fate of a fiction, an illusion.
The
Christian scheme is figured out as a designed double-meaning system, figured
out *as* a bi-fold 2-level system.
"Gentiles" means determinists, as the Hellenistic world
was. "Jews" is a code-word meaning
those who think in terms of freewill moral agency and consider themselves
culpable for morality and thus subject to be sent to heaven or hell (ideas from
the system of Orpheus). Did Apollonius
do the same -- did he teach a moral heaven/hell for freewillists, that then
breaks over into a different, contrasting scheme of "hell is belief in
freewill -- the current land the freewillists dwell in morally" while
"heaven is determinism", heaven = blaming Dionysus as avatar of
Gods/Fates for all actions?
The
Hellenistic world was fascinated by the freewill moral assumptions of some of
the Jews or of the temple sacrifice logic for repeatedly "cleansing moral
impurity".
Dionysus
is lord and shepherd and takes all guilt upon himself upon revealing to you
determinism via himself as entheogen.
Apollonius/Orpheus/Dionysus -- isomorphic with bi-fold Jesus-morality? To be saved -- to have sin cleared and enter
heaven, God's kingdom, believe in Jesus.
This means believing in determinism; Jesus represents determinism's
moral release disguised as freewillist morality.
Jesus
said, "To be saved and enter the kingdom of heaven, believe in
me". "Me" here means
"determinism and its moral correlates". This requires switching from the system of morality that looks to
the freewillist like heaven/hell moral punishment/reward but clearly is
revealed by the Holy Spirit as God owning all guilt. "Me" = Jesus' Holy Spirit-revealed system of salvation
from sin. "Believe in Jesus"
= believe that God is all-sovereign and deserves all guilt and has achieved
full appropriate guilt-punishment in the allegorical figure of Jesus on the
cross.
Is Jesus
son of God? He is the sacrificial son
provided for us to accept, like Abraham's angel, as a complete and appropriate
demonstration of our deterministic puppethood relationship to God the
all-controller. Jesus is the same type
as the sacrificial son of Abraham, isomorphic in that he, like Isaac was
permitted to escape death. The higher
thinker cannot countenance even a story of an allegorical Jesus figure actually
dying bodily and rising up. This says
it all: "Pilate could not believe Jesus was dead so quickly." Such staggering doubt, such a frenetically
waving red flag, is not in the scriptures by accident.
The swoon
theory is the superior way to mythically read these double-coded word-networks:
it preserves the isomorphic equivalence between Abraham's near-sacrifice of
Isaac and God's visible but virtual sacrifice of Jesus. Gnostics embrace allegorically God's just
suffering on the cross, but not a vulgar simple shallow fairy tale of bodily death
and bodily resurrection. The swoon theory
-- rather, the swoon hidden interpretation -- is far more rich in its Abrahamic
interpretive depth. The stories are
designed for just such depth.
The
dying/rising savior is consubstantial with the entheogen. http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=consubstantial
What did
Orpheus, the singing head, teach? The
judgement of the afterlife to divide moral agents into heaven and hell. Apollonius was the travelling apostle of
Orphic teaching, I surmise that he taught how entheogens reveal determinism and
the transformation into a higher network of interpretation.
Christianity
was in no way original -- except perhaps as a whole bi-fold system that
incorporated a historical and political reference point (the large-scale
crucifixion of Jewish rebels and would-be kings before the fall of the
Jerusalem temple in 70 CE). The 2-level
meaning-flipping about moral heaven and hell sorting must have come from
somewhere, not just from the uninitiated/initiated distinction or from the
meaning-toggling in Attic tragedy.
I am
Apollonius the mouth of Orpheus, the yammering Pauline teacher and minister --
I have something to share with you, taste my knowledge -- about how determinism
flips from one moral-system to another.
In higher moral system, hell is essentially the place freewillists now
live in and consider themselves subject to -- they are subject to Satan, are
subjects and worshippers of devil -- heaven is determinism's cancellation of
sin-culpability.
A couple
years ago, the Holy Spirit revealed two paths open to me: The Branch appeared
-- two ways appeared before me which I didn't then identify with the Christian
hell and heaven as deliberately designed, opposing systems of thinking. I chose determinism and knew I had entered
heaven, I knew my sin was in principle cancelled and rooted out, but still
didn't know how this deterministic sin-cancellation connected with 2-level
original Christianity.
This shows
that the full Christian Revelation requires not just the generic core
principles, but fully fleshed-out connections to existing systems, such as
Gnosticism, mystery religions, Stoic thought, Greek myths, astrological
determinism, Attic tragedy, temple sacrifice morality-cleansing, Reformed
theology, and Catholic moral religion.
I didn't
see that the fork I rejected wasn't just some magic never-solvable worldmodel
-- it wasn't just any old random nonsense -- but precisely and specifically the
way of thinking called "hell" -- the moral system that is "hell
and damnation and sin and devil-worship" in a certain encoded sense.
Now all
that was revealed during my initial partway entry into heaven (I still retained
the careless assumption of a Historical Jesus) is brought to completion through
studying the original Christianity and its mythic and philosophical context
such as the rock-chained, eagle-stabbed Prometheus, the Prometheus-eating
Titans zapped down by Zeus, and the death of the power of the bull in the
center of the labyrinth.
These are
the missing revelations Jesus told to Mary Magdalene by which the apostles were
so shocked and filled with disbelief, the missing pages removed from the Gospel
of Mary Magdalene; these are the message to be delivered to the minister at the
top of the Marsh Chapel
What is
the difference between my insight now versus my original transcendence of sin
and entry into heaven in the "forking path" encounter two or three
years ago? How have I "finished my
ascension" now, that wasn't finished before? Before, the only thing I knew was, letting go of supernatural
thinking and magic and freewill together implied determinism, and with
determinism my sins are annulled and made unreal, made never to have
existed.
That was
all I knew -- merely that core idea/experience. I didn't know Christianity to have been a deliberately crafted
system to inculcate two levels of meaning-network. I had just the chest of a skeleton of a theory, but now I have a
fully fleshed theory.
This
theory explains what "hell" means, when it exists, what
"sin" and "salvation" are taken to mean within the lower
and higher system of meaning, what "salvation" really is, how these
meanings were *designed* to shift, that being entrapped in the lower net of
meaning *is* having Satan as one's king, it *is* being in hell and damned. I have now not just had my sins cleared, but
have fully mapped the network of meaning held by people who are "in
heaven" that held by people who are "in hell".
I know
what the Last Judgement is -- that God stands in judgement of himself and
reveals how he has always been the only morally guilty one, deserving of all
moral punishment. The sinners
understand the Last Judgment one way and the saints another. Sinners are those who believe in the system
of freewill moral agency; saints believe in "Jesus" as the system of
determinist/fatalist/fixed-future agent-slavehood/puppethood.
I have
donned my Saint Michael hat. I have
become sinless, a saint incapable of sinning.
It is impossible for the mature determinist to sin. The punnish joke networks of meanings -- the
humor -- has been revealed. There is a
Christian belly laugh of enlightenment as the slap-your-head comical/clever
aspect of the two opposing semantic meaning-networks is revealed. In the Last Judgement, God is judged as
all-guilty; all people are revealed as morally innocent.
All minds
do not go to heaven; lifetime sinners spent their entire life in hell,
believing in freewill moral agency the whole time; those who are elected to be
saved spend part of their life in hell -- the freewill-assuming childhood
learning mundane conventional morality -- but during egodeath, they enter
heaven, the kingdom of God, during bodily life.
After
bodily life, nothing can be said. To
experience fatedness is to experience the way in which time is a frozen
block. Nov 14, 2001, all has been revealed
to me about the Christian 2-fold system of mental models.
The
Cybernetic Revelation of Moral Salvation
The
Revelation and the Last Judgment, the Apocalypse is today.
For 13
years I have been working on this puzzle, and it is solved today: what is the
egodeath-oriented allegorical meaning of the New Testament stories and
expressions? What is the simple and
elegant Revelation of their true, nonsupernatural, universally valid
meaning?"
Home (theory of the ego death and rebirth experience)
