John Marco Allegro - Vatican scholar, head translator of the dead sea scrolls, fluent in Aramaic, claimed that Jesus was a Magic Mushroom

What neither of you devout believers understand is that in ancient Rome, crucifixion was NOT a common means of execution and was in fact reserved soley for the most serious crimes committed against the Republic and later Empire. PERIOD.

Instead the Romans used a complex system of fines, property seizures and personal restitution [such as forced slavery if fines could not be paid]. Further, the Romans preferred their executions swift [and hopefully bloody] with simple strangulation or beheading most common. Despite Hollywood and your local pulpit, crucifixion in ancient Rome was quite rare. And like the likewise hustled claims of constant Christian persecution also largely FALSE. In fact, the Jews in Rome circa 50AD were considered more of a social threat to the point where they were specifically taxed for practicing their religion -something that had never before been done in all of Rome's history- as they quickly became a powerful lobby of wealthy businessmen determined to one day rule over Rome itself.

In the highest civil cases, exile was the supreme punishment where the convicted was branded on the forehead, all property was seized and he was denied food, shelter and employment within the Empire... and anyone who offered those comforts could suffer the same fate. In high-profile cases, the condemned would be escorted to the Roman boundaries and turned over to enemy barbarians who could do with them as they wished.

Spartacus' troops were crucified because they waged a two-year campaign [one of the three Servile wars that involved slave uprisings] against Rome itself and in the process made commanders including Claudius Glaber, Lutullus and Gaius Cassius look like inefficient fools... until Marcus Licinius Cassius finally cornered Spartacus and destroyed that revolt once and for all in 71BC. FYI: that's a full 70 years BEFORE Jesus' alleged birth and not just a "few decades" as you suggest.

The point in this little diatribe is for you not to be so quick to rewrite verified history as a means of supporting your own ideological beliefs.

BTW: according to the Bible, you may wish to recall that Pontius Pilate himself was so disgusted by the Sanhedrin bloodlust -and demands that Jesus be crucified- that he famously washed his hands of the entire affair. Had they not interfered, Pilate would've likely just fined Jesus for his low-key insurrection and the entire world would be absent one divine saviour and thus very different today!

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 11/20/2023 02:37 PM

hahah..so true.

What he/she said ^^^^^..

putin is a magic mushroom

vladimir lenin was also a mushroom

We have a brother, +Dr Matthew Wyman, he wrote a book about it and mushrooms in religion. It all scares me. I think it is used by commies to destroy them to idiot slaves you can corn hole all you want.

Wow that's quite an assumption about me! No, I do not believe the Earth is a spinning ball.

How is my statement being interpreted by you in this way?

I don't believe any of those things. And I do not believe the Bible, either.

dogs that eat their own vomit

Its true yet it has nothing to refute the true saviour who is different than all those

There is a real Saviour his name is Yahshua
Or Yahushua
Be was not a sun God. that's one identifying characteristic of many differences from these who were all solar saviour figures. We worship the solar Christ, at Xmas . We don't celebrate the birth if Yahushua. He was not a solar ar Christ.

[link to youtube.com (secure)]

They made him say that..."or else"

Just remember that the next time you end a prayer with a reverential "Amen" that was the name of the Egyptian supreme Sun God "Amen-Ra" [alternate spellings "Amun" and "Amon"-Ra] and that monotheism actually has its roots in Akhenaten, the tenth ruler of the 18th dynasty. He who promoted a radical new religion called "Atenism.".

But the worship of Amen-Ra predated Akhenaten himself by a good 300 years so that belief system was well-established and didn't die too easily! FYI: the much later Greek equivalent to Amen-Ra would've been Zeus.

It was Akhenaten who decided that a singular God should rule over all Egypt and the people hated him for it since they were forced to abandon their long-cherished panoply of Gods... just as Rome was much later in 433AD under Constantine I's Edict of Milan that ushered in Christianity as the primary religion of the soon-to-collapse empire.

And when Akhenaten died around 1334BC, his temples were torn down, his name chiseled off monuments and he was branded an enemy as the older polytheistic beliefs were restored.

Now you know where the idea of a singular God -the very foundation of both Judaism and Christianity- originated.

So, "Amen, Amun, Amon and pass that Turkey gravy!"

BTW: Constantine I was very aware of all this distant Egyptian history -and its condemnation of Akhenaten- which is why he sent his Mother Helena to the Middle East to "discover" so-called holy relics that proved the Jesus myth and thus cement it in the minds of Roman citizens suddenly cast adrift as were those Egyptians 1350 years before.

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 11/20/2023 03:53 PM

The occult view of the swastika is that it is a symbol of a man and woman, husband and wife, during Tantric union, which is sacred union with the Divine. In the occult, the original sin was orgasm. They believe, and this is supposedly taught throughout all secret societies but at what level I do not know, that male orgasm with ejaculate destroys the body, wasting the vital life force and that it leads to degenerate transgressions in behavior. There are three types of Tantra. Black, grey and white. Black is free for all (basically sex and orgasm with anyone). Grey is the man can have an ejaculation sometimes but mostly practices Tantric orgasm where the energy is drawn up the spine, into all the organs as it goes up, through chakras before reaching the crown chakra, attaining enlightenment and union with God. White is strictly Tantric orgasms. That is how I understand it. And the crucifixion is symbolic of union with God and subsequent enlightenment through sacrifice and suffering.


In old Norse lore, Odin hung himself upside down with his head partially submerged in the well (I can't remember the name of the well but it was a well of knowledge or enlightenment), pierced through the heart with his spear for 9 days to gain enlightenment and knowledge about the magic of the ancient runes. I'm starting to think that much of the Old Norse lore is about the fallen angels or the gnostic archons.

Run along now, kid. The adults are talking.

The great thing about geometry is that it represents the foundation, and the foundation, like any structure can be made to be different things for different people. My point is that geometry, symbology is symbology because it has multiple interpretations.

Josephus who claimed Jesus was resurrected, wrote only a brief paragraph about Jesus, but much more about John the Baptist. Hmmmm

No political historian, although they wrote of many lesser events, wrote of the scene caused at the temple with the merchants. Hmmmm

When the Romans crucified a person, they left them on the cross for a good long time as an example.

HMMMM: Flavius Josephus wasn't even born until 3 years after Jesus' crucifixion, thus EVERYTHING he ever wrote about the man and his times was ANECDOTAL, just as all the Gospels were.

Josephus was born into a wealthy Jerusalem family -and his Father no doubt had close connections with the ruling Sanhedrin- so from his earliest childhood he learned how to manipulate others, especially those of a lower class. And true to that beginning Josephus grew into a man whose opinions could be bought/sold, especially after his capture by the Romans in July, 67BC, while defending Jerusalem against their occupation of Galilee.

But while trapped in a cave before his capture Josephus' true nature revealed itself: as he urged his other 40 companions to draw straws and commit suicide [which they did], he chose not to fall on his own sword, was captured and thus began a lifetime of formally selling out to the Romans in a duplicitous career that saw him rise among their military ranks.

But as a prisoner in 69BC he became a more wretched traitor to his own people by telling them to surrender Jerusalem to the Romans; he failed and Jerusalem along with Herod's temple were burned to the ground. To add to his already trashed reputation among his own tribes Josephus then adopted the family name of his Roman conquerors, Flavius Vespasian and his son Titus, both of whom later became Emperors. As a result, up until the 19th-century his writings were forbidden to be read/studied by Jews.

Like so many other Biblical prophets and "historians" of the time, Josephus began writing his 500-year history of Judea after having an epiphany -a direct call from God- and he doggedly started assembling bits and pieces of those oral histories wherever he could find them... and when he needed to fill in historical gaps, his imagination took care of them quite nicely.

And again like so many other influences of that period, Josephus was very careful to only write what he thought people wanted to hear, especially those wealthy patrons he met while serving as an officer in the Roman legions... a position he only attained by his willingness to sell his heritage- and soul- to the highest bidder.

But since his were the most "detailed" accounts available, when the new Christian religion grew in earnest by 400AD, Josephus' writings were widely hailed as proof of the earliest history of Judea and -by extension- Jesus himself.

So, the hard truth remains that at best Josephus only wrote a hand-me-down history that was riddled with exaggerations and outright lies as needed to satisfy his readers.

You must also always bear in mind that the original sources of those old anecdotes were Judean tribesmen who -like the vast majority of the populace- were illiterate... which is why they relied so strongly upon oral histories as their primary form of record-keeping. And as such they too were flawed as they passed from mouth-to-mouth for generations.

Today here on GLP that kind of documentation would rightfully be ridiculed as "Uncle intel!"

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 11/21/2023 10:02 AM

NOT TRUE! It ALL depended upon the severity of the crime that was committed. For highest crimes against the Republic -such as Spartacus' slave revolt and two year war- those corpses might very well be left to rot in full public view along the Appian Way as a grim reminder of their treachery.

But in the city of Rome itself more often than not the bodies of criminals were simply carted to the banks of the Tiber River and tossed into the water, denied even a hasty shallow burial outside the city gates where all the cemeteries were located along roadways. In the cases of mass executions when the blood-soaked arenas were still legal, bodies were burned together in large pyres, also well-outside the city.

This type of criminal deterrent was not unlike the later -and equally effective- English practice of placing severed heads upon pikes along London Bridge, which was the fate of notables such as William Wallace, Sir Thomas More and Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell's was an especially unique version of political revenge: three years after he died, his body was exhumed from Westminster Abbey for a formal execution, the mummified head was hacked away and placed on a public pike for the next 24 years. And like the Romans long before them, it was done just to make a point!

BTW: even the biblical account that Jesus' body was removed from the cross shortly after death again disproves your statement.

Again: crucifixion in the Roman Republic/Empire was NOT a casual execution that happened on a regular basis and was one that was always reserved for only the highest-profile men who were convicted of the most serious capital crimes.

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 11/21/2023 09:56 AM

The main issue I have with your response is that you are lacking a main point. It seems as though you think my statement regarding "a few decades" vs 7 decades is a fatal error of some kind. You must believe that 7 decades obliterates all memory and psychic impact.

Well it going on over two hundred decades now since the sacrifice of Jesus and it must really irk you that it is still the most important facet of our spiritual existence.

Additionally, I'd really like to know what your actual
understanding of the 'psyche' is?
Are you just some kind of materialist who can't fathom a spiritual connection with past generations?

Materialists believe that the whole premise of Christianity
depends on the actual physical evidence of Christ's life, not on the message and meaning of Christ's life.

Furthermore, monotheism was not initiated by the ancient Egyptians. That's a ridiculous statement. Monotheism is
a worldview that recognizes the universality underlying the cosmos. It would have been grasped by any people of any region of any time. That is what the word 'universal' implies.
I apologize for deleting much of your post, but they don't offer a hide feature for lengthy posts.

[link to www.farsightprime.com (secure)]

Well, I have several issues with your reply.

1. I didn't suggest that 70 years was a "fatal flaw", rather I merely pointed out the timeframe was at least twice as long as you indicated. But the passage of time is actually irrelevant where belief systems are concerned since if a belief was false to begin with it'll remain that way forever.

Consider the fact that since ancient men first counted on their stubby fingers, EVERYTHING that has regulated our daily lives have been based upon nothing more than THEORIES. Little concepts like time, distance, weight, mass and volume -in fact, anything that involves numbers- are just arbitrary assignments adopted for the sake of convenience, conformity and commerce. To this day, nobody can prove a second is a second, a minute a minute or an hour an hour any more than they can prove an inch, pound or gallon since they all originated from a counting system based upon the number of digits we humans have on our hands. But just suppose that man had evolved with flippers or bifurcated hooves instead of those eight phalanges and two opposable thumbs? The bottom line is that we have smugly created a world for ourselves filled with faithful assumptions that make us feel far more superior than we really are.

2. When you are dealing with an illiterate populace as were those nomadic tribes, seven decades can easily erase details in oral histories that are enhanced or altered by others. As a child, did you never play that playground game of whispering something in someone's ear only to have it completely different after passing between only a handful of others? The exactly-same thing occurs with ANY oral history as it is passed from generation to generation, often by the elderly, who are "universally" motivated to insist that their earlier lives were preferable to the present. And at 73 years old, I speak from experience on that note!

3. Presuming to know my thought processes and then placing them into a convenient pejorative category is a common tactic among Christians when challenged by historical facts; and they have a term for this that applies to others but never themselves: it's called "bearing false witness." Only God can see into a man's heart and those who believe they can do so are guilty of acting like God Himself. This is in violation of the commandment that mentions "taking the name of the Lord thy God in vain." a passage that has never meant profanity, but VANITY... and this is something few Christians consider when proselytizing.

4. I am first and foremost a historian who -unlike ancient prophets- deals in verifiable facts instead of fantasies. And as I clearly pointed out in an earlier post, NO Biblical scholar seeks the truth, but rather only evidence that supports their specific narratives. Then to make matters worse, they rely upon ancient writers whose works were equally skewed by their own agendas, exist only in scraps or have been translated so many times all original meaning has been lost. And yet THESE are the texts upon which the Bible was based as they were written not just decades but even centuries after the purported events.

5. Thus the only thing that "irks" me is that over the millennia Christians have perverted verifiable history into a pack of lies. From creation to crucifixion to persecution very little of what they claim to be true occurred as is preached - and as I also pointed out the Bible itself is largely comprised of 'inner voices, visions & dreams' from the very first sentence that vividly describes the creation of the Earth and all life... when no one was perched upon a nearby cloud taking notes. And as every scientist knows, if a baseline is flawed -as is Genesis- then all that follows is likewise tainted.

6. I am also quite correct to state that the first recorded practice of monothesism occurred with Ahkenaten in the 14th-century BC. and I invite you to attempt to disprove that the "God of the Sun" and the "Son of God" are not directly linked. And no, simply saying so just won't cut it.

Even Mary's virgin birth was stolen from the polytheistic concept of ancient demi-Gods wherein a God mated with a mortal woman and produced an offspring imbued with Godly powers. In that respect Jesus' lineage was exactly the same as Hercules, Perseus, Achilles and Helen of Troy - all myths created to enthrall small children around a campfire.

Finally -and since you wish to debate etymology- let's examine two words that define every Christian -faith and theology- because they are BOTH based upon the same concept and together formed the foundation of all global religions whether ancient or modern.

The definition of "faith" is the belief in something that cannot be proven. And yet Christians wave it like a banner as if if was engraved on the pink Granite of Mount Sinai.

And "theology" likewise doesn't contain any veracity since the Greek prefix "theo-" meant a belief or supposition unsupported by fact. Thus with the added suffix "-ology" the word theology actually means the study of something based upon nothing other than conjecture. And it's no error that another word -theory- shares that same defining prefix since all theories are similarly unprovable.

Just remember: there's a very good reason that no religious texts -including the Bible- are found on the non-fiction shelves of your local library... because they -like faith and theology- lack substantiating FACTS and are instead based upon a bizarre combination of human fear of the unknown, rationalization of the unproven and the arrogance that anything can be the truth if you just believe it enough.

And that also neatly sums up the human psyche as well.

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 11/21/2023 08:00 PM

"Well, I have several issues with your reply.

1. I didn't suggest that 70 years was a "fatal flaw", rather I merely pointed out the timeframe was at least twice as long as you indicated. But the passage of time is actually irrelevant where belief systems are concerned since if a belief was false to begin with it'll remain that way forever."

Your belief system, materialism, is dominant at this point.

You have no concept of the psyche, therefore you have no
understanding of the spiritual realms and how they influence our lives. This is why you write off 2000 + yrs of human struggle with sin and corruption, not to mention the achievements which were obtained through our ancestral struggle.

There is nothing to be done for a person who only sees the material side of life, since it is a fixed form of perception, not an organic responsiveness to life's many dimensions.

The consumption of an entheogen, like the mushrooms in question, would be a psychic disaster for a materialist.
It would lead to psychosis and permanent schizophrenia; much like encountering an alien would effect such a personality.
But it's never hopeless. Many materialists do very good services for humanity and the environment while gradually
adapting their mendset to the fuller dynamics and reality of the spiritual spectrum.

a

"The definition of "faith" is the belief in something that cannot be proven. And yet Christians wave it like a banner as if if was engraved on the pink Granite of Mount Sinai."

'Faith' is a kind of generic term in that people will project their own understanding of the concept into their application of the term.

In good faith... means someone is acting and speaking from a sincere point of view. (vs. being insincere or fraudulent)

Being faithful... isn't just used in respect to Fido, but it
is about maintaining the trust in a marriage or other relationship.

The root of faith is 'fide'. Fidelity. Being true.

A high fidelity system is as true to life as possible.
There are fidelity speaker systems, visual recordings, and instruments of high resolution. These give a true picture of
things.

I dig your brain, you should make a thread. Link it here if u do.

Thank you!

Faith is a pretty important word, isn't it!?

It can also have the meaning of "a leap" (into the unknown) of faith.
Everything can be a leap into the unknown; like getting married, having a baby, starting college, or starting a career.

Also, concerning 'theology'.
The root is theo(s) + ology = God + the study of...