The Original Sin Of The Church
The Original Sin OF The Church:
The Original Sin Of The Church:
The
teaching of the Church that each person is born in sin and is in need of
salvation, is easily proven to be a bogus lie that has been used by the Church
to enrich themselves and rule over the people. Original
Sin, which is the primary foundational doctrine of the modern Church, is not drawn from
the Original Gospel teachings of Jesus and TheWay -- but rather, the doctrine of Original
Sin was imported from the Mithraic based teachings of the Iranian prophet
Mani. What can therefore be portrayed as The Foundational Paradigm of
Spiritual Failure upon which the modern Church
is erected, is built upon the doctrine of Original Sin and all the similar doctrines which
have their existence within the domain of a savior who must be sacrificed for
the salvation of a fallen mankind. While modern believers cling to the dogma
of the doctrine of Original Sin which was hatched by St. Augustine and promoted
by Martin Luther into virtually all sects of Protestantism, is the cause of the
faith-based believers own spiritual immaturity that causes them to cling to such
preposterous and carnal ideas about God. What was the source of the doctrine
of Original Sin? Quoting from T.W. Doane, Bible Myths and their Parallels in
other Religions, 7th ed., 1910, p.194-5: "The Persians
believed that they were tainted with original sin, owing to the fall of their
first parents who were tempted by the evil one in the form of a serpent"
[194:12]. Quoting from the
Wikipedia: "The Romans attributed their Mithraic
mysteries (the mystery religion known as Mithraism) to Persian or Zoroastrian
sources relating to Mithra." With respect to Manichaeanism, the same
article states: "It was among the Parthian Manicheans
that Mithra as a Sun God surpassed the importance of Narisaf as the common
Iranian image of the Third Messenger; among the Parthians the dominance of
Mithra was such that his identification with the Third Messenger led to cultic
emphasis on the Mithraic traits in the Manichaean God." Quoting
from The World's
Sixteen Crucified Saviors, by Kersey Graves who writes with respect to those
who believed in Mithra: "They observed all the
Christian sacraments, even to the laying on of hands in the confirmation."
(211.) And the Christian Tertullian also tells us that "The priests of Mithra
promised absolution from sin on confession and baptism," while another author
adds, that "on such occasions Mithra marked his followers (the servants of God)
in their foreheads," and that "he celebrated the sacrifice of bread, which is
the resurrection."
St. Augustine, one of the most
important figures in the history of the Roman Church, was a Manichaean before
converting to Christianity. Why did he convert? It is important to note that
Augustine's conversion came after the threat of death -- i.e., quoting the
Wikipedia:
"Augustine of Hippo (354–430) converted to Christianity
from Manichaeism, in the year 387. This was shortly after the Roman Emperor
Theodosius I had issued a decree of death for all Manichaean monks in 382 and
shortly before he declared Christianity to be the only legitimate religion for
the Roman Empire in 391." So, in the same way that the Emperor
Constantine hunted down the Ebionite Nazirenes and Spiritual Christians as
heretics in the year 325, Theodosius hunted down the Manichaeans in the year
382. And it was shortly after the decree of death by the emperor, that
Augustine converted to Christianity. Further, it is therefore important to
point out that Manichaean teachings were based upon a form of Gentile-Gnosticism
- and this form of Gnostic teachings which rejects the Core of the Gospel
Teachings, has totally undermined the modern Church. With respect to the
Manichaeism of St. Augustine the
Wikipedia states:
"Manichaeism taught an elaborate dualistic cosmology
describing the struggle between a good, spiritual world of light, and an evil,
material world of darkness. Through an ongoing process which takes place in
human history, light is gradually removed from the world of matter and returned
to the world of light, whence it came. Its beliefs were based on local
Mesopotamian gnostic and religious movements". Thus, when rightly
understood, these Mesopotamian teachings which have been classified as Gnostic
have totally undermined the original spiritual foundation of the Gospel
teachings. And with respect to the label Gnostic: It should be noted that the
Roman Church labeled virtually every theological position contrary to their own
as Gnostic heresy. To the degree that the word itself and what it
represents has been totally misrepresented by man's countless opinions that have
no basis in actual fact.
The Original Gospel teachings were
based upon the spiritual evolution of the Soul that attains Wholeness and
Completion over the course of many lives (see The Removal Of The Crucial
Teachings On the Pre-Existent Soul
http://BrotherOfJesus.org#Removal ). With the removal of the core
teachings on the evolution of the Soul, the doctrine of Original Sin was
imported into the core doctrines of the Church, in order to explain and fill the
great void that the Church suppression of important teachings on the
pre-existent soul created. Thereby creating a pagan foundation to the Church
that rendered Christianity spiritually impotent (see The Death Of The Gospels
http://DevilSpawn.Ebionite.com#DeathOfTheGospel ). Yet, Jesus himself in the
Gospels stated just the opposite in the words: "They
that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not
to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance" (Mark 2:17).
Contrary to the Church dogma, if Jesus is the physician, then those who achieve
and sustain a condition of Wholeness, do not
need the physician -- and as a physician, Jesus did not come for the salvation
of those who are Whole, but only those who
are sick and need the physician. And in opposition to Church dogma, what this
also means is that at the time of Jesus, there existed people who he portrays as
"whole [and] righteous" who did not need
Jesus the physician (see The Original Teachings Have Nothing In Common With
Church Dogma
http://TheCall.Nazirene.org#OriginalTeachings ).
When
Prof. John Allegro was quoted as saying that what has been revealed in the
discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls is a great amount of overwhelming evidence
that “...may upset
a great many basic teachings of the Christian Church. This in turn would
greatly upset many Christian Theologians and believers. The heart of the
matter is, in fact, the source and originality of Christian doctrine”
(August 1966 issue of Harpers Magazine),
few modern Christians have even begun to understand why Prof. Allegro made this
statement, which confirmed the position of A. Powell Davies
that: “Biblical scholars were not disturbed by what
they found in the Dead Sea Scrolls because they had known all along that the
origin of Christianity was not what was commonly supposed to have been”
(quoted by Millar Burrows in More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls). What was it
about the Original Foundational Gospel teachings that had virtually nothing in
common with what modern Christians believe today? And perhaps the more
important question: Does it matter?
While most Christians remain ignorant
of why biblical scholars published these long ignored warnings, the majority of
believers felt that so long as the Church had the Bible as their guide, that the
facts they remained ignorant of really didn't matter. Yet, in light of a
series of even more profound statement by scholars such as
Prof. Bart D. Ehrman that the Bibles that the Church is using has been edited
with core spiritual teachings removed -- wherein in his book, The Orthodox
Corruption of Scripture, he warns us that:
"...theological
disputes, specifically disputes over Christology, prompted Christian scribes to
alter the words of scripture in order to make them more serviceable for the
polemical task. Scribes modified their manuscripts to make them more patently
‘orthodox’ and less susceptible to ‘abuse’ by the opponents of orthodoxy"
-- which orthodoxy was to bring the
text of the Bible into conformity with the doctrines and tenets of the Church of
the Roman Emperor Constantine. As documented in the article
http://BibleCorruption.com , the
Gentile believers who portrayed themselves as Orthodox Christians, had been
editing the Gospels to make them support their pagan thinking and mindset -- and
this editing of the scriptures had been going on since the
first century. In his Introduction to the
Criticism of the New Testament, by Dr. F. H. Scrivener, he writes that:
"In the second century we have seen too many
instances of attempts to tamper with the text of Scripture, some merely
injudicious, others positively dishonest".
Scrivener states that
"it is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that the worst
corruptions to which the New Testament has ever been subjected, originated
within 100 years after it was composed: and that Irenaeus and the African
Fathers, and the whole Western, with a portion of the Syrian Church"
used inferior manuscripts.
Under the title of Bible in the
Church, the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics writes:
"In the first two centuries nearly all
the various readings of the New Testament came into existence, the majority of
them by deliberate alteration of the text, many for the sake of style, and
several in the interests of dogma… Often readings were rejected as
falsifications of heretics, but often the heretics were right in their
counter-complaint… Every province, every order, every monastery, has a tradition
of its own…"
If every province, every
order, and every monastery in the first two centuries had their own
version of the scriptures which supported their favorite doctrines of belief,
then we must seriously ask the question as to what has been passed down to us
today?
Once the original Christian
teachings on the transmigration of the soul that evolves to perfection over the
course of many lifetimes was removed from the Gospels and outlawed by the
Church, it was necessary to fill the void that was left by the absence of this
core teaching on the higher reality of the soul. And this removed core
teaching was originally an integral part of the questions posed by the disciples
of Jesus when they asked: "Now as
Jesus passed by, He saw a man who was blind from birth. And His disciples asked
Him, saying, 'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born
blind?'" (John 9:1-2 NKJ). Thus,
it is easily demonstrated that the original Gospel mindset was built upon a very
different foundation than what has evolved into the modern Church. What
Christian today would ask the forgoing question?
"...Who sinned, this man or his
parents, that he was born blind?'"
It must be immediately recognized that not a single modern Christian would even
consider asking such a question. Why? As stated in The
Hastings-Scribner Dictionary Of The Bible (New York, 1903. Bk 4, p. 63)
"To affirm that
Jews in Christ's time did not believe in pre-existence is simply incorrect".
Because modern Christians have been totally alienated from the biblical
foundational mindset by the very doctrines such as Original Sin that was adopted
while the Church was ruled over by Pagan Rome. Thus, we must pose the
question: What prompted the disciples of Jesus to even ask such a question?
Turning to the historian, this ultra important element to the equation of life
is made reference to by Edward Gibbon in the footnote regarding the question of
the disciples at John 9:2:
"The disciples of Jesus were persuaded that a man might have sinned before he
was born, (John, ix. 2,) and the Pharisees held the transmigration
[reincarnation] of virtuous souls, (Joseph. de Bell. Judaico, l. ii. c. 7;) and
a modern Rabbi is modestly assured, that Hermes, Pythagoras, Plato, etc.,
derived their metaphysics from his illustrious countrymen"
(Gibbon; Decline & Fall) -- metaphysics that embraced the
concept of the pre-existence and transmigration of the soul.
Again, let me pose the question as to
what this statement means to us from a modern-day perspective? It means that
the mindset and doctrinal thinking of the modern believer is so alienated from
the original biblical foundational mindset and thinking, that the modern
believer has been disenfranchised from the Gospel teachings and rendered
spiritually sterile. In the question posed to Jesus there simply is no
element of the Augustinian doctrine of Original Sin. The question posed to
Jesus by his disciples was whether the soul of the man born blind was caused by
the sin committed by the man's Soul in a previous life, or whether his blindness
was the result of the sin of his parents? The original mindset and thinking
with respect to the events of life from the perception of the disciples is
explored in the Wycliffe Commentary where it is written:
"The question of the disciples (v. 2)
was grounded in the belief that bodily infirmity or suffering was due to sin,
whether of parents (Exo 20:5) or of the man himself, presumably on the basis of
the soul’s pre-existence, which some Jews held".
Thus we must ask: Is this concept
that a soul can sin prior to birth some Jewish fable that the disciples of
Christ conjured up themselves? Or, is this belief based upon a foundational
teaching of the Gospel that Jesus taught to them? Once properly understood,
the position of the disciples is founded upon the construct of Jesus' statement
to the woman caught in adultery:
"Go,
and from now on do not sin anymore" (John 8:11). Thus, Jesus did
not tell the woman caught in adultery to believe in him (Jesus) as her personal
lord and savior for the forgiveness of her sins. If, as
Augustine set forth, the woman sinned because of the congenial sin imposed upon
mankind by virtue of the sin of Adam and Eve, then Jesus never would have stated
to her to go forward in her life and cease to sin -- acknowledging that she had
the power and ability to cease from sinning. And this is especially presented
in the example of the person
Jesus healed and made whole where he said:
"...sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee" (John 5:14).
Once again we see Jesus rejecting the Augustinian doctrine of Original Sin --
conveying to the man the need to begin to live a life wherein he would cease to
sin -- i.e., "...sin no more". But it was
the second part of his statement to the man where he made reference to The Laws
in the statement "...lest a worse thing come unto thee"
that immerses each of us in our own personal Labyrinth of Laws that is molded by
our previous actions, and has orchestrated the path and the choices of our
destiny (see The Laws That Control Our Lives
http://OuterDarkness.Nazirene.org#TheLawsThatControlOurLives ).
Once again we do not see Jesus
conveying to the man to believe in him as his personal lord and savior for the
forgiveness of his sins. We not only see Jesus instructing the man to
"sin no more" -- which, in opposition to the
Augustianian doctrine of Original Sin, meant that the man had the ability to live
free of sin -- but also warning the man that if he sins again after being
healed, that "...a worse thing [will] come unto thee".
Why? Because the Laws of God that were instituted at the dawn of Creation,
monitor our every word, thought, desire and deed (see The Laws Of Creation
http://OuterDarkness.Nazirene.org#TheLawsOfCreation . And it is these Laws
of Creator-God that were put in place in the Alpha of man's beginning, that
returns to each soul the fruit of their own thinking and actions. And it is
for this reason why both Peter and Paul affirm the reality that those who sin --
especially after coming to the knowledge of the Gospel message -- inherit a fate
even worse than before they were exposed to the Gospel teachings. To the
degree that Paul warned the congregation of believers: ,
“Do not be
deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows”
(Gal 6:7).
What does it mean that
"...God cannot be
mocked -- [and that each person] reaps what he sows”? To the
degree that Jesus warned the man:
"...sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee."
Yet, to their own spiritual demise, the vast majority of modern Christians
promote the belief that they are exempt from having their own sin and misdeeds
come back upon them in the manner that is portrayed in these verses -- and that
somehow they have been exempted from the fruit of their own ways, while everyone
else is held in judgment. In fact, Christians promote the doctrine that
because they attempt to appease the Lord with their lips, they virtually have a
license to live in sin. And they cling to this doctrine even though the
Gospel warns that their fate will be worse than the unbelievers (see
Fate) -- and that because
of their infidelity to the Gospel, wherein they are portrayed as crucifying the
Son of God afresh, even the opportunity of salvation by virtue of the sacrifice
on the cross has been denied to them (see
Sacrifice). And
because of their infidelity to the Gospel, they have been rendered spiritually
blind to the degree that they fail to perceive that they are dwelling in what
Jesus portrayed as The Prison and the "outer darkness"
of mind and being (see
Blindness) -- incapable of understanding the core meaning of the Gospel and
the scriptures.
The original ending of the Gospel of
Mark reads very differently than the present version -- i.e.,
"This Age of lawlessness and unbelieving lies under the
sway of Satan,
who will not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to
understand the truth and power of God;
therefore, they said to Christ, reveal your
righteousness now. Christ answered them, The term of years for Satan's power
has now expired, but other terrors are at hand. I was delivered to death on
behalf of sinners,
that they might
return to the truth and sin no more,
that they might inherit that glory of righteousness which is spiritual and
imperishable in heaven" (Moffatt,
quoting Gospel Of Mark in Codex W -- Also quoted by St. Jerome as being the
authentic ending of the Gospel of Mark). This original ending of the Gospel of
Mark that is still contained in some of the oldest biblical manuscripts,
presents the core essential Gospel teaching that believes in Jesus will
"...return to the truth and sin no more" --
that they might inherit that glory of righteousness which
is spiritual and imperishable in heaven". Which is why Paul wrote:
"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that
grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any
longer therein? Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should
obey it in the lusts thereof. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves
servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto
death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" (Rom 6:1-2,12,16 KJV).
And again Paul wrote: "But if, while we seek to be
justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ
the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I
destroyed, I make myself a transgressor" (Gal 2:17-18 KJV). While
the Mithraic Eucharist that was embraced by the Roman Church was for the
forgiveness of sins, Paul warns that if you sin and partake the cup of the Lord,
that you drink judgment unto yourself: "Therefore
whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner
will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself,
and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks
in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the
Lord's body. For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep"
(1 Cor 11:27-30 NKJ). Thus, while the modern Christian Church is founded upon
the Augustinian (Manichaean/Mithraic) doctrine of Original Sin and a savior
sun-god who was sacrificed to forgive the congenital sins of the people, the
Original Gospel teachings were founded upon the pre-existent soul that evolves
to perfection and having fulfilled the Royal Law within themselves, believers
are able to live a life free of sin.
In opposition to the Augustine
Manichaean doctrine, of the monk named Pelagius (354–420 or 440) the
Encyclopedia Britannica (1998 electronic edition) reads:
“Pelagius, though not a priest, became a highly regarded spiritual director
for both clergy and laymen. The rigorous asceticism of his adherents acted as a
reproach to the spiritual sloth of many Roman Christians, whose moral standards
greatly distressed him. He blamed Rome's moral laxity on the doctrine of divine
grace that he heard a bishop cite from the Confessions of Saint Augustine, who
in his prayer for continence beseeched God to grant whatever grace the divine
will determined. Pelagius attacked this teaching on the grounds that it
imperiled the entire moral law and soon gained a considerable following at Rome”.
Pelagius wrote that:
“Man is able,
if he likes, to live without sin and keep the commandments of God, in as much as
God gives him this ability”.
Which is exactly what the Original Gospel teachings taught. Notice that
Pelagius stated that
"...God gives [man] this ability”.
The Wikipedia states:
"Pelagius rejected the Augustinian concept of grace.
According to his opponents, Pelagius taught that moral perfection was attainable
in this life without the assistance of divine grace through human free will.
Augustine contradicted this by saying that perfection was impossible without
grace because we are born sinners with a sinful heart and will. The Pelagians
charged Augustine with departing from the accepted teaching (e.g.: John 8:11) of
the Apostles and the Bible, demonstrating that the doctrine of original sin
amounted to Manichaeism, which taught that the flesh was in itself sinful (and
thus denied that Jesus came in the flesh). This charge would have carried added
weight since contemporaries knew that Augustine had himself been a Manichaean
layman before converting to Christianity. Augustine also taught that a person's
salvation comes solely through a free gift, the efficacious grace of God, but
that this was a gift that one had no free choice to accept or refuse."
When Jesus warned the man
"...sin no
more, lest a worse thing come unto thee" -- he confirmed the
doctrine that all the calamities of life that each individual person encounters
and experiences, is caused by each soul's sin and disobedience to the Royal Law
of God. On the question itself that
the disciples of Jesus asked -- i.e., Master, who did sin? -- the commentary
Barnes’ Notes writes that:
"It was a universal opinion among the Jews that calamities of all kinds were the
effects of sin. The case, however, of this man was that of one that was blind
from his birth, and it was a question which the disciples could not determine
whether it was his fault or that of his parents. Many of the Jews, as it appears
from their writings (see Lightfoot), believed in the doctrine of the
transmigration of souls; or that the soul of a man, in consequence of sin, might
be compelled to pass into other bodies, and be punished there. They also
believed that an infant might sin before it was born (see Lightfoot), and that
consequently this blindness might have come upon the child as a consequence of
that".
On the question of who did sin, this
man, or his parents, and the pre-existence and reincarnation of the soul, the
Adam Clarke Commentary tells us:
"The doctrine of the transmigration of
souls appears to have been an article in the creed of the Pharisees, and it was
pretty general both among the Greeks and the Asiatics. The Pythagoreans believed
the souls of men were sent into other bodies for the punishment of some sin
which they had committed in a pre-existent state. This seems to have been the
foundation of the disciples’ question to our Lord. Did this man sin in a
pre-existent state, that he is punished in this body with blindness? Or, did his
parents commit some sin, for which they are thus plagued in their offspring!...
The Jewish rabbis have had the same belief from the very remotest antiquity.
Origen cites an apocryphal book of the Hebrews, in which the patriarch Jacob is
made to speak thus: I am an angel of God; one of the first order of spirits. Men
call me Jacob, but my true name, which God has given me, is Israel: Orat.
Joseph. apud ORIG. Many of the Jewish doctors have believed that the souls of
Adam, Abraham, and Phineas, have successively animated the great men of their
nation. Philo says that the air is full of spirits, and that some, through their
natural propensity, join themselves to bodies; and that others have an aversion
from such a union. See several other things relative to this point in his
treatises, De Plant. Noe-- De Gigantibus-- De Confus. Ling.-- De Somniis, etc.;
and see Calmet, where he is pretty largely quoted".
It is important in our assessment of
genuine biblical foundations of thought to recognize the fact that the
pre-existence -- and what some call the reincarnation of the soul -- was a
universally accepted belief among the people who Jesus taught the Gospel
Precepts -- and in the case of the Disciples, the higher reality of the soul and
the Mysteries of the Kingdom of God. Once this fact is acknowledged, then we
are forced to conclude that if this belief about the nature of life was in
error, and the journey of the pre-existent soul is not a viable part of the
teachings of Jesus, then Jesus would have had to condemn it -- or, we must
recognize that it was removed by the later Gentile Church.
With respect to the question: Did the
Jews in the first century believe in the pre-existent soul? The
Hastings-Scribner Dictionary Of The Bible (New York, 1903. Bk 4, p. 63)
"To affirm that
Jews in Christ's time did not believe in pre-existence is simply incorrect".
At Genesis 2:7, the Wycliffe Commentary writes: “Man's
body was fashioned from the dust of the ground, while his spirit came from the
very ‘breath’ of God. He is literally a creature of two worlds; both earth and
heaven can claim him”. More importantly, though, is for us to
clarify our understanding of when the soul came into existence. Thus, the
Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary notes the belief of both the Jews and
early Church: “The... views of Origen and other
Fathers, and the... Talmudists, that all souls had been created ‘in the
beginning,’ and were lodged by God in a certain place, whence each one was taken
out to inhabit the respective bodies of individuals”. In this
respect, it can easily be demonstrated the first followers of Jesus firmly
believed that the soul pre-existed the body, and that our present physical forms
are mere vessels that we inhabit during our sojourn in this life.
That the Pharisees understood that a
man is born blind from the misdeeds of a previous life is seen in their words to
the man: "You were born
entirely in sins, and are you teaching us?"
(Jn 9:34 NAS). Moreover, it is well
documented that the Essenes -- who with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls
are now understood to be the foundation of New Covenant teachings -- also
believed in the pre-existence and transmigration of the soul. In his
Antiquity of the Jews, the Jewish historian Josephus, who had lived among the
Essenes, and was a contemporary of the man Jesus, stated that the Essenes:
“…resigned up their souls with great alacrity, as
expecting to receive them again. For their doctrine is this, that bodies are
corruptible, and that the matter they are made of is not permanent; but that the
souls are immortal, and continue for ever; and that they came out of the most
subtle air, and are united to their bodies as to prisons, into which they are
drawn by a certain natural enticement; but that when they are set free from the
bonds of flesh, they then, as released from a long bondage, rejoice and mount
upward...”.
Josephus openly wrote the foregoing
words pertaining to the pre-existent soul that incarnates into the body, because
it was a predominant belief held by the Jews in the first century. This fact
is also seen in the writings of Philo in his On Dreams Being Sent from God,
section 22, where he speaks of the various kinds of souls and of the celestial
bodies as being animated entities, quite in common with the general teaching of
antiquity, and remarks: "Now all these souls seem to
descend upon the earth with a view to being bound up in mortal bodies, those
namely which are most nearly connected with the earth, and which are lovers of
bodily habitations. Others, however, soar upwards, and are distinguished from
others of their class according to the times and characteristics which Nature
has appointed unto them. All these souls, those which are influenced by desires
for mortal existence and which have been previously familiarized with it, return
to mortal life. But others, refusing bodily life as a great folly, and as a mere
trifling, pronounce it a prison or a grave, and fleeing from it by the impulses
of their nature as from a house of correction or a tomb, raise themselves on the
light wings of their nature towards the aether where they devote all their life
to speculations of a divine type...". And in the version of John 9:1
that is contained in the Gospel of the Nazirenes 53:1 (see
Born
Blind) we can see what the Gospel of John used to contain before being
edited by the Church (see
BibleCorruption.com ) where it is written: "And at
another time as Jesus passed by, he saw a man who was blind from his birth. And
his disciples asked him saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents,
that he was born blind? Jesus answered, To what importance is it whether this
man or his parents sinned? The rewards of our actions return again to us so that
the works of the Lord are made manifest. I must work the works of the Lord while
in this season. As long as I am in the world, I am the Light of the world."
Why is there no doctrine of Original Sin in
Judaism? The foundational doctrine which St. Augustine brought into the Church
from his Manichaean background? Modern Christians fail to realize that their
religion evolved out of the Essenes, and Spiritual Jews have always founded their
system of beliefs upon the concept of the pre-existent soul that evolves to
perfection over the course of many lifetimes. The following quotation is taken
from The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, under the heading of Souls,
Transmigration of: “The doctrine of transmigration of
souls, which was especially accepted by the Karaites… is generally attacked by
Jewish philosophers, but is defended by Isaac Abravanel and Manasseh ben
Israel. It appears often in Cabala; it is found in organized form in the Zohar,
it is further developed in the teachings of Isaac Luria (1534-1572), and in
Hasidism it becomes a universal belief. According to these teachings, all
human souls have a common origin in the spiritual unity of the primordial man,
sparks of which form the individual souls... The sin of Adam brought higher and
lower souls into confusion; as a result, every soul has to pass through a series
of incarnations... The soul itself has no sex, which is determined by the body
and may vary from incarnation to incarnation”.
In the Zohar which is the foundational doctrine of Jewish
Mysticism, it is written that: “All souls are subject
to the trials of transmigration; and men do not know the designs of the Most
High with regard to them… The souls must re-enter the absolute substance whence
they have emerged. But to accomplish this end they must develop all the
perfections, the germ of which is planted in them; and if they have not
fulfilled this condition during one life, they must commence another, a third,
and so forth, until they have acquired the condition which fits them for reunion
with God”. This reunion with God is the rebirth that was spoken of
by Jesus to the Pharisee Nicodemus, “a ruler of the
Jews”.
Parallel to the Journey of the Soul as set forth in
the Zohar in the foregoing, is the teachings in the Qur'an which states
"God generates beings, and sends them back over and
over again, till they return to Him" Which again parallels the
teachings of Jesus in the Pistis Sophia where it is stated:
“But if he shall have sinned once, twice, or thrice,
they shall reject that soul, sending it back again into the world according to
the form of the sins that it may have committed; the form whereof I will declare
unto you hereafter. But verily, verily I say unto you, that even the righteous
man that hath committed no sin at all cannot be brought into the Kingdom of
Light, forasmuch the seal of the mysteries of that kingdom is not found upon
him. Once for all, I say unto you, a soul cannot be brought into the kingdom,
if it be without the mysteries of the Kingdom of the Light.” When
it is understood that the "...seal of the mysteries"
which is further stated in the pronouncement that
"...Once for all, I say unto you, a soul cannot be brought into the kingdom, if
it be without the mysteries of the Kingdom of the Light” is parallel
to the Zohar where it states that "...But to accomplish
this end they must develop all the perfections, the germ of which is planted in
them; and if they have not fulfilled this condition during one life, they must
commence another, a third, and so forth, until they have acquired the condition
which fits them for reunion with God”.
Virtually all of the sayings of the Gospel of
Thomas was removed from the traditional scriptures and teachings (see
The Gospel Enigma That
Modern Christians Can't Comprehend ). Saying 84 (see
The Foundation Of The Soul And
The Threefold Self ) restores the teachings on the pre-existent Soul and our
own relationship to the previous lives our Soul has lived. Saying demonstrates
that the traditional belief in reincarnation as embraced by the Eastern religions
is in error -- and while the Pre-existent Soul does evolve over the course of
many lifetimes, each of these lifetimes are themselves unique incarnations.
And this is why the pre-Nicene Church Fathers rejected the traditional belief in
reincarnation, they embraced the teachings of the pre-existent Soul that evolves
to perfection over the course of many (unique) lifetimes. Therefore, as a
soul-generated personality, most people don't remember past lives, because they
never lived them -- yet, their own Soul generates as many soul-personalities as
is needed to become Whole, Complete, and fulfill the requirement of perfection
-- i.e., "You, therefore, must be Perfect, as you
Heavenly Father is Perfect" (Matt 5:48). And as demonstrated in the
previous link, the great difficulty in explaining the reality of the Soul to
organic man who Paul portrays as being of a "natural"
mind (see
Animal-Soul), is because the typical teachings on reincarnation are in error
-- and the pre-existent Soul evolves over the course of many Incarnations --
with each soul-generated personality only living one life. And because of the
spiritual-amnesia of having been cast into the "outer
darkness" of mind and being in which mankind as the prodigal
sons/daughters have been cast, Paul is correct when he asserts that man in his
"natural" untransformed mindset will reject
his own higher Soul-Reality as utter "foolishness"
-- i.e., “But the natural man does not receive the
things of the Spirit of God, for they are
foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because
they are spiritually discerned”
(1 Cor 2:14 NKJ).
While Christians attempt to interpret the parable
of the Prodigal Son in fragmented piecemeal, when taken as a whole, and
understood as a universal reality common to all of mankind in the manner it was
intended to be understood, it is recognized to be in total conflict with modern
Christian doctrine. Once it is understood that each of us is the Prodigal
Son/Daughter of our Heavenly Father, then it must also be recognized that each
of us at one time dwelled in the Kingdom prior to journeying out into this, the
"far country". We don't remember our more
distant past prior to this present life, because this realm is the
"outer darkness" that causes us to be
stricken with Spiritual-Amnesia
http://AnInconvenientTruth.org#SpiritualAmnesia . Thus, we see this
parallel concept in the above quotation from the Zohar where it states that each
of us, like the Prodigal Son that we are, must return to our Source -- i.e., "The
souls must re-enter the absolute substance whence they have emerged...."
In the parable of the
Wedding Feast, those
who come to TheCall must have put on the required Wedding Garment -- and thus,
we see the parallel concept in the Zohar in the words with respect to the
required perfection of each soul: "But to accomplish
this end they must develop all the perfections, the germ of which is planted in
them...". To the degree that Jesus stated in the Sermon on the
Mount at Matthew 5:48 that each soul must be as perfect as their Heavenly Father
-- i.e., again parallel to the Zohar: "...and if they
have not fulfilled this condition during one life, they must commence another, a
third, and so forth, until they have acquired the condition which fits them for
reunion with God”. In the parable of the talents, when the
distribution of Talents is understood within the Foundation of the Original
Gospel Teachings prior to being corrupted -- and the difference is understood
between those portrayed as "invited guests"
and the majority who were not "invited guests"
as pertaining to The Talents And A Person's Spiritual DNA
http://TheCall.Nazirene.org#SpiritualDNA , a totally different picture of
each of our more distant past begins to emerge -- prompting the Church Father
Origen to explain:
“Every soul... comes into this world strengthened by the victories or weakened
by the defeats of its previous life” (Origen, De Principiis).
God did not hate Esau and love Jacob for no
reason! Paul gives the example of Jacob and Esau, and writes:
“For though the twins were not yet born, and had not
done anything good or bad, in order that God's purpose according to His choice
might stand, not because of works, but because of Him who calls, it was said to
her, The older will serve the younger. Just as it is written, Jacob I loved, but
Esau I hated” (Rom 9:11-13 NAS). What the Apostle is very clearly
stating is that, before either of the twins had been born, before either had
“done anything good or bad”, God not only
decided their fate in life, but for no apparent reason, He hated Esau and loved
Jacob. Why? Paul offers no explanation other than God does what he wants to
do -- and man does not have the right to question God's choices in these
matters. This is especially seen in the words: “Does
not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel
for honor and another for dishonor?” (Rom 9:21 NKJ).
Origen then demonstrates that our lot in life is the result of our own deserts,
and writes: “For God the Creator makes a certain vessel
unto honor, and other vessels to dishonor; but that vessel which has cleansed
itself from all impurity [an untarnished wedding garment] He makes a vessel unto
honor, while that which has stained itself with the filth of vice He makes a
vessel unto dishonor. The conclusion from which, accordingly, is this,
that the
cause of each one's actions is a pre-existing one; and then every one, according
to his deserts, is made by God either a vessel unto honor or dishonor. Therefore
every individual vessel has furnished to its Creator out of itself the causes
and occasions of its being formed by Him to be either a vessel unto honor or one
unto dishonor. And if the assertion appear
correct, as it certainly is, and in harmony with all piety, that it is due to
previous causes that every vessel be prepared by God either to honor or to
dishonor, it does not appear absurd that, in discussing remoter causes in the
same order, and in the same method, we should come to the same conclusion
respecting the nature of souls, and (believe) that this was the reason why Jacob
was beloved before he was born into this world, and Esau hated, while he still
was contained in the womb of his mother”. This same reality
where each of us comes into the body in accord with the accomplishments of our
Soul's past, is expressed in the Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20, where it reads:
“Now I was a child good by nature, and… being good, I
came into a body undefiled”.
To even begin to comprehend this higher reality of
the perfection of the soul over the course of many lifetimes, the person must
understand the cycle of the Prodigal Son/Daughter as presented in the words:
"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your
ways My ways," says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so
are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts. For as
the rain comes down, and the snow from heaven, and do not return there, but
water the earth, and make it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the
sower and bread to the eater, So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth;
it shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish what I please, and it
shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it" (Isa 55:8-11 NKJ).
God cannot fail -- and nothing in Creation can be void -- and as the Prodigal
Sons of the Most High, each of us emanated from the Edenic Kingdom of
Origination -- and each us us must fulfill the requirement of perfection as
presented at Matt 5:48 -- and if this required perfection is
"...not fulfilled this condition during one life, [we] must commence another, a
third, and so forth, until [our souls] have acquired the condition which fits
them for reunion with God”
With respect to not only the example of Jacob and Esau in the womb -- but also all infants -- the question must be posed: What is a child? From the perspective of the framework of modern Christian thought, we would say that a child it is a newly soul that was created at conception by God. But is it? The Bible itself states to us in Eccl 1:9-11 that “there is no new thing under the sun” -- and then asks the question: “Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See this is new”. Let us refute the wisdom of the Bible, and use the example of a new-born baby as something that is new. Surely this baby is new -- i.e., from a Christian perspective it has never had an existence prior to being born. Yet, the scripture confutes us, and teaches that “It hath been already of old time, which was before us”. So that we might be sure that the scriptures are speaking about a new born baby, it then goes on to clarify the statement by adding: “There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after”. Based upon these words is can be said that, from a biblical perspective, even though a baby (or person) will not remember its past: “It hath been already of old time”. According to the first Christians, this is true -- unless the Lord opens the mind of a person which would then permit them to remember the previous lives that their soul has lived. That the majority of people do not remember the previous lives that their pre-existent soul has lived prior to their coming into being in their present life, is basically caused by the fact that by embracing the culture of this world, they have made themselves alien to their true self.
With respect to not only the example of Jacob and Esau in the womb -- but also all infants -- the question must be posed: What is a child? From the perspective of the framework of modern Christian thought, we would say that a child it is a newly soul that was created at conception by God. But is it? The Bible itself states to us in Eccl 1:9-11 that “there is no new thing under the sun” -- and then asks the question: “Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See this is new”. Let us refute the wisdom of the Bible, and use the example of a new-born baby as something that is new. Surely this baby is new -- i.e., from a Christian perspective it has never had an existence prior to being born. Yet, the scripture confutes us, and teaches that “It hath been already of old time, which was before us”. So that we might be sure that the scriptures are speaking about a new born baby, it then goes on to clarify the statement by adding: “There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after”. Based upon these words is can be said that, from a biblical perspective, even though a baby (or person) will not remember its past: “It hath been already of old time”. According to the first Christians, this is true -- unless the Lord opens the mind of a person which would then permit them to remember the previous lives that their soul has lived. That the majority of people do not remember the previous lives that their pre-existent soul has lived prior to their coming into being in their present life, is basically caused by the fact that by embracing the culture of this world, they have made themselves alien to their true self.
Once the teachings on the pre-existent soul was
removed from the Gospels and suppressed by the Church of Constantine, it became
necessary to fill the void with the Augustinian doctrine of Original Sin as a
means of explaining many of the inconsistencies left in the scriptures. And in
total conflict with Original Sin, Paul not only stated that mankind was forced
into what is personified in the allegorical Fall of Man -- but the journey in
the Far Country portrayed in the parable was absolutely necessary for each of
our development. As the Prodigal Sons/Daughters of the Most High, each of us
was forced to leave the Kingdom and venture out into this world which is
portrayed in the parable as the "far country"
-- not by our own choosing, but by the Will of God who through the Natural Laws
forced each of us into the "outer darkness"
of the Far Country. But what is the Far Country? A realm where each of us is
able to grow and evolve to perfection -- i.e., “For the
creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of
the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated
from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children
of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of
childbirth right up to the present time” (Rom 8:20-22 NIV). What
the Apostle states in the above quotation is that it was (the Laws of)
Creator-God that subjected mankind to the frustration of what we perceive as the
Fall of Man, in order that “the creation itself will be
liberated from its bondage” through the process of the soul-evolution
in this world which is God's Spiritual University that perfects and brings about
our eventual spiritual rebirth into the Kingdom -- i.e.,
“We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of
childbirth right up to the present time”. Yet, it remains virtually
impossible to convey to organic "natural"
man that this realm of the "outer darkness"
can be better portrayed as the "mental-womb"
of Mother-Earth (see Mental Womb
http://OuterDarkness.Nazirene.org#MentalWomb ). And in the same way that a
fetus is evolved within the womb of its mother to prepare for physical birth,
mankind who is born into this world as a
Cosmic
Ovum or Sperm , must become a viable embryo that is prepared to evolve
within the Womb of Mother-Earth, and bring about the next stage of birth that
Jesus said was absolutely necessary to enter the Kingdom of God.
What does Paul's words mean? Take
especial notice of the words: "...For the creation was
subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it
...For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs
together until now". In the same way that Jesus stated that unless
you bring about the next stage of birth, you cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven
-- all of the trials of the prodigal son in this, the Far Country, is the
process of birth that was brought upon mankind by the Laws -- Laws which evolve
each and every soul from the Alpha of ignorance, to the Omega of Enlightened
Light and Knowing (see
The Laws
That Control Our Lives). The great truth that is not at all understood in
the above words -- a truth that has been continually expressed by both Jewish
and Christian visionaries is that the knowledge of the mysteries of God and the
Divine Plan -- begins with the knowledge of ourselves as the Prodigal Sons of
our Heavenly Father. And it is for this reason that the second-century Church
Father Clement of Alexandria said that it is “…the
greatest of all lessons to know one's self. For if one knows himself, he will
know God; and knowing God, he will be made like God… and that man becomes God,
since God so wills”. And that this statement is confirmed in the
Gospel of Thomas in the words: "But
if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that
poverty... Whoever finds himself is
superior to the world." In his treaties on The Soul and the
Resurrection, St Gregory writes that “the Resurrection
is no other thing than 'the re-constitution of our nature in its original form’”,
and states that there will come a time “…when the
complete whole of our race shall have been perfected from the first man to the
last”. This statement should provoke great thought in the reader
who is under the misconception that our Heavenly Father would destroy or forever
cut off one of his sons or daughters who are lost in this world. Moreover, the
reality that mankind did not Fall from Grace because of the insane folly of what
the Church of Rome portrayed as Original Sin -- but rather
"...the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of
Him who subjected it" -- and that what mankind is presently enduring
is the "...groans and labors [of] birth pangs".
Which means that what is presented and concealed within the allegory of
the letter of the written word, is simply beyond even man's imagination.
Which is why Paul warns that the higher reality of the soul and the Mysteries of
the Kingdom is incomprehensible to the "natural"
mind of man who, because of his own mental and spiritual immaturity, will reject
the Truth as utter "foolishness" (see
Mystery Of The Gospel).
Moreover, this means that if what the biblical authors and early Church
authorities are saying is true, how could those who wrote the scriptures
possibly put what is incomprehensible into a plain written narrative that those
who totally lack the capacity to understand, would read and comprehend?
Further, so long as mankind remains what is portrayed as being "glued"
to the Citizen of this world -- and the Citizen or god of this world maintains
absolute control over the thinking and life of organic man -- then it remains
impossible for man to comprehend anything of a higher reality than the most
mundane things of this world.
posted by Brother Of Yeshua @ 6:43 AM
0 comments
