Won’t get too detailed so I don’t accidentally dox myself or something, but I’ve been considering my life up to this point, and I can’t help but feel I definitely might’ve wound up on the wrong side of history if divine intervention and my own intuition hadn’t gotten in the way.
I know people who work at Neuralink, Facebook, Google, IBM, etc. My college was pretty successful for job placement at big name companies
I’ve been in some of the “financial centers and think tanks” of the world as a student. I was presented with opportunities to engage with their work, especially toward the end of my undergraduate career. Most of these people made me uneasy; at the time, I couldn’t place my finger on why. But I always felt the urge to keep those places at arms distance.
As a gifted kid, I feel incredibly blessed to have gotten out of public school relatively unscathed. I feel incredibly lucky I didn’t join the status quo in college despite the pressure to conform.
This refusal to conform is definitely giving me some roadblocks now that I’m trying to get started in my career, but it does feel like I’ve dodged many bullets on the journey. And I’m glad I’m not part of the hive mind like most of my peers.
Anyone else have the same experience?
Edit to say: thanks to everyone who has commented! Really appreciate knowing others have similar journeys.
Oh my, another guy who watched a half of a youtube video and became the preeminent scholar on the subject worldwide.
That is because the Roman church includes the Apocrypha - works outside the accepted canon of inspired scripture, but are not in conflict with christian doctrine.
The Protestants only include canonical texts, but don't proscribe or even discourage their reading.
^TOTAL HOGWASH^ - what the hell are you talking about?
And beyond that, your comment was about THE BIBLE, not the Holy Roman Empire. I fully agree that the Roman Church or more specifically the Vatican - then and now - was and is Antichrist, which has busied itself from day one to the present in slaughtering every christian it could get it's hands on. And that has continued enmasse at least through WWII with the mass slaughter hundreds of thousands of Serbs who refused to convert to the Roman Church. A Roman Catholic Priest was hanged for his part in the genocide after the war.
You need to distinguish in your mind the difference in The Roman Church and THE BIBLE. Catholics freely admit to NOT FOLLOWING THE BIBLE. They follow their TRADITION, which they consider equal to Inspired Scripture.
What does Jesus say in Scripture about such behavior?
Up until the 1960s all Roman Catholics were PROHIBITED from reading Scripture under the penalty of mortal sin for doing so. A special dispensation could be had from a priest to allow it, but the reading must be in the presence of the priest.
DO NOT CONFLATE ROMAN CATHOLICISM WITH SCRIPTURE. They have nothing in common.
^Do^you^ever^get^tired^of^being^wrong^?
Thanks for your offer to point me in the right direction, but your massive experience of "the better part of a year," isn't as intimidating as you apparently think. And my suspicion from your near total lack of information and understanding is it is most probably that you watched nearly a whole youtube video on the subject, before appointing yourself supreme expert.
I have the better part of several decades of investigation behind me.
So, thanks anyway.
I'm not sure which part of the quote you are protesting. I didn't even say anything controversial and provided links which corroborate. They aren't the only sources that corroborate, they aren't even close. They were just paths to follow if you were interested. Nevertheless, I will further qualify the statements.
The Roman Church wrote the bible (the singular book that is a collection of other works). Their writing of it was the founding of the Holy Roman Empire. This isn't even slightly controversial. Obviously they used earlier works in their writing, so here by "writing," I mean translated a selection of earlier works (many of which translations are highly controversial) and decided what to keep, and what to throw away. This final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople in 382 AD. These councils were brought together by the ruling bodies (Emperor and God-Emperor respectively) to codify (make into law) certain beliefs and to create the formal church and ruling body (Holy Roman Empire). These councils created all Christian canon specifically to end the debate, which evidence suggests was very controversial at the time, on what Jesus was really saying, who he was, and more importantly, who We The People are in relation to Jesus and God.
The creation of the idea that Jesus is our ruler, our "Lord" God, was created at these councils, by setting him up as the only Son of God, where he said specifically, we are all the Children of God (AKA Split Aparts from Source AKA the Divine Spark). Many earlier Christians held that Jesus was showing us our connection to Source, our Divinity. Of course you can't rule Divine beings, so the church codified into law that that was not true. The church, which set itself up as our ruler, separated us from Source, and wrote the bible (massive edits) to ensure that those beliefs remained. They injected into Revelations a circularly defined Divinity of the book to create the deeply rooted belief that any debate on their interpretation is not allowed because it goes against our Ruler, The Lord God (YHWH in this case, the same entity that was the Ruler of the jews). Revelations itself is hugely problematic and was likely derived from an earlier (pre-Jesus) prophecy with several injections to close loopholes by creating circular arguments.
All later derivations of Christian religion use the same canonical beliefs as those laid down by law to end the controversy (see the Code of Theodosianus, link in previous post). These laws are repeated by all Christian sects during service. What do you think the Nicene Creed is? This controversy was about many things, not the least of which was the creation of the idea of the Trinity (which separates us from Source). All present day Christians repeat these beliefs, to brainwash themselves, at almost every gathering.
I meant a deep dive investigation into the authorship of the bible; one not guided by Christian belief confirmation bias (which I had done before in my life), but rather, with the only intention being to find the truth of it. I didn't mean that was the whole sum of my investigation into Christianity or religion. For that I too have many decades of experience. I'm not going to attempt to get into "qualifications," because such pro hominem arguments are always faulty. If an argument can't stand on its own, it is not a valid argument. Using credentials to support an argument is exactly how the world is in the state it is in.
You didn't address a single point I made in your protest. If you want I'm sure I can probably dig up some references, but if you wish to look for yourself, just look up "jews (or judaism) henotheism". The amount of evidence that supports that the jews believed in multiple gods (both polytheistic and henotheistic, depending on which group of jews you are talking about and the time period) is absolutely overwhelming. I'm not saying the jews that follow the formal religion that we call "Judaism" (there are actually quite a few jewish religions) aren't monotheistic now (though it is debatable which god they really believe in now). As just one simple example, it's written into the very First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In other words, "I am your number one god." This is a clear statement of both that there are other gods (implicitly stated), and that this "god" is self-stating absolute rulership of the Israelites and Judeans (explicitly dictated). Such rulership creates a hierarchy whereby the priests of the "Divine Ruler" gain ruler status as well, and that was exactly what they had, both then (around 3500 years ago), now, and all the time in between. Of course I'm sure that is purely coincidental.
Final point, a debate is an excellent path to get closer to the truth. This path can only accomplish that goal if it directly addresses points made. It is not about stating "your wrong." If you wish to engage, please engage directly. Using pro hominems, ad hominems, or simply stating "you are so stupid you don't even know how wrong you are" (paraphrased) does not help advance the debate and the investigation into the truth of a thing, rather they accomplish the opposite. In other words, they are used to obfuscate the truth.
Ok, here we go again.
I wrote: TOTAL HOGWASH^ - what the hell are you talking about?
BECAUSE EVERYTHING YOU SAID WAS WRONG. You obviously don't know that the bible was not only not " the manifesto and founding document for the birth of the Holy Roman Empire," you don't even know that the founding of the Holy Roman Empire was nearly five centuries later when Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne the first Holy Roman Emperor in Rome in the year 800 AD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Emperor
When you wrote: "The Jews weren't even monotheistic."
I replied with the proper quotation to illustrate your (childish) mistake with the quotation from Deuteronomy 6:4: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. https://www.ccalions.org/2019/09/30/deuteronomy-64-7/
If you are attempting to say that Israel turned from monotheism and worshiped Pagan gods?
YES, that is what got them slaughtered and driven out of the Holy Land.
That ^ was the promise God made to them if they turned to pagan gods. It actually UNDERSCORES that the God of the Bible and Israel IS ONE.
You further attempt to make Yahweh into a plural god by invoking the word "Elohim" as plural. If you will check with the Jewish Encyclopedia, you will see that the word "Elohim" is either plural or singular, depending on the context. Think of the word "American." If you are saying, "I am American," you are referring to a single person. If you say, "we" are American," you are referring to plural. It depends on the context. https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/#
Beyond this, you have too many childish mistakes for me to correct. and, yes, the things I wrote to you are not even disputed by any SERIOUS person, who has done the research, because YOU CAN HOLD THE PROOF IN YOUR HANDS. The key word there is SERIOUS. A serious person would not embarrass himself in public with such absurd assertions. If you continue to go to people who know as little as you, you will continue to fill your head with the same childish errors.
Sauce for Catholics being prohibited from reading the Bible? In fact, Catholics have always been encouraged to read the bible -- immediately after determining the canon (of 73 books), pope Damasus had St. Jerome translate the entire bible into latin, as it was the international language used throughout the west (there already were greek translations). There were ongoing translations through and after the middle ages, into various european languages, and monks painstakingly copied them by hand. Churches which could afford a very costly bible before the printing press was invented often chained it like a modern phone book is done, to prevent theft, but encouraged anyone to read the scriptures. Multiple popes encouraged the faithful to read scriptures, and every Catholic mass includes multiple scripture readings. In fact, scripture reading in Catholic churches follows a 3 year cycle currently, ensuring virtually all of the bible is read, every 3 years. https://cruxnow.com/faith/2015/11/a-quick-history-of-the-catholic-church-and-the-bible
There is much more, but I will stay to the point.
You are correct that the current Catholic Mass includes multiple scripture readings. In fact, scripture reading in Catholic churches follows a 3 year cycle currently, ensuring virtually all of the bible is read, every 3 years.
This ^ is post Second Vatican Council.
Prior to that (which is what I referenced) the private reading of Scripture - along with the reading of any publication or viewing any movie that did not contain the "Vatican Imprimatur"- was prohibited under penalty of Mortal Sin.
How do I know this?
I experienced it. It was taught in Parochial Schools. I vividly remember my older sisters checking to verify what they could read or what movie they could attend without sentencing themselves to eternity in Hell.
Modern Catholic apologists deny such things. The older ones must surely know they are telling lies. I suspect (and mercifully hope) the younger ones are only unwitting dupes to the dishonesty of their elders.