"Beware the man of a single book." --Bertrand Russell
There is nothing inherently anti-Christian or "demonic" about New Age beliefs, although some Christians (primarily more conservative ones) object to various New Age beliefs.
Intrests included in various New Age beliefs include some of the folowing:
- Astral projection
- Aura Reading and Kirelian Photography
- Divination, including tarot cards and scrying
About.com describes the New Age movement as follows:
"The term New Age has come to be applied to a wide variety of disparate belief systems. Many New Agers accept only a portion of New Age beliefs, and the totality of New Age beliefs certainly does not represent a single, coherent belief system."
"In addition, there are plenty of people who embrace practices often labeled as New Age but do not consider themselves New Agers."
"New Age beliefs tend to stress personal practices and an avoidance of dogma, as well as discovering our full potential, understanding of the wider spiritual cosmos, and recognition of the interconnectivity of things."
"The New Age Movement (NAM) is a revival of
spiritual and divine values and can be called as a Divine Regeneration
Movement. New Age Philosophy has conquered the West intellectually
and Western culture is currently experiencing a phenomenal shift –
sociological, spiritual & ideological. It’s a secular, multi-cultural,
multi-religious synthesis, of the Oriental mystical philosophies,
mainly Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism & Western Occultism, emphasising
Holism, the doctrine that Reality is organically One ( now taught
in American Universities after Einstein’s Theory of Relativity
Wkipedia has a page about the new age movement at:
And has this to say:
"The New Age movement is a spiritual and quasi-religious
Western movement that developed in the latter half of the twentieth
century. Its central precepts revolve around "drawing on both
Eastern and Western spiritual and metaphysical traditions and then
infusing them with influences from self-help and motivational psychology,
holistic health, parapsychology, consciousness research and quantum
physics" in order to create "a spirituality without borders
or confining dogmas" that is inclusive and pluralistic. Another
of its primary traits is holding to "a holistic worldview",
thereby emphasising that the Mind, Body and Spirit are interrelated
and that there is a form of Oneness and unity throughout the universe. It further attempts to create "a worldview that includes both
science and spirituality" and thereby embraces a number of
forms of science and pseudo-science."
Wikipedia has a link to fundamentalism here:
and has this to say about it:
" Fundamentalism refers to a belief in a strict
adherence to an established set of basic principles (usually religious
in nature), sometimes as a reaction to perceived doctrinal compromises
with modern social and political life.
The term fundamentalism was originally coined to describe a specific
package of theological beliefs that developed into a movement within
the Protestant community of the United States in the early part of
the 20th century, and that had its roots in the Fundamentalist-Modernist
Controversy of that time. Until 1950, there was no entry for fundamentalism
in the Oxford English Dictionary; the derivative fundamentalist
was added only in its second 1989 edition.
The term has since been generalized to mean strong adherence to any
set of beliefs in the face of criticism or unpopularity, but has by
and large retained religious connotations.
Fundamentalism is commonly used as a pejorative term, particularly
when combined with other epithets (as in the phrase "right-wing/left-wing
"why the fundamentalist approach is wrong:"
Has this to say,
"Indeed, many fundamentalists are so caught up in doctrinal
seriousness, that love, service and compassion seem scarcely to even
be a part of their thinking. As one correspondent said to me regarding
a certain Christian sect's converts, "Its like they go in and
surgically remove any sense of love or any sense of humor."
This emphasis on doctrinal conformity seems to be the result of the
belief in the requirement of absolute conformity to doctrine to achieve
salvation. Yet at the same time, many will also officially claim that
simple acceptance of that sect's doctrine is sufficient for salvation.
This dichotomy is often seen in the same sect; some of the fundamentalist
Christian sects being good examples. The contradiction seems to go
unnoticed or if it is noticed, it is ignored."
"The greatest philosophical problem of fundamentalism is that
it denies the power of God."
"Why Fundamentalism Is A Force For Evil In Society"
"By distracting otherwise sincere people from honest self-examination
and the spiritual growth it makes possible, and by obstructing honest
scientific inquiry and intellectual debate, fundamentalism derails
the progress that society would achieve by honest, competent religious
The following is from, http://www.religioustolerance.org/newage.htm
"The New Age Movement is in a class by itself. Unlike most formal
religions, it has no holy text, central organization, membership,
formal clergy, geographic center, dogma, creed, etc. They often use
mutually exclusive definitions for some of their terms. The New Age
is in fact a free-flowing spiritual movement; a network of believers
and practitioners who share somewhat similar beliefs and practices,
which they add on to whichever formal religion that they follow. Their
book publishers take the place of a central organization; seminars,
conventions, books and informal groups replace of sermons and religious
Quoting John Naisbitt:
"In turbulent times, in times of great change, people head
for the two extremes: fundamentalism and personal, spiritual experience...With
no membership lists or even a coherent philosophy or dogma, it is
difficult to define or measure the unorganized New Age movement. But
in every major U.S. and European city, thousands who seek insight
and personal growth cluster around a metaphysical bookstore, a spiritual
teacher, or an education center."
Good blog about the differences and conflict between
fundamentalits and New Agers.
From the Bible fallibilty page on www.near-death.com (http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen11.html)"
"Jesus rebuked the religious leaders of his day for taking
a strictly literal, conservative view of the Hebrew Bible. They created
an entire system of man-made rules and regulations around their literal
interpretation of scriptures. Because they rejected Jesus' liberal
interpretation of scripture, their theology was in question, so they
had Jesus killed. Today, there are a large number of religious leaders
and followers who are making the same mistake. For the last two thousand
years of church history, literalism help fan the flames of Inquisitions,
crusades, and all kinds of disputes over man-made dogma, such as:
works versus faith, trinity versus oneness, eternal security versus
no security, baptism versus tongues, and predestination versus free
will, just to name a few."
"Christianity is not a book religion" Criticisms and danger
of bible worship (idolotry)
Great book to read: Rescuing the Bible from fundamentalism
Bible condtradictions: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_book.html
Skeptics annotated bible
Good blog about the differences between fundamentalists
and New Agers.
Here is my link to new age spiritual links: http://finalbookofdaniel.com/links.html
Angels, reincarnation, masters, etc.
Here is Daniel's view on fundamentalism from my book (http://finalbookofdaniel.com/book/):
Criticisms of Fundamentalism
"We understand why children are afraid of darkness, but why
are men afraid of light?" - Plato
"Beware the man of a single book." --Bertrand Russell
"I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you.
I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good
... Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are
called by God, to conquer this country. We don't want equal time.
We don't want pluralism." - Randall Terry, Founder of Operation
Rescue, quoted in The News-Sentinel, Fort Wayne, Indiana. 8-16-93
The above comes from a "Christian" fundamentalist. Christ
was about love for all and unmatched tolerance. Since when did Jesus
The reader may wonder why Daniel is seemingly assaulting fundamentalists,
even though they claim to be of God, and though the people are beautiful
(generally), precious souls. First, they are oftentimes dispensers
of too many ideas which downright conflict with God's ways of love, light, tolerance and too often promote ignorance. It is an angel’s
desire to shed light on ignorance.
Second, they oftentimes prevent people from seeing the true Love
and Light of God by limiting the potential of souls to return to whence
they came by becoming the Way, by openly discouraging others from
seeking their higher, internal truths, by imposing restricted and
narrow doctrines and interpretation, usually through fear.
they are a very fast-growing and disproportionately vocal minority,
with expanding influence, particularly concerning Biblical prophecy,
politics and morality, which they desire to be legislated into laws
or even a new theocracy.
In a fundamentalist view, whenever there is a conflict between love
and compassion, and doctrinal seriousness and legalism, the latter
seems to prevail in choice. In their view, it is absolute conformity
to doctrine that provides salvation (and of course, everyone else
is going to Hell), where personal spiritual growth is too often discouraged.
The ability for one to find the Way to enlightenment internally –
to work out his own salvation, as Daniel, a living example, has done
– is deemed "false," and the only way, they believe,
is to blindly submit to the written word. One Mormon leader once said
to an audience of university students, "Don't think for yourself.
The thinking has already been done."
It was the fundamentalist religious leaders whom Jesus pointed out
as the hypocrites (scribes, Pharisees) who ultimately persecuted and
conspired in bringing on the crucifixion. In their misguided zeal
to kill the Light, they refused to see the Truth, even when it was
staring them in the face. Having the outward appearance of godliness
but inwardly full of hypocrisy and filth, they tithe and do good works,
but neglect justice, mercy and faith. It is the case with 21st-century
Daniel vs. Fundamentalism as well; things never change.
These are the ones who go out of their way to find a single convert,
yet lock people out of the Kingdom of Heaven and make the convert
as much a child of Hell as themselves. They pass off human precepts
as divine doctrine, yet are godly in appearance. Daniel is now attempting
to bring Truth and Light into the world by challenging the rigid doctrines,
darkness and hypocrisy of his day, as did Jesus, who was therefore
persecuted and killed.
"Therefore I send you prophets, sages and scribes, some of whom
you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your (synagogues,
churches) and pursue from town to town." (Matthew 23)
So may it be with Daniel. It's because of jealousy and fear that
people commit such a travesty upon true prophets of God.
You see, their favorite friend is Satan. Anything and everything
that does not fit into their particular narrow views, or that which
may threaten this security (which in this case is based on an inerrant,
literal Bible or quran) such as anything new and enlightening, or the possibility that a holy angel can incarnate in human form,
is attributed to "the work of the devil." In fact, they
glorify and allocate so much power to this "Satan" that
one might even conclude they are Satan worshipers themselves disguised
You know what the tools of "Satan" are? FEAR AND DOUBT
... fear of growth, and of true spirituality, light and love. Fundamentalist
preachers use generous quantities of fear and doubt in the way they
scare their congregations with such Dark Age thought, and it is THEY
who can be accused of leading people astray! Satan is the angel of
darkness ... not light.
They go so far as to say such idiocies as, "All those who seek
answers outside of the Bible are getting deceived by Satan!"
Instead of trying to find true meaning about themselves or God, they
will always "warn" you about all sorts of things that you
simply MUST be frightened of.
And of course if you stray from such
twisted concepts, then they will tell you to "turn to Jesus"
to avoid the Judgment, Hell, etc. They will see, in virtually everything,
evil, from a New World Order or New Age united by a deceptive Antichrist,
to how homosexuals are going to fry in Hell, and why it's OK to bomb
They loudly attack other peaceful, productive fellow Christians as
belonging to a "cult". (By proper definition only 0.1 percent
are ever involved in cults.) Yet in their misguided zeal and ignorance,
they make that about 50 percent. In fact, Fundamentalism is the fastest
growing "cult" in America since the 70’s. They idol
worship a book, they effectively worship Satan with the power they give him, presume only they
are right and everyone else is going to Hell, and have all the same
qualities as what they deem to be cultism. (Of course, the entire
movement of Christianity can be classified as a cult by this definition.)
Here is properly what to watch out for in a "cult;" fundamentalism
applies to most, if not all, of these:
* Isolation from everyone or everything outside of the group and
its control. "Us" vs. "them" mentality.
* Everyone external to the group is perceived as a negative or not
equal; one must be a member.
* Partial commitment or belief is not tolerated; everything is either/or.
* Excessive fasting and praying, extreme tension or stress, which
may result in eating disorders, chronic depression, acute anxiety,
physical exhaustion, or illness.
* Compulsively speaking of the group, leaders and doctrines.
* Continually quoting certain scriptures emphasized by the group while
ignoring the big picture, while avoiding as "satanic" all
discussions which may seem to criticize the group or threaten its
doctrine. For everything outside of the group is evil, of the devil,
* Complete or total domination of the participant's time in the group;
attending Bible study, crusades, revivals, prayer meetings, services,
or other group activities obsessively, especially at the expense of
other important pursuits, such as family, old friends, or other interests.
* Discouraging questions concerning its leaders or doctrines. Doubt
may be equated to an attack by the devil upon the follower's mind
or psychological manipulation.
* Fear and doubt, usually irrational.
* Compulsively witnessing their beliefs to everyone, sometimes in
a confrontational or extreme manner.
Distinguishing a Christian fundamentalist from other Christians is
their reliance on the Bible to the complete exclusion of any authority
wielded by the Church or even a modern prophet issuing "new" revelation.
The second thing is
Fundamentalists' insistence in a faith in Christ as one's personal
Lord and Savior as the ONLY means to avoid Hell. "Do you accept
Christ as your personal Lord and Savior?" they ask. "Have
you been saved?" Or, "God's 'word' is eternal Truth, therefore infallible."
The Bible is largely based on many eternal eternal truths, yet is not infallible
because it was written by inspired but imperfect humans who invariably
included and were influenced by their times, mythology and culture
and other absurdities. I could go on to mention many instances of
Bible errancies and contradictions
(there are plenty – in fact hundreds and hundreds). I am not
here, though, to disrespect the Bible, because I am included within it and we
should definitely pay close attention to its message as a priority
perhaps, but simply to demonstrate an important point.
That is, the
Bible holds the basic guidelines of morality, living a sound life,
includes God's Plan regarding the Jewish Messiah and prophetic past
and future of the age and Israel, yet it has been viewed and used
from an improper perspective.
The Bible is not a science textbook of the universe or spirit world
and does not contain all the answers – only a fraction. It is
not a rulebook to be strictly adhered to with respect to every moral
attribute literally discussed, nor should the elaborate symbology
of books like Revelation be taken too seriously or literally, for
they are largely figurative. It was only what God intended to reveal
at the time it was written, and employing this book as though it,
or any other Scripture, were the only source of truth and heavenly
revelation is simply wrong.
The Bible is also missing some important scriptures such as the book
of Enoch and Apocryphal writings (including portions of Daniel!) that
were left out of canonization by the Roman Catholic Church fathers,
which all present churches ultimately branched from. By including
and thereby following only what these early fathers of the church
themselves decided to include wrongly elevates the compilers to god-like
status and creates an idol in the form of a book. Moreover, as the
countless different religions that have sprung from the current Bible
attest, Scriptural infallibility is further undermined by imperfect
human interpretation and readership and language.
If God were to give us all, or even a small portion, of the nature
of nature, the universe and the spirit world, the entire earth would
be filled with massive volumes of books, crowding out the surface
of the planet. Accordingly, many use this argument of exclusion to
explain away anomalies such as scientific reasoning and conclusions,
reincarnation, UFO's, NDE's,
evolution, psychic ability, history, etc. by implying: "It's
not really discussed in the Bible, therefore it holds no validity
and is the work of Satan."
It is mind-boggling, for instance,
that so many otherwise intelligent people, even with all the overwhelming
scientific evidence available in the modern age, still consider the
earth to be roughly six thousand years old, because the book of Genesis
says "God created earth in six days," (and the seventh for
rest) with scripturally based genealogical records. This is literalism
at its worst.
This ludicrously futile disagreement between evolution and creationism
is based not on facts, rationality, logic or real science, but hardened
hearts, passion, blind "faith" and belief between the most
extreme fringes of both sides, who are always the most vocal concerning
Actually, both are correct on many points, and both are
incorrect on many points. The earth really is around four or five
billion years old – which one may suggest could correspond to
Genesis' six days of creation (in a "God day"), and life
did in fact evolve (though the Darwinist theory is seriously flawed,
but not totally incorrect as the creationists would therefore imply).
The story of Creation of Genesis is largely symbolic mythology, and
was derived from ancient Sumerian concepts of the Beginning. Evolution
is a natural process of life, the earth and the universe.
Hence the extreme evolutionists are also flawed in arguing that life
is totally chance, that life is a fluke creation of a Godless universe,
blindly following a strict set of scientific, natural rules. It is
not the strong that survive, but those most adaptable to change. Rather
than slow, gradual evolution, life evolves in great spurts of birth,
maturity, then catastrophe whence from this catastrophe those surviving
experience an abrupt explosion in growth. That is why there are often
missing links. Souls also undergo spiritual growth through repeated
reincarnations, learning until the soul in question evolves beyond
the need for continual rebirths and moves on to different dimensions.
This too can occur in an accelerated fashion, in the space of one
lifetime, negating the need to learn further karmic lessons.
The heart of fundamentalism is driven by unintellectual, closed-minded
rigidity, passion and belief, using tactics and arguments based on
fear, emotion and rhetoric rather than on facts, rationality, common
sense or even divine truths.
The fundamentalist approach ignores vast
tracts of reality, for instance by selecting out-of-context passages
of Scripture extracted from the Bible and twisting them to whatever
argument they believe their religion believes, but devoid of guidance
by the Spirit, often using them to justify slavery, sexism, racism,
wars, etc., which neither Jesus nor any other true prophet or angel
ever promoted. And if you dare challenge them with facts or intuitive
common sense, or don't agree with someone whose basis of religious
doctrinal security is rooted in the concept of an inerrant, literally
true right-down-to-the-last-punctuation-mark Bible, according to their
brand of interpretation?
Well, then you are "going straight to Hell," or, "must
be influenced by the devil." Anything that a fundamentalist cannot
easily explain, rationalize, or conceptualize into the framework of
his narrow belief system, in his mind, must be excluded by assigning
any or all anomalous phenomena to "Satan."
This can include
virtually anything new, scientific, unknown, spiritual or revolutionary,
such as NDE's, UFO's, reincarnation, evolution, unknown spiritual
concepts, modern science or any other faith perceived as a threat to the
security of their doctrine. (They love to apply the term "cult"
to any movement outside the mainstream, such as "New
Age".) In such a distorted world as theirs, the power and
influence given to this "Satan" is used for control by using
Satan's own best tools: doubt and fear. Indeed, this grotesquely borderlines
"Demons" have little real power over us; they have only as much power
over your life as you are willing to give them. Our very belief and
glorification of them creates their existence. Yet some imagine "Satan"
as some sort of hyper-potent entity, an ultra-cunning, omnipresent
being almost equal to God in power, running around with horns and
pitchfork, causing all the problems of the world.
That kind of "Satan"
simply does not exist outside of misread ancient writings, popularized
by overactive religious imagination. It is mythology blown out of
proportion: a symbolic representation of our darker, mortal selves.
And if such a being existed, he's long since been under the chains
of Hell. This is not to say that there are not negative and dark forces,
or disincarnate spirits, because there are, yet they are not nearly
this powerful; if one has a true connection to God and the light,
they cannot harm one. They certainly do not have the potency many
attribute to them.
What kind of entity would enjoy doing such a thing for all eternity?
What kind of God would permit it? Or disallow such an entity from
ever reascending? If you are one who refuses to believe this kind
of "Satan" does not exist, then why don't you help Daniel
in destroying him, by not thinking about him, and replacing him with
the light and love of God? The devil does exist, but not in the way
many are taught. It is symbolic mythology representative of the darker
side of human nature. It is as simple as that.
This may seem like heresy to some Christians, and I will be criticized
for it, but just like Jesus two millennia ago, where the Word and
Spirit of Truth became flesh, so it has through 21st-century Daniel.
I've actually become the Truth, Light and the Life. Before one gets
incredulous and indignant at such a proposition, let's explain.
The qualifications for being (in my case becoming) an incarnated angel do not
necessitate taking courses in theology or extensive literal knowledge
of the Scriptures or the Bible and details contained therein or belonging
to any faith or religion of any kind, because the Truth and Word as
it was meant to be has become ingrained in the mind, body, soul and
thought pattern through salvation by aligning to divine will by conquering
Self, purifying the heart and mind.
One may be an expert on the stories and minute details of the Bible
and can quote ad infinitum in strings and twist them into what may
seem like an emotionally appealing argument on the surface, but this
is actually intellectual (and spiritual) dishonesty. Some tend to
read the Bible ONLY, at the expense of all else, thereby limiting
their perspective of divine reality.
In other words, Daniel need not
read the Bible or other scriptures to expand spiritual awareness/consciousness,
but merely for the educational knowledge necessary to effectively
deal with critics in writings and arguments. The Bible is neither
Daniel's final authority nor object of worship, but the Most High
God and visions received from God are his authority and therefore
take precedent, for they are effectively a continuation of scriptures.
An analogy to the above topic is someone who would enroll in a school
course in "learning how to walk" when he is five years old,
then this same five-year-old turns around and says to a three-year-old
who has already mastered walking, attaining the highest level, saving
"I can walk better than you!"
"Why do you say that?" the three-year-old would respond.
"Because I learned every nuance about walking, I've studied
it and read all about it for months! And there's only one way to do
it right, and only I can tell you how to walk properly, and if you
don't accept my way, you shall certainly trip and kill yourself. This
book I've read on the subject is infallible ... and I can show how
to be saved from tripping and falling, and you must 'accept the author
of the book as your savior'! If only you follow its every word to
a T! And only this book."
The three-year-old has already mastered the truth of how to walk,
and already knows that he has saved himself from tripping and killing
himself, because it is naturally ingrained into his being and thought
process, and he has become a master of the Way through independent
effort. In attempting to show his adversary the truth of discovering
how to walk and save himself from tripping, without the requirement
of doctrinal study, and how incredibly simple yet necessarily effortful
it is, he will thenceforth be persecuted and treated condescendingly
by his elder adversary, who tells the three-year-old he's condemned
to die, even though the five-year-old should clearly be capable of
recognizing his mastery over walking ability.
In this situation, the three-year-old, seeing the five-year-old's
staunch resistance to change, and inability to see the light, will
shake his head, and move on to find the lost, and show them that they
can save themselves, through themselves, with some effort and turmoil,
and he will point out that the scriptures teaching the finer points
in walking are important and invaluable, and quite handy to refer
to from time to time.
And there you have Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, Daniel, and the various
teachers and masters of days gone by represented by the three-year-old.
Can you believe I still am approached by evangelists saying I have
to "accept Jesus as my savior, otherwise go to Hell," even
among some who know I'm an angel?
The current canonical Christian Bible is not the "only"
Bible and does not comprise the WHOLE truth (no one book can). While
it may form a complete picture in that it has a beginning and end,
truth cannot be restricted to it alone.
The Bible (as well as Daniel's
writings) should not be read literally, but through the process of
seeking self-evident, eternal truths, done prayerfully, not treating
it as the "inerrant word of God." Yet spiritual truths are
very difficult to understand in words, language being an inefficient
means of communication, subject to misinterpretation, based on the
reader's spiritual development, mood, and personality, and the influence
of cultural biases.
There are a million different ways people interpret scriptures, which
explains the hundreds upon hundreds of different sects; there are
38,000 different christian denominations worlwide, most nased on the
bible only. God did not write the Bible. Inspired humans did, and
humans are imperfect. God is not limited to the Bible, and did not
stop revealing 2000 years ago, or in the case of Islam, later. God
is constantly showing His existence, and the Near-Death
Experience (NDE) is one of the most conventional, modern forms
that God manifests. God is revealing through Daniel (however imperfect
the filter) as you read these words; this book is written by an incarnate
ANGEL OF GOD.
Thankfully, Daniel has had limited religious bias which
can poison the word, and has eliminated most cultural, religious and
personal biases, allowing as much divine truth as possible to shine
Simply because certain topics that have come to light in the modern
age are not discussed at length in scriptures (such as NDE's, reincarnation,
UFO's, evolution and other sciences, etc.), does not mean it is "of
the devil" as some would suggest. Those who limit the omnipotent
power and abilities of God to a book or a narrow interpretation thereof,
no matter how great that book or interpretation, are creating a false
idol to be worshiped.
The Bible is also NOT one book, but 66 separate books written over
centuries. To perceive scriptures in such a manner implies writings
from manuscripts such as Luke, John or Matthew – many written
more than an entire generation or two after Jesus' ministry, and from
word-of-mouth-sources – are somehow the "absolute word
of God." Much of the New Testament, as well as the formation
of the early church, originated from Christ-oppressor-turned-apostle
Paul. Is it in any way rational or intellectually honest to presume
that Paul's personal letters to the churches, such as Corinthians,
Romans etc., be taken as God's infallible word, simply because "it's
in the Bible?" Should we take literally Paul's comments that
women should remain silent in churches, because it's "in the
Paul was human, and obviously had his own cultural influences
and brand of (then considered new age) mysticism, and Paul was not
omniscient. Nor was John or Peter or Mark. In fact, in one of his letters to the early Churches, Paul actually admits that he was a "liar for the lord."
If you wish to completely
ignore Daniel's words, that of an actual angel of God at the end of
days, and instead worship 2000-year old letters written to Churches
by Paul, you are free to do so, as nobody is forcing you to believe
anything, but you are limiting truth.
Should we put to death anyone who works on a Sabbath (Saturday/Sunday)
as is commanded in Exodus 31, because Moses said so to the ancient
"... Six days shall work be done, but the seventh is a Sabbath
day of solemn rest, holy to the Lord; whoever does any work on the
Sabbath day shall die ..." Moses (Exodus)
Am I obligated to kill myself because my employer schedules me to
work Sunday evenings? Am I divinely obligated to visit every 24-hour
convenience store and start shooting all the employees on duty because
"it's in the Bible?" Doesn't the commandment "Thou
shalt not kill" seem contradictory in this case?
laws thereof are strewn throughout the Old Testament. In the past
slaveholders have certainly used the Bible to justify such actions.
Does this mean it is right or holy to own and trade in slaves? Or
According to the Bible, pork, ham and bacon are not to be eaten,
because they are "unclean." Does it make me any less holy
if I eat pig's meat? Why is pork any less holy than beef or chicken?
The answer is that it is not. Now, from a health standpoint, pork
IS unclean in relation to other meats because it disproportionately
contains saturated fat, which clogs arteries and induces cancer and
other ills; it is also a carrier of certain parasites. So in this
sense, such Kosher food laws often do make sense from a nutritional
standpoint, but are not indicative of "holiness."
Should I sacrifice and burn a prime steer in my backyard on an altar
as a sacrifice, sin-offering, because the odor thereof is "pleasing
to the Lord?" (These were actually pagan rituals adopted by Moses.)
What would my neighbors make of such a situation?
The broader teachings of Jesus and the New Testament – which
were actually highly spiritual and metaphysical – can make perfect
sense only when read from an unbiased, metaphysical, figurative, spiritual
and not literal standpoint.
The phrase "I am the way, truth and
the life, no one come to the Father but by me," for instance,
actually means Jesus found the keys to salvation and conquered death,
where the carnal body is no longer a hindrance to free expression
of the soul, and attained perfect alignment to divine will, and His
life pattern is something to be led and copied by man as an example,
a Way out and ascension: unconditional love made manifest. The phrase
may also imply he is also the Rescuer (Savior) from hellish realms many
people experience as the Light in NDE's: "No one come to the
Father except through the Son" ... "But I, when I am lifted
up from the earth, will draw ALL men to myself." (John 12:32)
Yet this can also be interpreted (as it is nowadays) to imply that
one must take a superficial oath and declare "I accept Jesus
as my Savior" as the "only means to salvation" to avoid
being thrown in Hell as so many evangelistic preachers suggest, often
with more out-of-context quotes.
Example: "... Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt
be saved, and thy house." (Acts 16:31) Saved from what? An angry
God, or Satan? Or is it faith and belief in the Pattern, or Way of
Jesus which is Christ-consciousness? Believe what, exactly? That Jesus
was born, lived in the flesh and died? Of course Jesus was and did.
Or do we believe in the Way – the pattern He lived and taught
–as an example for all men to attain through Christ-consciousness,
as the 'only' way to salvation? What am I supposed to be "believing"
in this case? See how this can get confusing? Of course, every fundamentalist
is right now jumping up screaming, "I know! I know! Our doctrine
I'm sure you do.
Daniel has also become the Way, as did Buddha, and many other Masters
most never heard of. They all have equal authority in proclaiming
"No one goes back to the Father but by ME." For they have
become the Pattern; the fulfillment of the Law or Mosaic Torah, and
are "in Christ." It is what Jesus meant with the phrase,
"Do you think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." (NIV) It
is the fulfillment of all the mystery religions as the apex to which
we all must ascend.
Jesus demonstrated this fallacy of how literally his disciples, when
condemning the fundamentalists of his day, responded to the phrase
"'...Watch out, and beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and
Sadducees.' They said to one another, 'It is because we have brought
no bread.' And becoming aware of it, Jesus said, 'You of little faith,
why are you talking about having no bread? ... How could you fail
to perceive that I was not talking about bread?’ ... Then they
understood he had not told them to beware of the yeast of bread, but
of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees." (Matthew 16)
So beware the yeast of the fundamentalists, Daniel's Satan of darkness,
who will attempt to throw truth to the ground under the guise of light.
Some of the above may sound quite harsh, and full of rhetoric, and
sarcastic, but it should be noted that this is how many use the power
of persuasion to limit expansive and enlightening viewpoints to protect
outmoded but dominant belief systems.
This site is non-for-profit and free to read. To help with costs, click here to visit the donations page!