Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

[rudemonk]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

franksterr, you are raising some good points and I wish I could spend the time I feel they require. Rather than rush through and simply look as though I am being argumentative, let me simply put one thing forth that struck me form your reply (and I want to watch the whole video series you posted lol):

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">monk




<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Consider, Mesopotamia was long held to be the cradle of civilization, then China, now Africa...so just consider for a moment if it were NOT African, or even (as I think something developing concurrently and somewhat independently at least possibly) would that then rob Egyptian myths of their relevance and importance, or diminish their contribution towards fowarding our understanding and interpretations of the communal archetypal well from which we all need to draw water from?</div></div>

<span style="font-weight: bold">If Africans are considered the first or originators now, should we not celebrate it while the world agrees?</span>

</div></div>

part of the problem which people who have faced cultural robbery is they feel a need and a want to replace what was lost and to 'reconnect' so to speak. I feel this is or can be exploitive if not fully investigated. Would it be ironic if Haggin traced his roots back to a conquered nation absorbed into the Egyptian hegemony.

This happened actually to an aunt of mine who swore up and down she was of scottish descent. Eventually she discovered she was actually Irish during a search for her roots.

This desire for connectivity happens on many levels and to many different degrees and we see it's power for both good and for bad- it is why 46% of otherwise completely rational intelligent people will believe in the collected writings gathered into a book whose original language none of them speak, over the hard concrete facts of scientific discovery that prove man and ape share common ancestry. So I think it is very common to people in general. As social animals who belong to large groups, it's understandable.

But the spiritual process that results in the actual point, is internal and individual, and surpasses the localized entry point to the equation- that is what I have not seen in Hagin's work. Yet?

It is a bit like Santa Claus. Everything is great while you believe the myth and people work and do their utmost to keep the soft lie going. When the truth comes out, suddenly it's not so good.

Hagins seems to stake a lot on Egypt and his mythic interpretations. I'll be honest, the video where he referenced the ancestor orbs is seriously troubling to me.

That is stated from my current perspective, being however ignorant of his greater work.

I speak here for myself- I would rather have never believed in Santa and don't agree with sugar pills.

I feel we must be honest, even if that is brutal. Otherwise, our homes are built on sand. The truth is actually that all culture is illusory and responsive to conditions, and is simply a fabrication. While some manifestations of culture have propelled us forward as a human race, other manifestations have caused much damage. Mayans may have developed advanced astronomical equations and observations, but they still killed people for make believe gods. For example. And great heaps of culture are built on developing divisive identity with a collective to which others are seen not to belong to.

What would happen if tomorrow some tomb were uncovered and incontrovertible proof it was Yashua's emerged.

It may never happen, but one has to admit it is plausible- setting aside the argument as to how plausible. What then, for Hagin. Well of course he would abandon the argument of never existing, and simply stake out a position against divinity.

Anyway, personally, I feel that Africa's (and other previous title holders) contributions to the world's heritage are exemplary and don't require justification outside of their own merits.

If human value is inherent, self evident, and intrinsic, you will see as I do the evil of pride. That's really what I am getting at.

[franksterr]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

monk

<span style="font-weight: bold">If Africans are considered the first or originators now, should we not celebrate it while the world agrees?</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

part of the problem which people who have faced cultural robbery is they feel a need and a want to replace what was lost and to 'reconnect' so to speak. I feel this is or can be exploitive if not fully investigated. Would it be ironic if Haggin traced his roots back to a conquered nation absorbed into the Egyptian hegemony.</div></div>

Robbed of the TRUTH, we need the TRUTH to live.
It is already exploitive, in its current form.
But isn’t it always the case wherein ones ancestor have been both the conquerors and the conquered, at some point in time?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This happened actually to an aunt of mine who swore up and down she was of scottish descent. Eventually she discovered she was actually Irish during a search for her roots.</div></div>
And should continue the search, as more information comes in she may find her Scottish or other roots.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This desire for connectivity happens on many levels and to many different degrees and we see it's power for both good and for bad- it is why 46% of otherwise completely rational intelligent people will believe in the collected writings gathered into a book whose original language none of them speak, over the hard concrete facts of scientific discovery that prove man and ape share common ancestry. So I think it is very common to people in general. As social animals who belong to large groups, it's understandable.</div></div>

The desire for “connectivity” is human spiritual and evolutionary. The desire for connectivity is Good - it is Universal.
The language of the pyramid (hieroglyphics’) is and has never been dead, and has been in continuous use to this day though not unchanged.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But the spiritual process that results in the actual point, is internal and individual, and surpasses the localized entry point to the equation- that is what I have not seen in Hagin's work. Yet?</div></div>

To get there one MUST use the “localized entry point” – you can only be where you are..
To recognize and appreciate the “localized entry point” – one must be made aware of what to do and look for.
The “spiritual process” is common to all and is shared by all but experienced on an individual level – it is both internal and external.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is a bit like Santa Claus. Everything is great while you believe the myth and people work and do their utmost to keep the soft lie going. When the truth comes out, suddenly it's not so good</div></div>.

Hagin is bringing the “truth”.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hagins seems to stake a lot on Egypt and his mythic interpretations. I'll be honest, the video where he referenced the ancestor orbs is seriously troubling to me.</div></div>

Please reference it so I may see, of what he speaks?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is stated from my current perspective, being however ignorant of his greater work</div></div>

Duly noted…. hence my reason for responding. Our sharing will enhance both our understanding of the man, his message, and the issues.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I speak here for myself- I would rather have never believed in Santa and don't agree with sugar pills.</div></div>

There are lesson to be learned from Myths and lies – The Power of Ideas.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I feel we must be honest, even if that is brutal.</div></div>
Many sees Hagins “brutal honesty” as a form of racism…… do you?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Otherwise, our homes are built on sand. The truth is actually that all culture is illusory and responsive to conditions, and is simply a fabrication. While some manifestations of culture have propelled us forward as a human race, other manifestations have caused much damage</div></div>

Aspects of culture are “illusory” not all of it.
“responsive to conditions. fabrication” yes.
The “manifestation” it takes depends on the Ideas(myths and lies) it holds


.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Mayans may have developed advanced astronomical equations and observations, but they still killed people for make believe gods. For example. And great heaps of culture are built on developing divisive identity with a collective to which others are seen not to belong to.</div></div>

Is it better or really different if they do it for Money?
If a small group is being oppresses by a larger group, it is in the immediate interest of the small group and the longer term interest of the larger group to change that cultural idea.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What would happen if tomorrow some tomb were uncovered and incontrovertible proof it was Yashua's emerged It may never happen, but one has to admit it is plausible- setting aside the argument as to how plausible. What then, for Hagin. Well of course he would abandon the argument of never existing, and simply stake out a position against divinity.</div></div>

It would not have been the first time in human history that that had happen


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyway, personally, I feel that Africa's (and other previous title holders) contributions to the world's heritage are exemplary and don't require justification outside of their own merits.</div></div>

Neither I nor Hagin has went outside of Africa's merit.
The Justifcation is the righting of a wrong, in which deliberate lies where propagated to set up Myths about a people in an attempt to rob them of their identity, value and part.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If human value is inherent, self evident, and intrinsic, you will see as I do the evil of pride. That's really what I am getting at. </div></div>
Yes “inherent and intrinsic” but lies can be used to hide that from perception of many…..It is only self-evident when you know what you are looking at

[rudemonk]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Robbed of the TRUTH, we need the TRUTH to live.
It is already exploitive, in its current form.
But isn’t it always the case wherein ones ancestor have been both the conquerors and the conquered, at some point in time?</div></div>

Yes man, but *which* truth and by whose standards? That is where local expressions stem the steps to the macro understanding. It is just like the saying, point a finger at the moon, some will see only the finger- that is the truth of the finger- but that is not the ultimate goal.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This happened actually to an aunt of mine who swore up and down she was of scottish descent. Eventually she discovered she was actually Irish during a search for her roots.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And should continue the search, as more information comes in she may find her Scottish or other roots.</div></div>

Yes man but the thing is if you had heard her going on about Irish people, and how her identity and connection was shaped...it was false.

And if she were to one day find that Scottish blood, what then? Would she then again feel justification for being &quot;Scottish.&quot; It is her own mind which has allowed these definitions to be defined, either by herself or what others have told her. She is still dealing with the conditioned mind.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This desire for connectivity happens on many levels and to many different degrees and we see it's power for both good and for bad- it is why 46% of otherwise completely rational intelligent people will believe in the collected writings gathered into a book whose original language none of them speak, over the hard concrete facts of scientific discovery that prove man and ape share common ancestry. So I think it is very common to people in general. As social animals who belong to large groups, it's understandable.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The desire for “connectivity” is human spiritual and evolutionary. The desire for connectivity is Good - it is Universal.</div></div>

no man I would say it depends on the causes and the arising of the connectivity- for example the social experiment the Wave, or Lord of the Flies.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The language of the pyramid (hieroglyphics’) is and has never been dead, and has been in continuous use to this day though not unchanged.
</div></div>

rather we should say the universal language of which the pyramid is an expression...for example we can say things in Greek, Latin, Bantu. The pyramid is one dialect.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But the spiritual process that results in the actual point, is internal and individual, and surpasses the localized entry point to the equation- that is what I have not seen in Hagin's work. Yet?</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To get there one MUST use the “localized entry point” – you can only be where you are..
To recognize and appreciate the “localized entry point” – one must be made aware of what to do and look for.
The “spiritual process” is common to all and is shared by all but experienced on an individual level – it is both internal and external.

</div></div>

EXACTLY! But...at what point to do you lead? Or create a business based on localized entry points. Are you not then honor bound at least to explain the local transient nature of the local entry, as something which must be transcended? You see the problem here is that pride and investing in such to re-map an cultural identity is actually a hindrance to transcending dualistic interpretations. We see this expressed in the world's spiritual teachings again and again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is a bit like Santa Claus. Everything is great while you believe the myth and people work and do their utmost to keep the soft lie going. When the truth comes out, suddenly it's not so good</div></div>.
[/quote]
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Hagin is bringing the “truth”.
</div></div>

it is what he hopes is the truth to the extant to which it can be known- and what he chooses to connect with. In the video I am watching now which you cited to, we see for example that this knowledge was esoteric and insular as kept and maintained by the Ancient Egyptians. There were people in that day who were locked off from it's benefits. How do we or Hagin know he would have been an initiate? Odds seem to favor if born in that time that he would not. Maybe Hagin would have been forced to suicide for the revelation of this kind of knowledge by the very people he has pedestaled. all this simply to say we must have a care as to what we invest ourselves in, because once the masses have their opiate...for many the game is over.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hagins seems to stake a lot on Egypt and his mythic interpretations. I'll be honest, the video where he referenced the ancestor orbs is seriously troubling to me.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Please reference it so I may see, of what he speaks?
</div></div>

I would have to find it, and I'll look once I finish watching the series of the vid you linked.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is stated from my current perspective, being however ignorant of his greater work</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Duly noted…. hence my reason for responding. Our sharing will enhance both our understanding of the man, his message, and the issues.
</div></div>

_/\_

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I speak here for myself- I would rather have never believed in Santa and don't agree with sugar pills.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
There are lesson to be learned from Myths and lies – The Power of Ideas.
</div></div>

Without question, and I would never argue otherwise- BUT, we don't want to, as Campbell once said, we wouldn't go to a steak house, see filet mignon on the menu, and then start chewing up the piece of paper on which filet mignon is printed and think we are eating steak.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I feel we must be honest, even if that is brutal.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Many sees Hagins “brutal honesty” as a form of racism…… do you?
</div></div>

this seems too generic for a serious answer. there are many ways to lie.

to clarify my meaning, I will refer back to Santa. Would being brutally honest to children be perceived as being mean, for example? Yes at first. But it would also be freedom. And it would be a boon to the zillions of children who lives can not possibly fit the scheme of the myth.

For example- each culture determines it's own origin myth. Rare it is to find a culture that does not place itself in the center of creation. Recognizing this, we can see this is the first separation. There are now, &quot;us&quot; and there are now &quot;them.&quot; And on this simple equation, we can see the iniquities of humanity perpetrated against each other on the great scale- meaning peoples against peoples and not simply referring to the ability we also have to 'other' our immediate neighbors lol. This is a classic mythic response to the problem of limited resources, and life consuming life, the Face of Glory or Ouroboros. If you create the other, you have your defense and coping mechanism for why you must kill them to gain food.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Mayans may have developed advanced astronomical equations and observations, but they still killed people for make believe gods. For example. And great heaps of culture are built on developing divisive identity with a collective to which others are seen not to belong to.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Is it better or really different if they do it for Money?
If a small group is being oppresses by a larger group, it is in the immediate interest of the small group and the longer term interest of the larger group to change that cultural idea.
</div></div>

but you would agree with me, would you not, that people tend to settle in. that is why we have such a maxim as religion is the opiate of the masses.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If human value is inherent, self evident, and intrinsic, you will see as I do the evil of pride. That's really what I am getting at. </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Yes “inherent and intrinsic” but lies can be used to hide that from perception of many…..It is only self-evident when you know what you are looking at
</div></div>

my point exactly. now what is the best path? substitution of one doorway with another? simply showing people the other door to the cultural exclusion of other doors?

This is the question I am asking. I think it would be more meritorious to understand the function of the doors as a predicate to entering through them. In this way, one can quickly ascertain, with the discipline of the mind, when people are sitting at table and eating menus.

[franksterr]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

monk

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes man, but *which* truth and by whose standards? That is where local expressions stem the steps to the macro understanding. It is just like the saying, point a finger at the moon, some will see only the finger- that is the truth of the finger- but that is not the ultimate goal. </div></div>

Is there more than one truth? -The message and the messengers.
The standard is Integrity.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Yes man but the thing is if you had heard her going on about Irish people, and how her identity and connection was shaped...it was false.

And if she were to one day find that Scottish blood, what then? Would she then again feel justification for being &quot;Scottish.&quot; It is her own mind which has allowed these definitions to be defined, either by herself or what others have told her. She is still dealing with the conditioned mind.</div></div>

The point I am making is that as with all science the more information you get the more the picture or ideas change as the become more fully understood.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no man I would say it depends on the causes and the arising of the connectivity- for example the social experiment the Wave, or Lord of the Flies.</div></div>

explain further?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
rather we should say the universal language of which the pyramid is an expression...for example we can say things in Greek, Latin, Bantu. The pyramid is one dialect.</div></div>

The science that they use to construct the pyramid maybe considered universal. But the language of the people of Egypt is not - it is Afrikan.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
EXACTLY! But...at what point to do you lead? Or create a business based on localized entry points. Are you not then honor bound at least to explain the local transient nature of the local entry, as something which must be transcended? You see the problem here is that pride and investing in such to re-map an cultural identity is actually a hindrance to transcending dualistic interpretations. We see this expressed in the world's spiritual teachings again and again.</div></div>

If you give the people the truth, the answer will be known and realized within the lessons.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">it is what he hopes is the truth to the extant to which it can be known- and what he chooses to connect with.</div></div>

Is that not the case with all of us?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In the video I am watching now which you cited to, we see for example that this knowledge was esoteric and insular as kept and maintained by the Ancient Egyptians. There were people in that day who were locked off from it's benefits. How do we or Hagin know he would have been an initiate? Odds seem to favor if born in that time that he would not. Maybe Hagin would have been forced to suicide for the revelation of this kind of knowledge by the very people he has pedestaled. all this simply to say we must have a care as to what we invest ourselves in, because once the masses have their opiate...for many the game is over.</div></div>

The knowledge is public, and all are welcome whom have the necessary prerequisites. It is found in many cultures all over Afrika in this Egypt is not alone



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would have to find it, and I'll look once I finish watching the series of the vid you linked.</div></div>

thanks in advance.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Without question, and I would never argue otherwise- BUT, we don't want to, as Campbell once said, we wouldn't go to a steak house, see filet mignon on the menu, and then start chewing up the piece of paper on which filet mignon is printed and think we are eating steak.</div></div>

That would only mean we do not know or recognize what we are looking at.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic">I feel we must be honest, even if that is brutal....

....Many sees Hagins “brutal honesty” as a form of racism…… do you?</span>


this seems too generic for a serious answer. there are many ways to lie.</div></div>

What I am saying is that his &quot;brutal honesty&quot; is seen by many as a form of racism...and to be more to the point this maybe the reason why you are having a problem with him.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to clarify my meaning, I will refer back to Santa. Would being brutally honest to children be perceived as being mean, for example? Yes at first. But it would also be freedom. And it would be a boon to the zillions of children who lives can not possibly fit the scheme of the myth.</div></div>

TRUE...not totally sure what you mean by &quot;boon&quot;.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For example- each culture determines it's own origin myth. Rare it is to find a culture that does not place itself in the center of creation. Recognizing this, we can see this is the first separation. There are now, &quot;us&quot; and there are now &quot;them.&quot; And on this simple equation, we can see the iniquities of humanity perpetrated against each other on the great scale- meaning peoples against peoples and not simply referring to the ability we also have to 'other' our immediate neighbors lol. This is a classic mythic response to the problem of limited resources, and life consuming life, the Face of Glory or Ouroboros. If you create the other, you have your defense and coping mechanism for why you must kill them to gain food.</div></div>

The Power of Ideas, The dominating ideas in any group of people dictates and circumscribes how they behave in total.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but you would agree with me, would you not, that people tend to settle in. that is why we have such a maxim as religion is the opiate of the masses.</div></div>

YES....Some settle, some are forced, some are only too willing.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my point exactly. now what is the best path? substitution of one doorway with another? simply showing people the other door to the cultural exclusion of other doors?</div></div>

Give people the TRUTH.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is the question I am asking. I think it would be more meritorious to understand the function of the doors as a predicate to entering through them. In this way, one can quickly ascertain, with the discipline of the mind, when people are sitting at table and eating menus. </div></div>

That is what Hagin is doing.

[rudemonk]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes man, but *which* truth and by whose standards? That is where local expressions stem the steps to the macro understanding. It is just like the saying, point a finger at the moon, some will see only the finger- that is the truth of the finger- but that is not the ultimate goal. </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Is there more than one truth? -The message and the messengers.
The standard is Integrity.</div></div>

Not exactly more than one truth...this is Pilate's epic question.

If integrity is truly the standard, than one would not condone white lies, soft lies, fibs or partial stories, nor would they substitute one fabrication for another....or would they?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Yes man but the thing is if you had heard her going on about Irish people, and how her identity and connection was shaped...it was false.

And if she were to one day find that Scottish blood, what then? Would she then again feel justification for being &quot;Scottish.&quot; It is her own mind which has allowed these definitions to be defined, either by herself or what others have told her. She is still dealing with the conditioned mind.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The point I am making is that as with all science the more information you get the more the picture or ideas change as the become more fully understood.
</div></div>

I agree with that completely. I am simply suggesting that one should not begin to stake out absolutes which may prove damaging to the point of staking out the absolute...scientific method is beautifully self correcting.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no man I would say it depends on the causes and the arising of the connectivity- for example the social experiment the Wave, or Lord of the Flies.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
explain further?</div></div>

The Wave was an experiment in group think. It is how a group can invent a mythology to the point where it no longer matters what the origin of the mythology actually is...and how this mythology (or culture) can effect it's constituents, not always to their benefit. Culture often times creates the 'other' as a defense mechanism for the existence of evil and for example the securing of limited resources, such as food.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
rather we should say the universal language of which the pyramid is an expression...for example we can say things in Greek, Latin, Bantu. The pyramid is one dialect.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The science that they use to construct the pyramid maybe considered universal. But the language of the people of Egypt is not - it is Afrikan.
</div></div>

now continue...if all we do is look at the finger pointing to the moon...we miss the glory of heaven.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In the video I am watching now which you cited to, we see for example that this knowledge was esoteric and insular as kept and maintained by the Ancient Egyptians. There were people in that day who were locked off from it's benefits. How do we or Hagin know he would have been an initiate? Odds seem to favor if born in that time that he would not. Maybe Hagin would have been forced to suicide for the revelation of this kind of knowledge by the very people he has pedestaled. all this simply to say we must have a care as to what we invest ourselves in, because once the masses have their opiate...for many the game is over.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The knowledge is public, and all are welcome whom have the necessary prerequisites. It is found in many cultures all over Afrika in this Egypt is not alone </div></div>

well now it is well known- sacred geometry is discovered through observation and for that one needs leisure....but the thing is that the egyptians did not reveal these things to the general public- this &quot;magic&quot; was kept secret and exclusive. This is why when we see people claim archetypes, as Hagins sometimes does, as their own...it's a little silly. Of course some concepts are noticeably borrowed. Other concepts are easily traced. Like the number 432,000.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would have to find it, and I'll look once I finish watching the series of the vid you linked.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
thanks in advance.
</div></div>

I mean he is making a lot of ignorant statements in this piece.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nf5VnDUs94c"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nf5VnDUs94c" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic">I feel we must be honest, even if that is brutal....</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
....Many sees Hagins “brutal honesty” as a form of racism…… do you?</span>
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
this seems too generic for a serious answer. there are many ways to lie.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
What I am saying is that his &quot;brutal honesty&quot; is seen by many as a form of racism...and to be more to the point this maybe the reason why you are having a problem with him.</div></div>

I think my problem, such as it is, has been succinctly stated (and shown) as his scholarship and use of soft lies in place of other soft lies. If Hagin is 'racist' (which means he dislikes Martians? lol) I'm not his judge, I'm not that familiar with him and certainly don't pretend to know if he is prejudiced against one group of people or not. I do think he is sometimes off his mark when attributing prejudice to certain observations he makes- such as when he claims that the reason why pictures can not be taken of artifacts or murals or frescoes is because an amorphous 'they' does not want what he calls 'evidence' to come out. I mean, all this art is incredibly well documented. There is absolutely no reason and in fact provable harm in having every tom dick or harry with a flash cam snapping away the exact same imagery which is a matter of easily accessible record. While it is obvious certain scholastic or academic groups propagated agendas through their scholarship, it's as we said, self correcting in the sense that their is peer review.

You yourself have said that Hagins is not exactly the first to come out with some of the previous errors...

I've also noticed that so far, and again I'm admitting it is only minimal, but I haven't yet heard Hagins mention any previous researcher whose material he is presenting, or what sources he cites publicly.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to clarify my meaning, I will refer back to Santa. Would being brutally honest to children be perceived as being mean, for example? Yes at first. But it would also be freedom. And it would be a boon to the zillions of children who lives can not possibly fit the scheme of the myth.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
TRUE...not totally sure what you mean by &quot;boon&quot;.
</div></div>

A boon is a blessing, benefit, or favor granted which causes great good.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For example- each culture determines it's own origin myth. Rare it is to find a culture that does not place itself in the center of creation. Recognizing this, we can see this is the first separation. There are now, &quot;us&quot; and there are now &quot;them.&quot; And on this simple equation, we can see the iniquities of humanity perpetrated against each other on the great scale- meaning peoples against peoples and not simply referring to the ability we also have to 'other' our immediate neighbors lol. This is a classic mythic response to the problem of limited resources, and life consuming life, the Face of Glory or Ouroboros. If you create the other, you have your defense and coping mechanism for why you must kill them to gain food.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The Power of Ideas, The dominating ideas in any group of people dictates and circumscribes how they behave in total.
</div></div>

That's right, and you will see that most groups define this code of behaviour in terms of us and them...and that is actually one of the big concepts the duality of which transcendental spiritual systems seek to demolish, and why that process often instigates long periods of ascetic isolation and a turning inwards.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but you would agree with me, would you not, that people tend to settle in. that is why we have such a maxim as religion is the opiate of the masses.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
YES....Some settle, some are forced, some are only too willing.
</div></div>

Right...which is why I would not get all lathered up over Egyptian mythology per se as if it were 'mine,' if I were of localized african descent, beyond what it meant archetypally as an expression of that universal language. It is being presented as a sort of replacement more than one modality of understanding of this archetypal legacy- in my view. In fact, at one time it may have been forced down people's throats the same way as colonial christianity- since Egypt was definitely a state which prosecuted wars and invasions, ironic seeing as how Yashua's lineage cites to African ancestry. Which is why I think Hagin's position begs a question- what if his ancestry points to a link with people who were subsumed into Egypt's orthodox presentation of these archetypes, or from one of the peoples from whom Egyptians 'stole' their myths. That's possible.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my point exactly. now what is the best path? substitution of one doorway with another? simply showing people the other door to the cultural exclusion of other doors?</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Give people the TRUTH.
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is the question I am asking. I think it would be more meritorious to understand the function of the doors as a predicate to entering through them. In this way, one can quickly ascertain, with the discipline of the mind, when people are sitting at table and eating menus. </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
That is what Hagin is doing. </div></div>

well....I think I am of a different opinion. I think of, say, Diop, and his research and presentation of is a lot more credible from what I have seen so far. It may seem like I am splitting hairs, but the differences to me are significant.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IufD0A4GnP0"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IufD0A4GnP0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

although I don't think it is accurate to say modern europeans 'evolved' from Africans as if they are a new species, it's a mutation (skin color) which still allows sharing genetic material and are not different beyond appearance.

[franksterr]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

monk


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Not exactly more than one truth...this is Pilate's epic question.

If integrity is truly the standard, than one would not condone white lies, soft lies, fibs or partial stories, nor would they substitute one fabrication for another....or would they?</div></div>

The Truth is the Truth and there is only one TRUTH but many perspectives.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I agree with that completely. I am simply suggesting that one should not begin to stake out absolutes which may prove damaging to the point of staking out the absolute...scientific method is beautifully self correcting.</div></div>

There is Only One Absolute I know of.....which I have yet to speak of..NO I was not staking out absolutes.
It is the nature of science to be self-correcting...in nature it is called Growth.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Wave was an experiment in group think. It is how a group can invent a mythology to the point where it no longer matters what the origin of the mythology actually is...and how this mythology (or culture) can effect it's constituents, not always to their benefit. Culture often times creates the 'other' as a defense mechanism for the existence of evil and for example the securing of limited resources, such as food.</div></div>

The Origin MUST matter!
No one denies its effect, then how can you denial the causal chain from the origin.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">now continue...if all we do is look at the finger pointing to the moon...we miss the glory of heaven.</div></div>

If so above so below be true, then if we look with care and diligence we will find the beauty and majesty of the glory of heaven.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well now it is well known- sacred geometry is discovered through observation and for that one needs leisure....but the thing is that the egyptians did not reveal these things to the general public- this &quot;magic&quot; was kept secret and exclusive. This is why when we see people claim archetypes, as Hagins sometimes does, as their own...it's a little silly. Of course some concepts are noticeably borrowed. Other concepts are easily traced. Like the number 432,000.</div></div>

There was no secrecy beyond the fact the physics and chemistry is secret to those who never study them.
The Knowledge was their for those who fulfilled the requirements...Just like today if do not live in a society that affords you some sort of a public education, then most people will not be educate, except those who can afford to pay for private education.

What do you mean by archetype?
What Hagin is claiming is the Afrikanness and Afrikan contribution to the Christian Mythos that his audition for the most part were never aware of and that as far as we know, though some still dispute this...it is the birth place of these now universal archetypes, legends and mythology stories that dominate the western mans mind today.




<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I mean he is making a lot of ignorant statements in this piece.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nf5VnDUs94c"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nf5VnDUs94c" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object> </div></div>

.[/quote]


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think my problem, such as it is, has been succinctly stated (and shown) as his scholarship and use of soft lies in place of other soft lies. If Hagin is 'racist' (which means he dislikes Martians? lol) I'm not his judge, I'm not that familiar with him and certainly don't pretend to know if he is prejudiced against one group of people or not. I do think he is sometimes off his mark when attributing prejudice to certain observations he makes- such as when he claims that the reason why pictures can not be taken of artifacts or murals or frescoes is because an amorphous 'they' does not want what he calls 'evidence' to come out.</div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">That &quot;amorphous they&quot; as you put it,are those within the power structure of European civilization that supports and perpetuate a racist agenda who has for hundred of yrs propagated this falsity as trut</span>h...That was used to rob an oppressed people of their history and culture.
Hagin peddles no soft or otherwise lies?
It has been true for hundred of yrs that historical things that are Afrikan has been hidden and true place in history lied about....and this is very likely still the case???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I mean, all this art is incredibly well documented. There is absolutely no reason and in fact provable harm in having every tom dick or harry with a flash cam snapping away the exact same imagery which is a matter of easily accessible record. While it is obvious certain scholastic or academic groups propagated agendas through their scholarship, it's as we said, self correcting in the sense that their is peer review.</div></div>

Why Not? they have stood the test of time!

Hagins actions and video is part of the peer review process.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You yourself have said that Hagins is not exactly the first to come out with some of the previous errors...

I've also noticed that so far, and again I'm admitting it is only minimal, but I haven't yet heard Hagins mention any previous researcher whose material he is presenting, or what sources he cites publicly.</div></div>

I think I have heard him give credit...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to clarify my meaning, I will refer back to Santa. Would being brutally honest to children be perceived as being mean, for example? Yes at first. But it would also be freedom. And it would be a boon to the zillions of children who lives can not possibly fit the scheme of the myth.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
TRUE...not totally sure what you mean by &quot;boon&quot;.
</div></div>

A boon is a blessing, benefit, or favor granted which causes great good.[/quote]

Are you then saying that the idea and lies surround Santa are not beneficial to children, adults, parents, and western culture?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For example- each culture determines it's own origin myth. Rare it is to find a culture that does not place itself in the center of creation.</div></div>

Rare yes.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Recognizing this, we can see this is the first separation. There are now, &quot;us&quot; and there are now &quot;them.&quot; And on this simple equation, we can see the iniquities of humanity perpetrated against each other on the great scale- meaning peoples against peoples and not simply referring to the ability we also have to 'other' our immediate neighbors lol. This is a classic mythic response to the problem of limited resources, and life consuming life, the Face of Glory or Ouroboros. If you create the other, you have your defense and coping mechanism for why you must kill them to gain food.</div></div>
Most southern Afrikan cultures where not xenophopic..they became so after contact with Europeans


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's right, and you will see that most groups define this code of behaviour in terms of us and them...and that is actually one of the big concepts the duality of which transcendental spiritual systems seek to demolish, and why that process often instigates long periods of ascetic isolation and a turning inwards.</div></div>

That is not true, but is one of the many lies taught by Colonial Imperialism.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Right...which is why I would not get all lathered up over Egyptian mythology per se as if it were 'mine,' if I were of localized african descent, beyond what it meant archetypally as an expression of that universal language. It is being presented as a sort of replacement more than one modality of understanding of this archetypal legacy- in my view.</div></div>

it is both a modality and a replacement.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In fact, at one time it may have been forced down people's throats the same way as colonial christianity- since Egypt was definitely a state which prosecuted wars and invasions, ironic seeing as how Yashua's lineage cites to African ancestry. Which is why I think Hagin's position begs a question- what if his ancestry points to a link with people who were subsumed into Egypt's orthodox presentation of these archetypes, or from one of the peoples from whom Egyptians 'stole' their myths. That's possible.</div></div>

everything is possible, but the facts as they are known today points to afrika.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
well....I think I am of a different opinion. I think of, say, Diop, and his research and presentation of is a lot more credible from what I have seen so far. It may seem like I am splitting hairs, but the differences to me are significant.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IufD0A4GnP0"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IufD0A4GnP0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object> </div></div>

As i said Diop is one of his teachers, and Hagins message must fit those for whom it is intended

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">although I don't think it is accurate to say modern europeans 'evolved' from Africans as if they are a new species, it's a mutation (skin color) which still allows sharing genetic material and are not different beyond appearance.
</div></div>

Just some more &quot;brutal honesty&quot;

As for the orbs, no one knows what they are and the hagins makes a speculation... who knows Egyptian magic talks of thought forms that exist as guardians of the temples and pyramid.,

[rudemonk]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

frankster I am enjoying this discussion so I hope we can keep it going despite the clunky nature of this format. I'm sure if we were sitting down we would see quickly there is more on which we are agreeing than not.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">monk

</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">____________________________________________ _____________</span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Not exactly more than one truth...this is Pilate's epic question.

If integrity is truly the standard, than one would not condone white lies, soft lies, fibs or partial stories, nor would they substitute one fabrication for another....or would they?</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Truth is the Truth and there is only one TRUTH but many perspectives.

</div></div>

and so the messenger must be seen and studied very carefully, because many sell snake oil, the messenger MUST be vetted. that is after all, how we have inherited this chicanery in the first place isn't it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It is the nature of science to be self-correcting...in nature it is called Growth.
</div></div>

Yes, but in nature, growth is not cognizant of itself. Nature also can grow things which are not always beneficial or self correcting to the benefit of the organism. For example, nature has caused humans to be of different intelligences. Some take advantage of that disparity, to the ill effect of those lesser than they...if what you say is true of nature, that it always improves, then this trait would lessen over time. we have tons of examples where a genetic mutation has been passed down that is not an improvement at all- that is one of the major arguments which Arguments from Design must account for.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Wave was an experiment in group think. It is how a group can invent a mythology to the point where it no longer matters what the origin of the mythology actually is...and how this mythology (or culture) can effect it's constituents, not always to their benefit. Culture often times creates the 'other' as a defense mechanism for the existence of evil and for example the securing of limited resources, such as food.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The Origin MUST matter!
No one denies its effect, then how can you denial the causal chain from the origin.</div></div>

yes...origin certainly matters...the causal chain is important. I use the wave as an example of how origin can be muddled by cultural tools to purpose- and my point is that purpose has an agenda. All cultures create an &quot;other.&quot; That is why they produce a mythological system, to deal with certain realities of life. It is why we are able to have war, and to kill for food. Cultures function at that level explicitly as identity for groups. Sometimes and in fact very often this other is the scapegoat for the purpose of the commission of sins of survival. I don't see how that can be contested as history throughout the world is resplete with such examples and this can quickly be seen once you study any comparative mythology or sociology.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">now continue...if all we do is look at the finger pointing to the moon...we miss the glory of heaven.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If so above so below be true, then if we look with care and diligence we will find the beauty and majesty of the glory of heaven.</div></div>

so why keep looking at the finger, why hide the fact that the finger is supposed to point. when is Hagin going to spill the full hundred. Has he? I would like to see if you could save me some time of reviewing all his materials.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well now it is well known- sacred geometry is discovered through observation and for that one needs leisure....but the thing is that the egyptians did not reveal these things to the general public- this &quot;magic&quot; was kept secret and exclusive. This is why when we see people claim archetypes, as Hagins sometimes does, as their own...it's a little silly. Of course some concepts are noticeably borrowed. Other concepts are easily traced. Like the number 432,000.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
There was no secrecy beyond the fact the physics and chemistry is secret to those who never study them.</div></div>

That has not been the claim set forth- the claim in one of the videos quoted several sources that spoke of being worthy, having to prove oneself, priestly classes, etc. The implication that Moses was such an inheritor of esoteric knowledge is clear- the implication is he used Egyptian secrets he learned as a member of this secret society to fool ignorants. I think that makes sense, to be honest, because the whole of Genesis is kind of silly, when analyzed outside of a religious tradition of indoctrination in its belief.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The Knowledge was their for those who fulfilled the requirements...Just like today if do not live in a society that affords you some sort of a public education, then most people will not be educate, except those who can afford to pay for private education.</div></div>

but again, this is not the claim. this knowledge was not for the general public. I mean there is certainly precedent for this. Ruling classes and priestly classes have always used knowledge as means of control.

this is one of the things I really like about the Buddha, as he correctly stated the dharma is self evident and self manifest. there are millions of buddhas for millions of different people and in fact everyone is a buddha. Yashua teaches something very much the same but it has been fuggeried into what we have now.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
What do you mean by archetype?</div></div>
Archetype- an archetype is a mechanism or representation of some intrinsic intuitive understanding- it helps deal with ineffables and points to questions which transcend culture and speak directly to human existence. Like Gods of Thunder. A god of Thunder speaks to an archetypal need to understand and explain why there is thunder. So while all Gods of Thunder are locally individual or related, they all speak to the original idea of there being a reason why it is Thundering. People who have had no contact with one another will often develop similar systems of explanation, for example one can easily and categorically match up many polytheistic mythologies and make accurate comparisons between deities and their roles, because of their very nature they begin to take on certain aspects. Sometimes these archetypes come from observation- for example I cited the number 432, you will find that countless mythological systems incorporate this number, much like they also incorporate discoveries or observations of sacred geometry. Some of these discoveries shall we say are certainly transmitted culture to culture, but not always.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
What Hagin is claiming is the Afrikanness and Afrikan contribution to the Christian Mythos that his audition for the most part were never aware of and that as far as we know, though some still dispute this...it is the birth place of these now universal archetypes, legends and mythology stories that dominate the western mans mind today.</div></div>

Well...that is somewhat misleading...and that is why I say it is a &quot;soft&quot; lie. It *may* be true, and it may not. Obviously not all of the Judeao Christian mythology owes ancestry to one source, any more so than Egyptian mythology was developed in isolation...one can make the case that many aspects of the mythology are actually self manifesting once people have the leisure to think of their existence. That is why there is sooooo much commonality.

For another example of what I mean, Diop makes the case that the Jews were egyptianized, and were African. So then Hagin seems a little overblown by stating that the Jews stole their religion from Egyptians. Correct me if I am wrong- I'm starting into Diop's materials now. Like I said, I much prefer his presentation and work.




<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I mean he is making a lot of ignorant statements in this piece.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nf5VnDUs94c"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nf5VnDUs94c" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object> </div></div>

.[/quote]


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think my problem, such as it is, has been succinctly stated (and shown) as his scholarship and use of soft lies in place of other soft lies. If Hagin is 'racist' (which means he dislikes Martians? lol) I'm not his judge, I'm not that familiar with him and certainly don't pretend to know if he is prejudiced against one group of people or not. I do think he is sometimes off his mark when attributing prejudice to certain observations he makes- such as when he claims that the reason why pictures can not be taken of artifacts or murals or frescoes is because an amorphous 'they' does not want what he calls 'evidence' to come out.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="color: #FF0000">That &quot;amorphous they&quot; as you put it,are those within the power structure of European civilization that supports and perpetuate a racist agenda who has for hundred of yrs propagated this falsity as trut</span>h...That was used to rob an oppressed people of their history and culture.</div></div>

Yes. but that is *probably* not the reason why pictures are no longer allowed. image degradation of ancient art through picture taking is a proven phenomena. You can not go and take pictures in Lascaux for example, if you try it in some art museums you can be the recipient of a flying tackle.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hagin peddles no soft or otherwise lies?
It has been true for hundred of yrs that historical things that are Afrikan has been hidden and true place in history lied about....and this is very likely still the case???</div></div>

this puts me in the position of sort of kind of denying that this robbery and obfuscation has taken place on a systemic scale and that is not my purpose. It is my purpose however to suggest that Hagin needs to be more careful so as to present the MOST accurate information and this is where I find him falling short of the mark for reasons noted. this is a practice of all conquering people, and Egyptians were caught doing it too, when you examine certain of their treaties or records of battles and wins, their side presents a difference of opinion shall we say, from the others. That's why I am saying it may possibly be ironic if it comes to light that perhaps Hagin descends from one of the cultures the Egyptians swallowed and re translated and stole ideas from.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I mean, all this art is incredibly well documented. There is absolutely no reason and in fact provable harm in having every tom dick or harry with a flash cam snapping away the exact same imagery which is a matter of easily accessible record. While it is obvious certain scholastic or academic groups propagated agendas through their scholarship, it's as we said, self correcting in the sense that their is peer review.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Why Not? they have stood the test of time!
</div></div>

yes...but not the exposure to modern technology.

many items we have were never exposed as they are now. we are actually lucky that so much is available for the public to see. Some neolithic cave art has been attacked by the introduction to the cave environment of mold spores brought in by viewers, for example. There is tons of material just google search it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Hagins actions and video is part of the peer review process.
</div></div>

No, that is not peer review. Not peer review at all. That is how there can be 46% of the american public believe in a fairy tale and not evolution. Diop was peer reviewed. He submitted his work to bodies of his peers. Hagins creates videos which are sold to the public. I have not found one article which he has had published in an academic journal, or a debate in which his ideas or findings are submitted or challenged, outside of these public examples.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You yourself have said that Hagins is not exactly the first to come out with some of the previous errors...

I've also noticed that so far, and again I'm admitting it is only minimal, but I haven't yet heard Hagins mention any previous researcher whose material he is presenting, or what sources he cites publicly.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I think I have heard him give credit...
</div></div>

well that may be, but mostly he presents this information like he is the discoverer. pretty much everything in his first series was known- perhaps not to his public audience and that I do not find surprising because I believe in general academia does a horrible job at presenting and disseminating findings.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to clarify my meaning, I will refer back to Santa. Would being brutally honest to children be perceived as being mean, for example? Yes at first. But it would also be freedom. And it would be a boon to the zillions of children who lives can not possibly fit the scheme of the myth.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
TRUE...not totally sure what you mean by &quot;boon&quot;.
</div></div>

A boon is a blessing, benefit, or favor granted which causes great good.[/quote]
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Are you then saying that the idea and lies surround Santa are not beneficial to children, adults, parents, and western culture?</div></div>

well they clearly benefit the retail world. they do not benefit good poor children who have to be told another lie as to why Santa missed them.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For example- each culture determines it's own origin myth. Rare it is to find a culture that does not place itself in the center of creation.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Rare yes.
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Recognizing this, we can see this is the first separation. There are now, &quot;us&quot; and there are now &quot;them.&quot; And on this simple equation, we can see the iniquities of humanity perpetrated against each other on the great scale- meaning peoples against peoples and not simply referring to the ability we also have to 'other' our immediate neighbors lol. This is a classic mythic response to the problem of limited resources, and life consuming life, the Face of Glory or Ouroboros. If you create the other, you have your defense and coping mechanism for why you must kill them to gain food.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most southern Afrikan cultures where not xenophopic..they became so after contact with Europeans
</div></div>

no man that is not possible. that would mean there was never any migration due to war, hunger, that would mean there was never a stone arrow head or hand axe chipped out of flint on the continent, and that is not true. The &quot;other&quot; that is created by mythology is not necessarily or does not have to be created out of fear, it can simply be created as a mechanism of explanation and justification. The Jews of today lay claim to the lands which they claim not out of fear, but because their religion and their God has created for them an &quot;other.&quot;

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's right, and you will see that most groups define this code of behaviour in terms of us and them...and that is actually one of the big concepts the duality of which transcendental spiritual systems seek to demolish, and why that process often instigates long periods of ascetic isolation and a turning inwards.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
That is not true, but is one of the many lies taught by Colonial Imperialism.
</div></div>

it's definitely true, it's taught by observing ANY culture, even peaceful societies are ordered on such strata because their are jobs which people in groups MUST perform which may not be exactly ideal. there are many cultures and societies which have not been touched by colonial or imperialist powers and they all create an Other. Including the culture of the ancient Egyptians as it developed. That is clear, since they were definitely imperial in many phases of their growth.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Right...which is why I would not get all lathered up over Egyptian mythology per se as if it were 'mine,' if I were of localized african descent, beyond what it meant archetypally as an expression of that universal language. It is being presented as a sort of replacement more than one modality of understanding of this archetypal legacy- in my view.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
it is both a modality and a replacement.
</div></div>

RIGHT! As Muta might say, it's a response. Now, I agree with Hagin in the sense that a response is indeed justified and more than merited- HOWEVER, I would like to see a response that is bulletproof and actually solves the underlying issue of why there needs to be a response to begin with. I hope that makes sense.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In fact, at one time it may have been forced down people's throats the same way as colonial christianity- since Egypt was definitely a state which prosecuted wars and invasions, ironic seeing as how Yashua's lineage cites to African ancestry. Which is why I think Hagin's position begs a question- what if his ancestry points to a link with people who were subsumed into Egypt's orthodox presentation of these archetypes, or from one of the peoples from whom Egyptians 'stole' their myths. That's possible.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
everything is possible, but the facts as they are known today points to afrika.
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
well....I think I am of a different opinion. I think of, say, Diop, and his research and presentation of is a lot more credible from what I have seen so far. It may seem like I am splitting hairs, but the differences to me are significant.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IufD0A4GnP0"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IufD0A4GnP0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object> </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
As i said Diop is one of his teachers, and Hagins message must fit those for whom it is intended</div></div>

are you saying that Hagins learned directly from Diop? Or that he familiarized himself with his materials? Because I don't think anyone could view the two on the same level. Diop clearly outstrips Hagin.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">although I don't think it is accurate to say modern europeans 'evolved' from Africans as if they are a new species, it's a mutation (skin color) which still allows sharing genetic material and are not different beyond appearance.
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Just some more &quot;brutal honesty&quot;
</div></div>

YES! It sure is lol. I have to say the public debate on these issues completely occludes the real information and I stopped enjoying reading all the white supremacists getting all lathered over the reclamation of Egypt lmao. They really get themselves out of sort.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
As for the orbs, no one knows what they are and the hagins makes a speculation... who knows Egyptian magic talks of thought forms that exist as guardians of the temples and pyramid., </div></div>

no man, there too I disagree- orbs have indeed been shown as to what they are, in fact we had a thread about it, and the experiment was actually carried out by a paranormal group who would have loved nothing more than to have proven their supernatural origin.

this is sort of what I mean though- frankster my friend, I think you would agree with me that if the orbs are as you say temple guardians, they have done one preciously lousy job of it....

[rudemonk]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

further to defining archetypes:

sorry it is wikipedia:

<span style="font-weight: bold">Archetypes are, according to Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, innate universal psychic dispositions that form the substrate from which the basic themes of human life emerge. Each stage is mediated through a new set of archetypal imperatives which seek fulfillment in action. These may include being parented, initiation, courtship, marriage and preparation for death.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 Introduction
2 Chronology
3 Origins
4 Examples and conceptual difficulties
5 Actualisation and complexes
6 Psychoid archetype
7 Parallels and developments
7.1 General developments
7.2 Archetypal pedagogy
7.3 Archetypes and psychology
8 The Value of the Archetype
9 Articles on specific archetypes
10 See also
11 Notes
12 References
[edit]Introduction

Virtually alone among the depth psychologists of the twentieth century, Jung rejected the tabula rasa theory of human psychological development, believing instead that evolutionary pressures have individual predestinations. We must therefore, think of these images as lacking in solid content, hence as unconscious. They only acquire solidity, influence, and eventual consciousness in the encounter with empirical facts.&quot;[2]}}
The archetypes form a dynamic substratum common to all humanity, upon the foundation of which each individual builds his own experience of life, developing a unique array of psychological characteristics. Thus, while archetypes themselves may be conceived as a relative few innate nebulous forms, from these may arise innumerable images, symbols and patterns of behavior. While the emerging images and forms are apprehended consciously, the archetypes which inform them are elementary structures which are unconscious and impossible to apprehend. Being unconscious, the existence of archetypes can only be deduced indirectly by examining behavior, images, art, myths, etc. They are inherited potentials which are actualized when they enter consciousness as images or manifest in behavior on interaction with the outside world.
The archetype is a crucial Jungian concept. Its significance to analytical psychology has been likened to that of gravity for Newtonian physics.[3]</span>

why this is so important, is that the mythological <span style="font-style: italic">other</span> which I am referring to, is a necessary construct of the conscious mind- the ego. it is in the unconscious mind, the meditative state which removes the ego, in which all spiritual systems, when seen for what they are, seek to invoke. The reason WHY they all seek and succeed or fail at the entering into, or stopping the world as the australian aboriginals conceived the term, is because it is in the subconscious and the unconscious where communication comes to us from the 'outside' in other words, not generated from our 'self.' this well spring is the kingdom of heaven or the extinguishing of the dualistic comprehension of the world, where we are anchored to the divine connection between all creation. we do not 'control' per se the subconscious or the unconscious mind. the 'per se' is important.

[franksterr]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

monk

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">frankster I am enjoying this discussion so I hope we can keep it going despite the clunky nature of this format. I'm sure if we were sitting down we would see quickly there is more on which we are agreeing than not.</div></div>
So am I.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally Posted By: frankster
The Truth is the Truth and there is only one TRUTH but many perspectives.


and so the messenger must be seen and studied very carefully, because many sell snake oil, the messenger MUST be vetted. that is after all, how we have inherited this chicanery in the first place isn't it.</div></div>
If the information is TRUTH and WHOLE then the messenger is not all that important.
No this “chicanery” was put in place by brute force and on pain of death.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is the nature of science to be self-correcting...in nature it is called Growth.


Yes, but in nature, growth is not cognizant of itself.</div></div>
How so? Are you not cognizant of growth?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nature also can grow things which are not always beneficial or self correcting to the benefit of the organism.</div></div>
Nature is about Life… all things are beneficial.
The lion feds on the hapless fawn and to us it smacks of cruelty…We in turn eat the chicken…it is the Nature of Life
In short what is and is not beneficial is myopic and personal to your present state and condition.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For example, nature has caused humans to be of different intelligences. Some take advantage of that disparity, to the ill effect of those lesser than they..</div></div>
Variety and individuality is express in the extent to which we explore our potentialities. We all have potential to be that which we aspire to.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">if what you say is true of nature, that it always improves, then this trait would lessen over time. we have tons of examples where a genetic mutation has been passed down that is not an improvement at all- that is one of the major arguments which Arguments from Design must account for.</div></div>
I don’t recall saying that but …..Name such a trait?
It maybe a corollary.
There are always exceptions.
There was a time when doctors thought the tonsils (after a certain age) was useless….. and they still do about the appendix at any age.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes...origin certainly matters...the causal chain is important. I use the wave as an example of how origin can be muddled by cultural tools to purpose- and my point is that purpose has an agenda.</div></div>
Sure that’s the Power of Ideas, used by Cultural Imperialist to usurp the natural use of popular myths to foster dysfunctions or to gain control of the popular imagination.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All cultures create an &quot;other.&quot; That is why they produce a mythological system, to deal with certain realities of life. It is why we are able to have war, and to kill for food.[quote]
Yes
[quote]Cultures function at that level explicitly as identity for groups. Sometimes and in fact very often this other is the scapegoat for the purpose of the commission of sins of survival. I don't see how that can be contested as history throughout the world is resplete with such examples and this can quickly be seen once you study any comparative mythology or sociology.</div></div>
Historians speaks of warlike cultures and peace loving ones….Now because the warlike cultures are in dominance does not mean the are more intelligent or smarter.
Peaceful cultures tend to be subsumed within war like one….and so are often over looked.
The Arawaks, the Polynesians, Tibetans and Aborigines* where not known as warlike people.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so why keep looking at the finger, why hide the fact that the finger is supposed to point. when is Hagin going to spill the full hundred. Has he? I would like to see if you could save me some time of reviewing all his materials.</div></div>
You can not really be expecting him to spill the full hundred in a 10’ video clip?
If one cannot understand the importance of a single pointing finger…the how do you expect to appreciate the canopy of heaven?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That has not been the claim set forth- the claim in one of the videos quoted several sources that spoke of being worthy, having to prove oneself, priestly classes, etc. The implication that Moses was such an inheritor of esoteric knowledge is clear- the implication is he used Egyptian secrets he learned as a member of this secret society to fool ignorants. I think that makes sense, to be honest, because the whole of Genesis is kind of silly, when analyzed outside of a religious tradition of indoctrination in its belief.</div></div>

Do you have to prove yourself worthy in order to get into Harvard or Oxford?
To people who have never been to school, would not all knowledge there rightly be considered esoteric?
The only secret society was the secret society of the learned.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but again, this is not the claim. this knowledge was not for the general public. I mean there is certainly precedent for this. Ruling classes and priestly classes have always used knowledge as means of control.</div></div>

And they still do.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">this is one of the things I really like about the Buddha, as he correctly stated the dharma is self evident and self manifest. there are millions of buddhas for millions of different people and in fact everyone is a buddha. Yashua teaches something very much the same but it has been fuggeried into what we have now.</div></div>
Self-evident when you know what to look for
Self-manfest when you have acquired or release the ability to do so.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What Hagin is claiming is the Afrikanness and Afrikan contribution to the Christian Mythos that his audition for the most part were never aware of and that as far as we know, though some still dispute this...it is the birth place of these now universal archetypes, legends and mythology stories that dominate the western mans mind today.


Well...that is somewhat misleading...and that is why I say it is a &quot;soft&quot; lie. It *may* be true, and it may not. Obviously not all of the Judeao Christian mythology owes ancestry to one source, any more so than Egyptian mythology was developed in isolation...one can make the case that many aspects of the mythology are actually self manifesting once people have the leisure to think of their existence. That is why there is sooooo much commonality.</div></div>
I do not think he is claiming that all of Christian mythology owes it origin to Egypt, but what is important to Him he has demonstrated does…That not a lie in any way.
Egypt is not isolated, but so far it has the earliest known form to most of these Myth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For another example of what I mean, Diop makes the case that the Jews were egyptianized, and were African. So then Hagin seems a little overblown by stating that the Jews stole their religion from Egyptians. Correct me if I am wrong- I'm starting into Diop's materials now. Like I said, I much prefer his presentation and work.</div></div>
They are both right, one is just being “brutally honest”


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes. but that is *probably* not the reason why pictures are no longer allowed. image degradation of ancient art through picture taking is a proven phenomena. You can not go and take pictures in Lascaux for example, if you try it in some art museums you can be the recipient of a flying tackle.</div></div>
I have heard that one before…..but usually with regards to paintings, rock drawings and such….but not stone.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">this puts me in the position of sort of kind of denying that this robbery and obfuscation has taken place on a systemic scale and that is not my purpose.</div></div>
Did it or didn’t it occur?
Is it still occurring?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is my purpose however to suggest that Hagin needs to be more careful so as to present the MOST accurate information and this is where I find him falling short of the mark for reasons noted.</div></div>
His information is the TRUTH, your call for more accuracy is really a call for a soft approach.. whilst he is being brutal.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> this is a practice of all conquering people, and Egyptians were caught doing it too, when you examine certain of their treaties or records of battles and wins, their side presents a difference of opinion shall we say, from the others. That's why I am saying it may possibly be ironic if it comes to light that perhaps Hagin descends from one of the cultures the Egyptians swallowed and re translated and stole ideas from.[quote]
Hagin is not a conqueror.
The difference may be one of Perspective.



[quote]yes...but not the exposure to modern technology.

many items we have were never exposed as they are now. we are actually lucky that so much is available for the public to see. Some neolithic cave art has been attacked by the introduction to the cave environment of mold spores brought in by viewers, for example. There is tons of material just google search it.</div></div>

All the more reason why it should be perfectly safe.
Yes some is public, not all.
And when information is only in the hands of institutions, or under their control then they can manipulate, obfuscate and misinformed.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, that is not peer review. Not peer review at all. That is how there can be 46% of the american public believe in a fairy tale and not evolution. Diop was peer reviewed. He submitted his work to bodies of his peers. Hagins creates videos which are sold to the public. I have not found one article which he has had published in an academic journal, or a debate in which his ideas or findings are submitted or challenged, outside of these public examples.</div></div>

I am sure his peers has seen them and made their comments known to him and the public. His work has cause you I and dahjah to be discussing this info. You maybe looking for a review in the Harvard journal, that will come perhaps in the near future, but this is the process that may bring it to the attention of the journal.
Originally Posted By: monk
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You yourself have said that Hagins is not exactly the first to come out with some of the previous errors...</div></div>

I did not say that!



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well that may be, but mostly he presents this information like he is the discoverer. pretty much everything in his first series was known- perhaps not to his public audience and that I do not find surprising because I believe in general academia does a horrible job at presenting and disseminating findings.</div></div>

The information is New to Hagins audience, and there is no need at the point to give credit beyond that it is having to do with the bible.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well they clearly benefit the retail world. they do not benefit good poor children who have to be told another lie as to why Santa missed them.</div></div>

How important is retail profits to capitalism?
Those who Santa miss learns that poverty is a sin(bad) and one hopes they strive to get out.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most southern Afrikan cultures where not xenophopic..they became so after contact with Europeans


no man that is not possible. that would mean there was never any migration due to war, hunger, that would mean there was never a stone arrow head or hand axe chipped out of flint on the continent, and that is not true. The &quot;other&quot; that is created by mythology is not necessarily or does not have to be created out of fear, it can simply be created as a mechanism of explanation and justification. The Jews of today lay claim to the lands which they claim not out of fear, but because their religion and their God has created for them an &quot;other.&quot;</div></div>
Those could mean tools for hunting, tilling and clearing land not wars, this does not means wars where absent, just that the people were not warlike.
Originally Posted By: monk
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's right, and you will see that most groups define this code of behaviour in terms of us and them...and that is actually one of the big concepts the duality of which transcendental spiritual systems seek to demolish, and why that process often instigates long periods of ascetic isolation and a turning inwards.

Originally Posted By: frankster

That is not true, but is one of the many lies taught by Colonial Imperialism.


it's definitely true, it's taught by observing ANY culture, even peaceful societies are ordered on such strata because their are jobs which people in groups MUST perform which may not be exactly ideal. there are many cultures and societies which have not been touched by colonial or imperialist powers and they all create an Other. Including the culture of the ancient Egyptians as it developed. That is clear, since they were definitely imperial in many phases of their growth.</div></div>
Again this is not true and is a lie of imperialism – Ubantu philosophy of Afrikan civilizations shows that not all peoples think or act like that.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">RIGHT! As Muta might say, it's a response. Now, I agree with Hagin in the sense that a response is indeed justified and more than merited- HOWEVER, I would like to see a response that is bulletproof and actually solves the underlying issue of why there needs to be a response to begin with. I hope that makes sense.</div></div>
Not really


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well....I think I am of a different opinion. I think of, say, Diop, and his research and presentation of is a lot more credible from what I have seen so far. It may seem like I am splitting hairs, but the differences to me are significant.</div></div>

Diop is a professor, Hagin is a preacher…why are you expecting a preacher to behave or speak or reason like a professor?




<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">are you saying that Hagins learned directly from Diop? Or that he familiarized himself with his materials? Because I don't think anyone could view the two on the same level. Diop clearly outstrips Hagin.</div></div>
Diop and Sertima have been saying these things from the late 60s- early70s, Hagins immediate teacher is Ashra Kwesi.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">YES! It sure is lol. I have to say the public debate on these issues completely occludes the real information and I stopped enjoying reading all the white supremacists getting all lathered over the reclamation of Egypt lmao. They really get themselves out of sort.</div></div>
They haven’t a ground to stand on – Egypt is Afrikan.
Originally Posted By: frankster


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no man, there too I disagree- orbs have indeed been shown as to what they are, in fact we had a thread about it, and the experiment was actually carried out by a paranormal group who would have loved nothing more than to have proven their supernatural origin.</div></div>

What are they?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">this is sort of what I mean though- frankster my friend, I think you would agree with me that if the orbs are as you say temple guardians, they have done one preciously lousy job of it....</div></div>

REALLY show me something in Europe that is manmade and has stood for 6000yrs many of them unmaintained?

[franksterr]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

h?v=xcctkyJbhlg&amp;feature=relatedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAHv2nuga4k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJblT1mQT4&amp;NR=1

http://sciencestage.com/v/6393/the-black-man-must-wake-up,-part-4-dr.-yosef-ben-jochannan.html

http://www.youtube.com/watc

[rudemonk]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: franksterr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
So am I.
</div></div>
cool...after reading through some of what passes for 'debate' on human origins of civilization, just wanted to say that lest our words have meaning imputed to them which we do not intend.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If the information is TRUTH and WHOLE then the messenger is not all that important.
No this “chicanery” was put in place by brute force and on pain of death.
</div></div>

yes my friend, <span style="font-style: italic">but</span>...here we begin to see what Pilate was getting at. There is truth which is established to support doctrine and control- the 'truth' which you refer to which is brought by the sword...as yet we do not have 'whole' truths, especially not when it comes to our origins. That is a body of knowledge which is constantly growing. For example, nobody knows that what we call chinese people or white people or arab people did not evolve IN africa and move from there. I was just reading a sheaf of papers which present strong evidence for the entirety of humanity as we have it today to an african population of no more than 2,000 people. We were almost wiped out. From this genetic pool all of us descend.

And that is the problem with men like Hagin. They're essentially self governing and self serving in their interest- like many...their growth is stunted when they reach a conclusion which suits them. They are not peer reviewed, they are reviewed as it were, by the masses of people whom they influence, just like Michael Behe.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Yes, but in nature, growth is not cognizant of itself.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How so? Are you not cognizant of growth?
</div></div>

Of course- what I mean is that what guides evolutionary processes is not always conscious. Take for example pea plant breeding, or dog breeding. There is a conscious decision. When people seek out mates with attributes they are hard wired to look for- that is a mixture of conscious decision making and instinct. But when we look at crystals growing, that is not a conscious growth- that is a function of the nature of crystals, without which there could be no life.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nature also can grow things which are not always beneficial or self correcting to the benefit of the organism.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Nature is about Life… all things are beneficial.
The lion feds on the hapless fawn and to us it smacks of cruelty…We in turn eat the chicken…it is the Nature of Life
In short what is and is not beneficial is myopic and personal to your present state and condition.</div></div>

That's very Ch'an, invokes the ouroborus or the Face of Glory, and in essence I agree with you and would like to here also suggest this is a prime causal of creating mythological systems. It would also be Ch'an to then force suffering on you lol to also make you viscerally understand the flip side, which is that suffering sucks. Nobody likes to get beat with a stick. The fawn kicks and struggles and does not accept it's death happily. In one sense all we have is our myopic view.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">if what you say is true of nature, that it always improves, then this trait would lessen over time. we have tons of examples where a genetic mutation has been passed down that is not an improvement at all- that is one of the major arguments which Arguments from Design must account for.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I don’t recall saying that but …..Name such a trait?
It maybe a corollary.
There are always exceptions.
There was a time when doctors thought the tonsils (after a certain age) was useless….. and they still do about the appendix at any age.
</div></div>

yes exactly what I mean- some other inherited traits which are relatively poor things to pass on to your progeny would be susceptibility to disease like sickle cell, the way we eat and breathe, our spines, GE calls it planned obsolescence- they could build a washing machine that can last 10,000 years, but they would put themselves out of business so they build machines with a known life span. we have managed to increase our life span- in many societies- beyond what nature would normally allow.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Historians speaks of warlike cultures and peace loving ones….Now because the warlike cultures are in dominance does not mean the are more intelligent or smarter.</div></div>

agree completely, in fact in some examples I can think of, peaceful cultures were more 'advanced' so to speak, than many warlike. human nature being what it is, it sucks sometimes.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so why keep looking at the finger, why hide the fact that the finger is supposed to point. when is Hagin going to spill the full hundred. Has he? I would like to see if you could save me some time of reviewing all his materials.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can not really be expecting him to spill the full hundred in a 10’ video clip?</div></div>

I would like a hint of it my friend. He has dozens of vids by now...he is brutally honest after all...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If one cannot understand the importance of a single pointing finger…the how do you expect to appreciate the canopy of heaven?
</div></div>

This makes his audience seem rather poorly equipped than they are...now more than ever before technology has allowed for the ease of the dissemination of information. After one series explaining the purpose of the finger- to carry on the analogy- it is a moot point to continue lecturing on the same subject when it is now a matter of record.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That has not been the claim set forth- the claim in one of the videos quoted several sources that spoke of being worthy, having to prove oneself, priestly classes, etc. The implication that Moses was such an inheritor of esoteric knowledge is clear- the implication is he used Egyptian secrets he learned as a member of this secret society to fool ignorants. I think that makes sense, to be honest, because the whole of Genesis is kind of silly, when analyzed outside of a religious tradition of indoctrination in its belief.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Do you have to prove yourself worthy in order to get into Harvard or Oxford?</div></div>

Yes, to get into. But I do not need to attend Oxford or Harvard to benefit from them. Again, their findings or their advances or their body of work is a matter of public record. Anyone can go to the lectures, the symposiums, can access the research or the papers published.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
To people who have never been to school, would not all knowledge there rightly be considered esoteric?
The only secret society was the secret society of the learned.
</div></div>

depends on how that knowledge is transmitted or packaged. in the case of the ancient world it was often an admixture of spiritual mumbo jumbo.

the average citizen of the world today has incredible resources available to him for self education...much knowledge is public domain.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but again, this is not the claim. this knowledge was not for the general public. I mean there is certainly precedent for this. Ruling classes and priestly classes have always used knowledge as means of control.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
And they still do.
</div></div>

yes my friend, they still do, but their ability to do so is growing weaker!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">this is one of the things I really like about the Buddha, as he correctly stated the dharma is self evident and self manifest. there are millions of buddhas for millions of different people and in fact everyone is a buddha. Yashua teaches something very much the same but it has been fuggeried into what we have now.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Self-evident when you know what to look for
Self-manfest when you have acquired or release the ability to do so.
</div></div>

Self-evident on observation! I know a tree gains sustenance from soil. It won't grow from being in a cup of water. Now I know it is soil. I see the degredation of matter on top of the soil leach nutrients below the surface because trees or plants with this degrading biological material grow better. I myself will one day degrade and feed what makes me back to the universe. I eat the fruit of the tree, and so participate in this exchange. From this, the connectivity of the self with everything around it is evident. All this requires is time for observation. A guide or teacher may bring results quicker, but this can be and has in fact been, the kernal of independent yet convergent spiritual inquiry through many many cultures.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For another example of what I mean, Diop makes the case that the Jews were egyptianized, and were African. So then Hagin seems a little overblown by stating that the Jews stole their religion from Egyptians. Correct me if I am wrong- I'm starting into Diop's materials now. Like I said, I much prefer his presentation and work.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They are both right, one is just being “brutally honest”</div></div> They can't both positions be right. If you read what they say carefully, Diop presents them as Africans. Moses was African. That is basically a civil split. Hagins paints an extraordinarily different picture that one falsifies the other *if true*. Hagins position-correct me if I am wrong- is that whites stole the religion from the ancient egyptians and then proceeded to whitewash history as documented, although he is getting a little carried away as also shown.




<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">this puts me in the position of sort of kind of denying that this robbery and obfuscation has taken place on a systemic scale and that is not my purpose.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did it or didn’t it occur?
Is it still occurring?
</div></div>

yes clearly. but that is my point. <span style="font-style: italic">clearly</span>. it's a mind job if you allow ego to be the mechanism from which justice is sought for. but the way through is the middle path, and the light of reason, the self correction innate in the rigourous application of the scientific method.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is my purpose however to suggest that Hagin needs to be more careful so as to present the MOST accurate information and this is where I find him falling short of the mark for reasons noted.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">His information is the TRUTH, your call for more accuracy is really a call for a soft approach.. whilst he is being brutal.</div></div>

No man, he's not being truthful. He's mixing truths with half truths and his presentation is based on a 'hopefully I'm right about this until I'm not, and then I can still claim to be right because nobody reviews me but the public so I can get away with it' series of videos and writings. He's not being fully brutally honest to his constituents, he's only showing them a little.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> this is a practice of all conquering people, and Egyptians were caught doing it too, when you examine certain of their treaties or records of battles and wins, their side presents a difference of opinion shall we say, from the others. That's why I am saying it may possibly be ironic if it comes to light that perhaps Hagin descends from one of the cultures the Egyptians swallowed and re translated and stole ideas from.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hagin is not a conqueror.
The difference may be one of Perspective.
</div></div>

yes, to the victor goes the spoils- but it is again, the rigorous application of the scientific method which reveals the effects and interpretations of data.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I am sure his peers has seen them and made their comments known to him and the public. His work has cause you I and dahjah to be discussing this info. You maybe looking for a review in the Harvard journal, that will come perhaps in the near future, but this is the process that may bring it to the attention of the journal.
</div></div>

I won't hold my breath to be honest lol.


Originally Posted By: monk
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You yourself have said that Hagins is not exactly the first to come out with some of the previous errors...</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I did not say that!
</div></div>

yes, what I mean is you stated that diop was someone from whom hagins learned from. meaning diop was one of the first to start documenting some of the errors in egyptology that had become mainstreamed.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well they clearly benefit the retail world. they do not benefit good poor children who have to be told another lie as to why Santa missed them.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
How important is retail profits to capitalism?
Those who Santa miss learns that poverty is a sin(bad) and one hopes they strive to get out.

</div></div>

why is material wealth the mark of success or happiness? many of my monk brothers live in what many would deem to be abject, mendicant poverty as renunciates. they are all happy. capitalism is fueled by exploitation, my friend, if there is a sin in this it is the sins of capitalism which unchecked have shaped this world in which we find ourselves, where one man subjugates the next for his own personal gain and the expense of others.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most southern Afrikan cultures where not xenophopic..they became so after contact with Europeans
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
no man that is not possible. that would mean there was never any migration due to war, hunger, that would mean there was never a stone arrow head or hand axe chipped out of flint on the continent, and that is not true. The &quot;other&quot; that is created by mythology is not necessarily or does not have to be created out of fear, it can simply be created as a mechanism of explanation and justification. The Jews of today lay claim to the lands which they claim not out of fear, but because their religion and their God has created for them an &quot;other.&quot;</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those could mean tools for hunting, tilling and clearing land not wars, this does not means wars where absent, just that the people were not warlike.</div></div>

yes but we know from the archaeological record there is often a difference between tools of war and tools of other purpose and we have found both, besides we have other records, right up until the time for example of boer migration and then British, the Zulu Empire for example, predated colonial powers and from it's own accounts was a brutal regime, and there are other indicators in the oral history of the regions into which various colonial powers came into contact with, South America prime example. It wasn't Cortez, for example, who defeated the Aztecas, it was all the combined enemies whom the Aztecas had subjugated who joined Cortez who won the day.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's right, and you will see that most groups define this code of behaviour in terms of us and them...and that is actually one of the big concepts the duality of which transcendental spiritual systems seek to demolish, and why that process often instigates long periods of ascetic isolation and a turning inwards.
</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

That is not true, but is one of the many lies taught by Colonial Imperialism.

</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
it's definitely true, it's taught by observing ANY culture, even peaceful societies are ordered on such strata because their are jobs which people in groups MUST perform which may not be exactly ideal. there are many cultures and societies which have not been touched by colonial or imperialist powers and they all create an Other. Including the culture of the ancient Egyptians as it developed. That is clear, since they were definitely imperial in many phases of their growth.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Again this is not true and is a lie of imperialism – Ubantu philosophy of Afrikan civilizations shows that not all peoples think or act like that. </div></div>

We don't need ALL peoples to think one way or another- just enough people to support a view...usually these philosophies are legacies of fruitful times, but when stressors come out due to uncontrollable or unforeseen phenomena like disease or natural disaster, they are quickly subsumed by what I am talking about. The fact is that there are many examples of imperial actions taken in Africa that predate any western imperialism or propaganda and which subsume golden rule thinking. I've already cited quite a few, we know for a fact the Zulu Empire, the Egyptian, the Ethiopian...the history of Africa is resplete with examples. All we need is one example to falsify the statement or idea that war or creating dischord is a western import.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">RIGHT! As Muta might say, it's a response. Now, I agree with Hagin in the sense that a response is indeed justified and more than merited- HOWEVER, I would like to see a response that is bulletproof and actually solves the underlying issue of why there needs to be a response to begin with. I hope that makes sense.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not really
</div></div>

okay, simply, I am saying yes Diop, no Hagin, lol.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well....I think I am of a different opinion. I think of, say, Diop, and his research and presentation of is a lot more credible from what I have seen so far. It may seem like I am splitting hairs, but the differences to me are significant.</div></div>

I've seen quite a few more of his talks and read some more of his work and I am growing more and more confirmed of this.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Diop is a professor, Hagin is a preacher…why are you expecting a preacher to behave or speak or reason like a professor?
</div></div>

because he is pretending towards being a purveyor of information and the 'truth.' And people are believing what he is telling them, because they are preconditioned to accept information this way. It's what I tend to dislike about most preachers.

you don't see a difference in the quality of the information being presented between the two? it's like, yes, some people drink Yoohoo...but why when there is Quick. All hagins is doing- to me- is swapping the flavor of the kool aid. He's saying no, don't drink cherry kool aid, the original is strawberry.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">are you saying that Hagins learned directly from Diop? Or that he familiarized himself with his materials? Because I don't think anyone could view the two on the same level. Diop clearly outstrips Hagin.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Diop and Sertima have been saying these things from the late 60s- early70s, Hagins immediate teacher is Ashra Kwesi.
</div></div>

yes, I saw their having had a falling out.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no man, there too I disagree- orbs have indeed been shown as to what they are, in fact we had a thread about it, and the experiment was actually carried out by a paranormal group who would have loved nothing more than to have proven their supernatural origin.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
What are they?
</div></div>

they are digital artifacts created by the process of digital photography. but we don't even need to go there to falsify the idea of them being ancestors.

what if Hagins has his ancestry traced and is from a tribe in Southern Africa. Why would they be so overcome with joy to support him and appear in Egypt...a culture and religion his ancestors and he has no connection to? What if I went to Paris and got a picture with orbs in front of the Eiffel tower, or in the grand canyon?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">this is sort of what I mean though- frankster my friend, I think you would agree with me that if the orbs are as you say temple guardians, they have done one preciously lousy job of it....</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: frankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">REALLY show me something in Europe that is manmade and has stood for 6000yrs many of them unmaintained?</div></div>

So wait now, I just want to be clear before I choose a falsification- you are saying that the orbs perform some kind of maintenance task and that is the reason why the pyramids and such have stood the test of time and not the sheer genius of egyptian engineering?

And why must the example come from Europe? If such structures did exist there, and orbs were photographed amongst their ruins, what would that mean? If orbs protect the pyramids, why were they looted and fallen into disrepair? Why don't they allow it so Hagin can photograph what he wants, why are the ancestors powerless against these foreign usurpations throughout KMT's history.

I have a few orb photos myself, which begs the question, Why were Kemetic temple orb guardians in Pennsylvania at a kung fu seminar.

What is the earliest example of ancient architecture?



p.s. from Ted I found a talk about this project and I thought you would find this interesting! I've been on it all night.

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html

[rudemonk]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

also...did you ever notice how when people try and roll back the hands of time and imagine these ancient societies, they always see themselves as full participants in the most glorious aspect of those societies...as opposed to the more probably role (if they even do descend from these societies) of being some poor schlep who was made to haul rocks for a living. they always see themselves as the ones lounging on the rich couches entertained by dancing girls, and not the tool running back and forth to the kitchen or wine barrels lol.

[franksterr]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

Originally Posted By: franksterr

Sorry about the delay.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes my friend, but...here we begin to see what Pilate was getting at. There is truth which is established to support doctrine and control- the 'truth' which you refer to which is brought by the sword...as yet we do not have 'whole' truths, especially not when it comes to our origins. That is a body of knowledge which is constantly growing. For example, nobody knows that what we call chinese people or white people or arab people did not evolve IN africa and move from there. I was just reading a sheaf of papers which present strong evidence for the entirety of humanity as we have it today to an african population of no more than 2,000 people. We were almost wiped out. From this genetic pool all of us descend.

And that is the problem with men like Hagin. They're essentially self governing and self serving in their interest- like many...their growth is stunted when they reach a conclusion which suits them. They are not peer reviewed, they are reviewed as it were, by the masses of people whom they influence, just like Michael Behe.</div></div>

You cannot wait for all the information to be in….as in all likelihood that will never be. So you go with what you have that is most relevant, probable, realistic and useful.
Whose interest would you have him serve if not those of his audience and himself? The Truth has no interest, it just IS.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Of course- what I mean is that what guides evolutionary processes is not always conscious. Take for example pea plant breeding, or dog breeding. There is a conscious decision. When people seek out mates with attributes they are hard wired to look for- that is a mixture of conscious decision making and instinct. But when we look at crystals growing, that is not a conscious growth- that is a function of the nature of crystals, without which there could be no life.</div></div>
Here you are doing that which you lament in Hagin, making an assumption before all the information is in. Who are you to say crystals do not have consciousness?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's very Ch'an, invokes the ouroborus or the Face of Glory, and in essence I agree with you and would like to here also suggest this is a prime causal of creating mythological systems. It would also be Ch'an to then force suffering on you lol to also make you viscerally understand the flip side, which is that suffering sucks. Nobody likes to get beat with a stick. The fawn kicks and struggles and does not accept it's death happily. In one sense all we have is our myopic view.</div></div>

Of course life sucks – that’s changes nothing. It is the way of life. Suffering is integral to life. Can one have true happiness without suffering?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes exactly what I mean- some other inherited traits which are relatively poor things to pass on to your progeny would be susceptibility to disease like sickle cell, the way we eat and breathe, our spines, GE calls it planned obsolescence- they could build a washing machine that can last 10,000 years, but they would put themselves out of business so they build machines with a known life span. we have managed to increase our life span- in many societies- beyond what nature would normally allow.</div></div>
Sickle cell is beneficial since it makes us resistant to malaria, people who have sickle cell ancestors came for malaria infested areas.
Our improvement is also natural growth, cause we are part of nature.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would like a hint of it my friend. He has dozens of vids by now...he is brutally honest after all...</div></div>
I see many hints in all his videos

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This makes his audience seem rather poorly equipped than they are...now more than ever before technology has allowed for the ease of the dissemination of information. After one series explaining the purpose of the finger- to carry on the analogy- it is a moot point to continue lecturing on the same subject when it is now a matter of record.</div></div>
He is speaking to people who have been for all intents been misled and lied to, so he must proceed from where they are, not where you are.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, to get into. But I do not need to attend Oxford or Harvard to benefit from them. Again, their findings or their advances or their body of work is a matter of public record. Anyone can go to the lectures, the symposiums, can access the research or the papers published.</div></div>
Anyone can go to Egypt and visit the temples, but unless you know how to read and comprehend the hieroglyphs it remains meaningless to you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">depends on how that knowledge is transmitted or packaged. in the case of the ancient world it was often an admixture of spiritual mumbo jumbo.

the average citizen of the world today has incredible resources available to him for self education...much knowledge is public domain.</div></div>
Mumbo Jumbo!!!!! Only to those who do not understand.
And even more information is not in the public domain


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Self-evident on observation! I know a tree gains sustenance from soil. It won't grow from being in a cup of water. Now I know it is soil. I see the degredation of matter on top of the soil leach nutrients below the surface because trees or plants with this degrading biological material grow better. I myself will one day degrade and feed what makes me back to the universe. I eat the fruit of the tree, and so participate in this exchange. From this, the connectivity of the self with everything around it is evident. All this requires is time for observation. A guide or teacher may bring results quicker, but this can be and has in fact been, the kernal of independent yet convergent spiritual inquiry through many many cultures.</div></div>
Yes because you have been taught what to look for or expect.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They can't both positions be right. If you read what they say carefully, Diop presents them as Africans. Moses was African. That is basically a civil split. Hagins paints an extraordinarily different picture that one falsifies the other *if true*. Hagins position-correct me if I am wrong- is that whites stole the religion from the ancient egyptians and then proceeded to whitewash history as documented, although he is getting a little carried away as also shown.</div></div>
Hypothetically
I am a Jamaican(black), who became a US citizen(white). While living in the states I attended university and returned to Jamaica as a teacher. I recognize that Jamaica allows for duel citizenship but the US doesn’t.
What then am I a Jamaican or American?
Can I be called either?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes clearly. but that is my point. clearly. it's a mind job if you allow ego to be the mechanism from which justice is sought for. but the way through is the middle path, and the light of reason, the self correction innate in the rigourous application of the scientific method.</div></div>
Ego is not the mechanism, why do you think he is using ego?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No man, he's not being truthful. He's mixing truths with half truths and his presentation is based on a 'hopefully I'm right about this until I'm not, and then I can still claim to be right because nobody reviews me but the public so I can get away with it' series of videos and writings. He's not being fully brutally honest to his constituents, he's only showing them a little.</div></div>
All Facts are true and final until more detail reveal deeper understandings and more facts. He is showing then what they need to know at this moment.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes, to the victor goes the spoils- but it is again, the rigorous application of the scientific method which reveals the effects and interpretations of data.</div></div>
Again how much of the data do you have?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes, what I mean is you stated that diop was someone from whom hagins learned from. meaning diop was one of the first to start documenting some of the errors in egyptology that had become mainstreamed.</div></div>
truth

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">why is material wealth the mark of success or happiness? many of my monk brothers live in what many would deem to be abject, mendicant poverty as renunciates. they are all happy. capitalism is fueled by exploitation, my friend, if there is a sin in this it is the sins of capitalism which unchecked have shaped this world in which we find ourselves, where one man subjugates the next for his own personal gain and the expense of others. </div></div>
This is Truth, but no matter one must realize also that it is a stage in the process of human maturation and development to greater and better output and expression

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes but we know from the archaeological record there is often a difference between tools of war and tools of other purpose and we have found both, besides we have other records, right up until the time for example of boer migration and then British, the Zulu Empire for example, predated colonial powers and from it's own accounts was a brutal regime, and there are other indicators in the oral history of the regions into which various colonial powers came into contact with, South America prime example. It wasn't Cortez, for example, who defeated the Aztecas, it was all the combined enemies whom the Aztecas had subjugated who joined Cortez who won the day.</div></div>
When one calls a people peace-loving it does not mean that wars are absent, what it means is that the society is not structured around war and military adventures as a means of social ordering and development.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We don't need ALL peoples to think one way or another- just enough people to support a view...usually these philosophies are legacies of fruitful times, but when stressors come out due to uncontrollable or unforeseen phenomena like disease or natural disaster, they are quickly subsumed by what I am talking about. The fact is that there are many examples of imperial actions taken in Africa that predate any western imperialism or propaganda and which subsume golden rule thinking. I've already cited quite a few, we know for a fact the Zulu Empire, the Egyptian, the Ethiopian...the history of Africa is resplete with examples. All we need is one example to falsify the statement or idea that war or creating dischord is a western import.</div></div>
Did I say war was absent, except zulu the others you mention are not southern afrikan nations



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">because he is pretending towards being a purveyor of information and the 'truth.' And people are believing what he is telling them, because they are preconditioned to accept information this way. It's what I tend to dislike about most preachers.

you don't see a difference in the quality of the information being presented between the two? it's like, yes, some people drink Yoohoo...but why when there is Quick. All hagins is doing- to me- is swapping the flavor of the kool aid. He's saying no, don't drink cherry kool aid, the original is strawberry.</div></div>

Yes there is a difference.
Hagin is transmitting info in his domain, according to the people he is informing.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes, I saw their having had a falling out.</div></div>
Yes Ashra is trying to make a living from the info.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">they are digital artifacts created by the process of digital photography. but we don't even need to go there to falsify the idea of them being ancestors.</div></div>
I said it was a speculation…how can it be a falsity.
If you take a picture of me, on that paper am I not being represented by shades of light or in other words digital artifact in video


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">what if Hagins has his ancestry traced and is from a tribe in Southern Africa. Why would they be so overcome with joy to support him and appear in Egypt...a culture and religion his ancestors and he has no connection to? What if I went to Paris and got a picture with orbs in front of the Eiffel tower, or in the grand canyon?</div></div>
The speculation is about the Egyptian orbs, they may not view race and ethnicity the way we do
That would be great

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So wait now, I just want to be clear before I choose a falsification- you are saying that the orbs perform some kind of maintenance task and that is the reason why the pyramids and such have stood the test of time and not the sheer genius of egyptian engineering?</div></div>
The orbs are part of the “sheer genius” of Egyptian engineering

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And why must the example come from Europe? If such structures did exist there, and orbs were photographed amongst their ruins, what would that mean? If orbs protect the pyramids, why were they looted and fallen into disrepair? Why don't they allow it so Hagin can photograph what he wants, why are the ancestors powerless against these foreign usurpations throughout KMT's history.</div></div>
Pyramids are found all over the globe, if the orbs are a form of technology then one would expect to find them also all over the globe

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have a few orb photos myself, which begs the question, Why were Kemetic temple orb guardians in Pennsylvania at a kung fu seminar.</div></div>
Mybe those are kunfu orbs?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What is the earliest example of ancient architecture?</div></div>
Wild guess, graves mounds or megaliths

[Emperah]

Re: Afrikans Are Ante-Christian Not Anti-Christian

WOW,
you guys are good I go away for a bit and you guys still a gwaan pan dis.
I'll have to find de time fi read all a dis now