Palindromedary ~ Wow! That was a lecture and a half. Thanks for sharing! Where do I start? The religious topics I'm mostly already aware of. I studied the history of Christianity, Catholic theology, the history of "The Church", classic mythology and world history already. Once I wrote a paper comparing the similarity of the Babylonian, Greek, Roman, and Norse myths. I even went so far--as you just did--to try and tie them into the fundamentals of Judeo Christian beliefs. Of course I wrote that paper in a course about classic mythology and my myopic teacher didn't like the idea of me going beyond the purview of the course. She gave me a B+. I will never forget her. She was wrong!

One thing about your information that puzzles me is the connection to Hinduism from Christianity. It seems I remember learning that in Hinduism the stories, gods, ideas, and even legends are completely different. After all, some gods have four faces, 6 arms, and are blue. Also, I don't remember the Kama Sutra mentioned anywhere in my Catholic Catechism. That is something I would have remembered. Nevertheless, I'll take your word for it. Now, you have me curious. Thanks for those links. I will look closely at them the first chance I get. I always appreciated the beauty of what I learned about Hinduism and look forward to learning more.

Generally, the main issue about these stories that you have to remember is that they don't always intend to portray the same hero as much as intending to portray the same challenges the readers have in their own personal life. We are all born and die. We age. We grow. We are challenged. We struggle. We question.

One common theme in mythology is the archetype of the hero. In ancient times the hero was powerful, indestructible, and descendant of the gods. In Rome we have Hercules, in Norse myths we have Thor, in Judeo Christian myths we have Samson. These were the ancient archetypes. Powerful warriors. Many things to many people; though, basically the same guy. Someone to guide the peasants into being warriors. Since Rome the need to encourage powerful warriors amongst the common people ended. Then began the myths about the peacemakers. The righteous martyrs. The obedient servants.

I've taken the time to devour these stories myself and analyse them from every perspective you can imagine--and then some. I can't say I disagree with anything you've said about their similarities, uses, and origins.

However, I can disagree with your statement that the use of parables is a convenient excuse to cover for the impossible. For sure, there are amongst all religious institutions those who do exactly what you are talking about. However, when one reads the Bible one learns that whenever Jesus told a parable he followed up with an explanation about what he was talking about. The same explanation follows the story about the 7 headed monster in Revelations. Look it up. The seven heads are seven kings. The 10 horns are ten kingdoms. Many interpret this to refer to NATO. The head that was wounded by the sword is the USA. The USA after the assassination of JFK of course. If you have an imagination with the explanation of the 7 headed monster you can read all kinds of potential applications to this metaphor you want. My point is that the metaphor is explained in the original text as a metaphor. The meaning is also explained leaving little room for misunderstandings and a whole lot of room for misinterpretation. The 7 headed monster is not real and never was meant to be.

That being said, you can look at the rest of the Bible quite literally. Old testament people living 800 years, Moses parting the Red Sea, the flood of Noah, Jesus turning water into wine and Lazarus rising from the dead. In Revelations Jesus says that in the new Jerusalem he will write the name of his father in the foreheads of the saved. No metaphor here. These are literal events. You believe them or you don't. Anyone trying to sell you a book of ideas that these are parables is selling Holy batcrap, Batman! Whether or not you believe they are true is something that is totally up to you.

Speaking about Revelations, everything you said about Mother Theresa is a shock beyond belief. I almost wish I didn't even bring it up. That quote you posted from her almost blew my ears off my head. Needless to say I will have to read more on that. My friend you are giving me homework at this point. Not fair! This is supposed to be my weekend off.

Nevertheless, if Mother Theresa is wiped off the short list for canonization that only leaves Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. In either case, he certainly deserves it more. He faced opposition and danger to speak the truth. He braved controversy and persecution. He acted mostly on his own without backing of any huge institution or sponsor. He risked his life to make a difference in the world and succeeded in doing so. And finally, he left us at an young age in the prime of life, fighting for equality on his feet. Mother Theresa left us at a ripe old age, supported and protected by the largest group of organized crime in history. Like Billy Joel said, "Only the good die young." Don't forget what I said earlier--Jesus REFUSED Satan's offer of the Throne of his world wide church. You know what that means. Your revelations only help prove that theory to be true.

Thanks again my friend. Much food for thought. I'll have to chew slowly.

Right on, Flopot! Couldn't agree more!

Quote web site article: A belief central to Christianity is that the gospel message is unique and the historical fulfillment of Judaic lessons and prophecy. Research into early Christian history has shown this belief to be an oversimplification. Images from Greek gnosticism and Zoroastrian dualism are found throughout the Christian scriptures, particularly in John's gospel and the epistles of Paul. In addition, many early Christian doctrines were influenced by stoicism. These non-judaic influences are well documented by theological scholars and verify that Christianity did not arise solely within an isolated Hebraic religious context.
-
Further research has revealed that the five great world religions share numerous themes and symbols which, when viewed cross-culturally, demonstrate that the world religions are much more closely allied than orthodox or fundamentalist Christian views would have us believe.
---
..historically the Church has tried to distance itself from mystical theologies similar to those found in Eastern religions (Pagels, 1981:xxii)
----
Rather than a single “Judeo-Christian” stream of spiritual truth winding its way through history, there were many streams of theological and philosophical knowledge throughout the Mediterranean region which interacted and flowed together.

When reading the following parallel teachings, one should keep in mind that the Hindu scriptures being cited predate the Christian New Testament by at least 500 years. In addition the term "Brahman," which in Indian philosophy is the unchanging, all-embracing Reality behind the universe, is also referred to in the Upanishads as the 4 "divine Lord, the personal God, endowed with manifold glories," who "holds dominion over all the worlds" and is "one without a second" (Svetasvatara Upanishad;
Prabhavananda, 1948:121). Swami Nikhilananda, a highly respected Hindu commentator, also adds, "endowed with infinite power, Brahman is the lord of lords"
-----
...additional examples from the Upanishads and the Gita which parallel Christ spending three days in the tomb, His temptation in the wilderness, the parable of the prodigal son, and His interpretation of moral teachings.

...This portion of the story is reminiscent of Jesus being tempted by Satan in the wilderness. Before imparting this teaching, the King of Death tempts him with power and riches, hoping to convince Nachiketa to choose a different boon. "Choose for thyself a mighty kingdom ... ask for that -- not for sweet pleasures only but for the power, beyond all thought, to taste their sweetness." He also promises him "9 celestial maidens beautiful to behold." But Nachiketa holds fast, resists temptation proving himself worthy of receiving the secret of immortality (Prabhavananda 1948:16)

http://www.bsu.edu/libraries/virtualpress/wolfe/word/ParallelTeachings.pdf

note: go to the web site to see many parallels between Hindu and Christian religions.

Quote DAnneMarc:.. How did that "slip out"--especially from a completely made up story. What was going through the authors head when he screwed that up? More important, why didn't they fix that blunder--they've had 2000 years? ...If it was made up, that is...

And, perhaps, the same could be said for ancient Hindu sacred texts...they had way more years to "fix the blunders" ...if...as you said..."if it was made up". So, do you believe that all those ridiculous stories in the Hindu texts are all just "made up"? I'd say so! And I'd say that much of what is in the Bible...all those stories are largely plagiarized from more ancient ridiculousness...modified to convince, the then modern (albeit 2000+ years ago) Hebrew and Pagan mentality.

In all fairness, Gandhi did say some great things that should be remembered forever and help redeem his other less noble contributions to society.

Quote Gandhi:An eye for and eye, and soon the whole world is blind.

Quote Gandhi:You must be the change you wish to see in the world.

Quote Gandhi:Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony.

Quote Gandhi:You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.

Very well said!!

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mahatma_gandhi.html

Palindromedary ~ A most interesting and provocative analysis indeed. A good friend of mine also has similar criticisms of Gandhi. He points out that he was very racist against South Africans and even compared them to animals in one famous quote. He left his wife to pursue a gay relationship with a body builder. Just a few tidbits to add to your sobering quotes.

Funny that you point out the money changers story about Jesus. How does a conflicting story "slip out" on a completely made up character? "You have turned the house of God into a den of thieves."

Actually, I've always wondered how it "slipped out" and was only caught by me that when Jesus was tempted three times in the wilderness by Satan one of the temptations was Satan offered Jesus his vast Throne on his church that ruled over all the earth. Jesus refused. JESUS REFUSED!!! That of course would imply that Satan before and after rules the church of the earth. Go figure! Who'da thunk it? You can't bargain with something you don't own. How did that "slip out"--especially from a completely made up story. What was going through the authors head when he screwed that up? More important, why didn't they fix that blunder--they've had 2000 years? ...If it was made up, that is...

By and large I like your first question best, why Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and not Malcolm X? Your theory is quite sound and probably accurate. Malcolm X suffered so much from white supremacy that anything he said or did was probably taken as a direct threat to the white elitists. Also, Malcolm's Islamic background probably disqualified him from any type of heroic status in our culture due to it's inherent threat to Christianity, middle east dominance, and our theocracy as perceived by the white elitist. Of course, here in my "open-minded" beloved home town we remember Malcolm X for who he really was, a victim of racism, a fighter for righteousness, a very brave and noble man, and a hero. In the schools and colleges I've attended there have been whole courses taught about the life of Malcolm X. We have schools and libraries named after him; and here, he will not be forgotten. Here, the only reason he doesn't share equal status with MLK is because he wasn't as charismatic; and, didn't embrace the way of peace as saintly and perfectly as MLK. But then in our time, who did? Gandhi? I think not!

Only Mother Theresa might outshine MLK. I wonder when she will be canonized? If you ask me, they both should be declared Saints. Don't ask me when it will happen--after all, it's not my church!

There is NO EVIDENCE that Assad used chemical weapons on his own people, just rhetoric from our politicians and MSM. Let us, the people, make up our own minds about the credibility of the evidence. We can no longer trust the word of our politicians nor the media.

Point of information - the intelligence community warned their governments that there was no credible evidence that Iraq had WMD. The press and politicians have been squirming ever since trying to come up with a convincing narrative - Blair says the evidence was wrong; British documentaries suggests that all the Western intelligence communities were fooled by a very clever Iraqi dissident. This is all hogwash - the Western intelligence services told their leaders that the evidence was not credible as it came from one, dubious source.

Bush and Blair lied.

Ever wonder why Martin Luther King is celebrated but Malcom X isn't? Ever wonder why certain icons have been fashioned as men of peace and any sore thumb phrases they may have uttered, which seem rather out of place or rather odd compared to the other things they've said, get buried? These icons may have been a real pain-in-the-backside to the ruling elite of their day but history is often dictated by the ruling elite and what we know of history is a corrupted version. Gandhi, for instance, is played up as a man of peace. Someone who wouldn't hurt a fly...he said he was a man of all religions...and, one would get the impression that he even adopted the Jainsian religion where they really don't kill flies or bugs or any kind of life. But then some of his quotes may not be very much emphasized. Quotes that I have posted in previous posts. Where he is taking a more violent turn against his enemies. There are also some Jesus quotes that tend to indicate that we should all not rebel against our masters, and give unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar (ie: be sure to pay you taxes). Then the man of peace makes some sore-thumb awkward quotes that don't seem to fit the man-of-peace image. Overturning the money changers tables was an act of violence. And there are other quotes that don't seem to fit a man-of-peace scenario. I think that there are ruling elite historians who manipulate history to manipulate the masses. They cajole the masses to be peaceful and don't upset the money changers tables (of course some things slip through). Yes, I've heard all of the worn out apologists trying to reinterpret history...these wise men speak in parables....whatever! Whenever there are contradictions to the "official" stories...they were just talking in parables...not literally. Yeah, right!

And so, now we all celebrate the ruling elite generated version of history so that none of us are ever inspired to emulate the relatively hidden or suppressed side of these icons...ie: the rebel against authority side. Jesus wasn't a member of the Sicarii, as our ruling elite historians tell us (but other historians tend to differ). The Sicarii, in biblical times, were the terrorists of the day...carrying curved daggers (the Sicarii dagger) hidden in their clothing. They'd sneak up behind the Roman soldiers in the crowded market place and stab the soldiers in the back and then disappear in the crowds. Some historians believe that Jesus was a member of the Sicarii.

I don't know about Gandhi or Martin Luther King but they really ticked off the ruling elite Brits and ruling elite Americans so much so that they were assassinated by them.

By the way, this might be a bit off topic; but, since we are already talking about depleted uranium warfare and crimes against humanity has anyone heard that every tuna recently caught off the coast of California has tested positive for radiation?

Bluefin Tuna Caught Near California

Quote Huffington Post:Bluefin tuna just can't catch a break. Weeks after it was reported that overfishing had reduced the Pacific population of the fish, which is popular in sushi bars, by over 96 percent, researchers have found trace levels of radiation still lingering in their flesh almost two years after the catastrophe at the nuclear plant in Fukushima, Japan. And the 50 tuna they studied were all caught off the coast of California, 6,000 miles east of Japan, where they were born.

The tuna that registered the highest levels of radioactivity were those that migrated to California in 2011, soon after the accident, but those that migrated in 2012 also demonstrated above-normal levels of radiation. Monte Burke at Forbes writes that the results of the study suggest "there is still a high level of radiation in the waters near the Fukushima plant most likely because, as marine chemist, Ken Buessler, asserts, the plant is still leaking radiation into the ocean nearly two years later."

Yikes. Doctoral student Daniel Madigan, one of the chief authors of the study also did work showing that tuna were radioactive back in spring of 2012, so it's not like this is a new phenomenon. But it's alarming that radioactivity is still popping up. Not that it should be a complete surprise: Bluefin tuna can live to be up to 30 years old and, because they're near the top of the marine food chain, they're unusually prone to building up high levels of pollutants in their bodies.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/bluefin-tuna-radiation_n_2736221.html

Foreign Policy might just be the least of our worries.

(Vials of the wrath of God from Revelations? Ever notice how the exhaust stack of a nuclear power plant almost resembles a giant vial?)

Palindromedary ~ Honestly I'm not sure. I quoted The Guardian; which, in the past, has always been a reliable source of information from my perspective. However, If I were to use my own eyes and our corporate media, I could attest for anywhere from 10 to 50 victims of non-conventional warfare; and, not all were fatalities. Nevertheless, The Guardian is a source I tend to trust.

Of course depleted Uranium far out-Trumps any chemical weapons. That is a crime against humanity without any rivalry. If I remember correctly our own troops suffered from the effects of depleted uranium.

I will restate my case--whenever criminals get away with a crime they will inevitably attempt to out do that crime. We need to enforce international law, now. The powers that be--in this country--are out of control.

DAnneMarc: Yeah...same old Contras...different country! And Reagan(666) morphed into Bush then Obama. I wonder if the US is importing some large quantities of hashish from Syria...they get plenty of opium from Afghanistan since they cut down on the Taliban who wouldn't allow it to be grown. I once read, many years ago during the Guns for Drugs Contra conflicts that our entire banking system would collapse if our government put a stop to US banks laundering all that drug money. I guess when an entire economy gets hooked on drug money it's hard to stop the addiction. Now that they are making MJ more legal in many places and the Feds are not going to go after MJ users if the state's laws approve their laws on MJ use then the price should come way down. Not that I plan to buy any...and if I did...I'd eat it in brownies..certainly not pollute my lungs with that stuff. It may or may not be better than tobacco but I believe that anything other than fresh air is harmful to the lungs. It may help asthmatics...I don't know?

A brief history lesson of one of the legacies of President Ronald Wilson (666) Reagan

Quote Wikipedia:The contras (some references use the capitalized form, "Contras") is a label given to the various rebel groups opposing the Sandinista Junta of National Reconstructiongovernment in Nicaragua that were active from 1979 through to the early 1990s. Among the separate contra groups, the Nicaraguan Democratic Force (FDN) emerged as the largest by far. In 1987, virtually all contra organizations were united, at least nominally, into the Nicaraguan Resistance.

From an early stage, the rebels received decisive financial and military support from the U.S. government, initially supplemented by the Argentine dictatorship of the time. After U.S. support was banned by Congress, the Reagan administration covertly continued contra aid.

The term "contra" comes from the Spanish contra, which means against but in this case is short for la contrarrevolución, in English "the counter-revolution". Some rebels disliked being called contras, feeling that it defined their cause only in negative terms, or implied a desire to restore the old order. Rebel fighters usually referred to themselves ascomandos ("commandos"); peasant sympathizers also called the rebels los primos ("the cousins"). From the mid-1980s, as the Reagan administration and the rebels sought to portray the movement as the "democratic resistance", members started describing themselves as la resistencia.

During the war against the Sandinista government, the contras carried out many human rights violations, and evidence suggests that these were systematically committed as an element of warfare strategy. Contra supporters often tried to downplay these violations, or countered that the Sandinista government carried out much more. In particular, the Reagan administration engaged in a campaign to alter public opinion on the contras which has been denoted as "white propaganda".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contras

Wow! Syria!! It's Deja Vu all over again!

MMmmNachos ~ I'm sorry if I've been ignoring you. This week has been hectic. In my profession I have to earn Monday off; and, I do want Monday off. Unfortunately, the topics recently have been so heated that there are few people--if any--that I disagree with. I can only add my two cents here and there. Keeping up with the posts is the best I can hope for; especially since it appears we are all on the same page about these topics.

Palindromedary ~ As usual you are a fountain of enlightenment. That last post about documents supporting Syrian rebels with support from Washington I found quite disturbing and shocking. Not particularly surprising--just disturbing and shocking. My worst fears and suspicions actualized.

Personally I am not surprised that the US electronic propaganda machine is trying to spin this into another middle east "Boogie Man" spectacle. If Washington can pull the strings of Thom Hartmann than certainly they can control CNN as well. Like I said before, we never see victims of US attacks or US serviceman bodies on TV. But when our "Boogie Man" kills, those corpses are flashed repeatedly over and over and over and over at nauseum. WE MUST BELIEVE THAT ONLY THE POLITICALLY CORRECT "BOOGIE MAN" KILLS INNOCENT CIVILIANS. WE ARE SO MUCH BETTER THAN THAT. (Now repeat that after me 100 times or until you believe it.) SOS--Same Old $h!tt

I certainly hope that you are right and that people are starting to wake up from this incredible nightmare of deceit on the part of Washington, the Pentagon, and our "Intelligence" community. Time will tell. If this blog demonstrates anything it is that you are probably correct in that assumption.

Meantime, please keep the revelations coming--no matter how shocking they may be. Your contributions are most appreciated. Thanks again!!!! ;-)