Homosexuality and the forces of resurrection

On www.world-mysteries.com/PhilipGardiner/forbidden_letters.htm you can find the so called Forbidden Letters by the Paris 4. They argue that only certain homosexual people have the specific microcosmic balance of the psychic male/female (animus/anima) to safely conduct the forces of resurrection.

________________________________________________________________

A P.S. to this topic-header after reading about 30 posts.

[Quote brothwood]But apparently i must accept the literal impossible. i must accept that christians are quite elitist and are the few that will be the only ones who reach God. [/QUOTE]
Dear members, I've been away for several day's and just checked your posts on the Forbidden Letters. The level is simply depressing. It is simply astonishing to see that people react on stuff they don't even understand. I've seen the Letters discussed on theological and gnostic forums too and people were simply mesmerized. Men like Philip Gardiner and Gary Osborn get hunderds of mails every year by people about the Grail. It is not for nothing that they chose these mails to be published on their Forum within 24 hours and that they were accepted immediately at world-mysteries.com, the perhaps finest site on eseoterica world-wide, and certainly the classiest. I decided to bring it to a gay Forum after I've read two posts by theologians who argued: the letters work like clock. We don't know whether it's true, but they work like a clock.

And know I can understand that this election thing (one doesn't reach God, God reaches you) is for the elite. Fancy, people like you, who should be masturbating, instead of reading , in heaven.

You won't believe me, but I didn't write that last sentence to offend you. What's more, the sentence isn't even offending you.

For it is amazing that I read about 30 posts who hardly even touch the Letters. Ask yourself: what on earth are you doing in this section of religion? Blabbing about God? You're wasting your time.



All the best to hipunk.
__________________________________________________________________
A P.S. taken from another Forum discussing the Letters:

Here's a PS taken from another Forum, discssing the Letters:

"I'm not the author of the Letters, but I know a few things about alchemy. The forces of resurrection is the Kundalini fire. If it is wrongly conducted the force creates (as they say) havoc in the body and mind ending with death.

Animus is the microcosmic male (anima the microcosmic female). They have to wed in the 'chemical wedding', the 'hieros gamos', the 'wedding of the Lamb'. This wedding is done through that fire. One is reborn then after one is recomposed by that fire again and thereby resurrected again, and erected from the dead. The dead are not the buried ones, but the not through that fire reborn. So one is not resurrected from a usual grave in the ground, but the grave of the 'dead (=not reborn) body'. Religion is mythology misunderstood (who said that?). That's why the Gospel according to Thomas says: the dead (not through fire reborn) are not alive, and the living (the through fire reborn) will not die. Alchemy is supposed to be about physical immortality."

My extra remark:

If the Letters are true, then we christians have been eating the menu instead of the meal all the time. But I think not all is lost. In alchemy it is said in old manuscripts that 'the solar hero' will fetch the gold of immortality (it is said to reside in the centre of the earth). They say: you need gold, to make gold (for the benefit of us all?).

Alchemist also say: 'don't pray to to cross, it is too young, it comes too soon.' And they say: 'we're awaiting the stone.'

For what it's worth.

Tatsuko.

 

I'm almost afraid to type this:
thank you.

 

Hipunk, is that irony or gratitude? Forgive my ignorance. I'm not too familiar with the finer western way of expressing.

 

With out voice inflection irony can be hard to tell on the internet.
But mine was gratitude.

 

Oh Yes. That is definately real.
I think its pretty clear that the Gospels are all ficticious (except the parts they use as authoritative) and that a Gay Man holds the balance of microcosmic male and female.
This will give him power of Resurection.
Yes.
(sorry inflection is not heard in type but if it was .. oh man, i am inflecting lol)

Seriously though, even 'The Davinci Code' looks Collegiate compared to this ridiculous made-up-as-we-go screwball email exchange by some fruitcake trying to come up with the latest excuse to ride the 'Davinci Code Coattails' towards a shitty book deal.
Lame.

 

if people want to believe things, why should you put them down, i believe it is called faith

 

I believe lies are 'wrong' or 'bad' and that believing in stupid lies is a 'negative' way to do things.

Thats just my belief so please dont put it down ok, broth?

 

but can you not see that is exactely what they see you as doing? quite oftern i do believe you are not a christian, but are trying to make it look bad, because you really do not advertise it well
peacex

 

Fair enough.
However, if your not going to call Bullshit when its sitting there plain as day - then you might well think you are 'being nice to people' but really you are just losing respect for Christianity.

 

i am losing respect for christianity, i call bullshit on much of the Bible. and as i have been told recently, if i do not accept the Bible as literal truth of God then i am not a christian, so i tried to read the Bible as literal and could not get the first page. and i am not a christian therefore.
peacex

 

wow, thats heavy.

 

uh huh, i thought christianity surrounded love, being in love with God and in love with life which i am. but apparently i must accept the literal impossible. i must accept that christians are quite elitist and are the few that will be the only ones who reach God. I apparently must accept that we believe God is SO amazing anad huge yet we can read him in a book. i also must believe homosexuality is wrong, which i have never have and never will.

i love God, i just feel a huge gap between me and the church
peacex

 

It does not sound like you are a Christian.
Im not sure if you are really putting your faith in Christ as the hope for forgiveness, reconciliation, justification and then the newness of life?

Maybe you need to dig into what it means to be a Christian and not just have someone say 'Literal Truth' and then not even really know what 'you think' the word 'literal truth' means and then go and dismiss yourself based on this.

Like I say, from what I can tell you dont understand what you are intending to associate yourself with.
Did someone tell you you should stop loving homosexuals or are you telling me you love anal/oral sex with men and intend to 'stand for it' over anything else or what here?

Honestly, I think its apparent from your posts that you havent really thought this through.
Why dont you put it to God in prayer and sleep on it for a while.
If you dont even think the Resurrection is possible then you probably dont need to be putting insincere commitments together yet.

I cant speak for God but I suspect he really doesnt want you just accepting something which is not clear to you (at this time).

 

i no longer associate myself with the christian church. period.
from your posts about homosexuals it is clear that love isn't on your mind, i have seen so many christians, say we love the sinner but hate the sin, i see this as a total cop out. i am not a homosexual, but have many homosexual friends, and they have partners and are in love. it is not wrong what they are doing at all.

can you answer me one question, if i do not believe the creation story metaphorically or literally, can i be a christian, not at all. and i believe the creation story is impossible both ways then i cannot accept it.

i still love God, but i do not pretend i can read him, and i believe this is exactely what the Bible does
peacex

 

Thats too bad for both of you.
You were the Church too.

I think you are trying to see what you want to see (or not see) and I suggest that just 'rolling your eyes' at the concept of loving the sinner but hating the sin doesnt make it any less truthful or profitable.

Nobody is really worried about people loving each other.
The debate is whether they should be having sexual relations at the same time.
whether that activitiy is healthy and loving is the debate.

Why you have prejudiced yourself is beyond me but apparently you have attained some level of awesome knowledge at your young age that MUST be shared with everyone.
Since there is no way you could change your conclusions and its already deemed a fraudulent book then you can throw Genesis out the window.

Can you be a Christian still... I suppose you have to reconcile how Jesus can be quoting Genesis or geneologies which trace his ancestry back to Adam but the real 'stumbling block' will be Original Sin.
If you do not accept that (at least eventually) that Mankind has a missing piece then there is no real way for you to accept Jesus need to be here.
I suppose you 'could' find some way to reconcile the issue but I cant imagine how.
It would be some 'custom' contrivance you would need to make up in your own mind.

God doesnt concern Himself about you loving him.
Indeed, while we were yet enemies, He laid down His life for us, so that we would be reconciled with him.
Its about God loving you, man.
Its about Him still loving you.

 

i have spoken to s few christians in this town recently, and the majority admit they do have a problem, because they will treat homosexuals differently, and kinda look down on them. can i ask you, do you with all your heart, love all homosexuals, be honest, and not just answer with what scriptures demands, with your heart.

In my opinion, (and it is just my opinion) the sexual relation between two homosexuals can be in total love. and they express their love in the motion of a sexual relationship.

i have never said anything about my knowledge, i know nothing, why is your knowledge better. it is quite elitist to believe you know more than the majority of humans is it not? i know nothing about most things, as do all humans in my view.

if i cannot accept the fisrt page, i do now doubt the whole Bible, although i can see meaning and truths from the book. me are furthest for God, when we do not realise God. i do not buy the creation story or much of Genesis. in my honest opinion the very first page of Genesis is impossible to reality. if yo can give me an answer for how this can be possible, then i can move to the next page.

There is also a two way relationship, i do love God with all my heart. Of course God will always love all of life.
peacex

 

sorry about the quotations, still havnt got used to using them properly :&
peacex

last post edited to try and correct changes

 

The question asks if I love every homosexual with all my heart.
Nope.
Theres a few Id like to punch in the face.
More that annoy the hell out of me.
A lot of them I love dearly.
Pretty much how I feel about any other Demographic

Im all for two men or two women loving each other and caring for each other.
IF ONLY more people did that.
I definately would suggest that carrying out sexual relations can be downright damaging to the psyche.
I dont consider bending and warping each others psyches to be loving.
This is probably where the real issue of disagreement lies.
No biggie.

It just seems to me you have somehow decided that Genesis is neither Literal or Metaphorical.
Wowzers.
In fact, you seem to know this conclusively and there remains no more debate for you.
Im suggesting that either you know something others dont or maybe the reason there is tremendous debate, discussion and seemingly ever-increasing volumes of thought on the issue is, at least, indication that one of those two options can be taken seriously.

Its a good point.
If you don't believe Abraham was real, 'Sin Nature' is inherint in the human race, that God has given the Law or that the Israelites are a chosen people then I have no idea why you would believe Jesus was a Messiah, Grace was even necessary, forgiveness or justification are required?

Hey, I can rationalise how someone might insist that the Creation account itself is 'Metaphorical'.
(not really, i think its downright goofy to read it as such but anyways..)
But
If you are saying you think its a forgery or some sort of senseless fable or lacks value then why would you be bothering to find value in anything else?

Personally, I would strongly recommend anyone start with the Gospels anyways.
BTW.. Im not sure if you think that 'The Bible' is just one big book someone wrote and you just start at the beginning and read through to 'The Ending' but its really a compendium of 66 different books, two different 'Covenants' and there are different things, Law Books, History books, Accounts, Teachings, Prophecy etc.
I mean.. I guess its 'possible' that someone might just decide to reject one or more books for some reason but stick with the others.
Why shortchange yourself I say.

Please note: Im trying very hard not to throw this into yet another wild 'Evo-Crea' debate thread.
I suppose it might help to just take a look at 'the other side' of this issue and before you throw out a whole Bible based on Genesis, maybe take a read through:
Genesis Questioned:
http://trueorigins.org/hughross01.asp
or
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/
or Answering Genesis:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/

How you cannot see at least a Metaphor in Genesis, in particular the first page is beyond me.
Put Aside the Creation/Evolution debate entirely and just forget all that and only take a look at it for what its about, whats going on, how this explains and reflects so much of what we encounter from a Spiritual perspective.
Forget the first page,
forget the first chapter,
The FIRST SENTENCES alone are loaded with fascinating premises and implications.
Here is just one page of commentary.
http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/gen1.htm

Probably a Thousand Books are written and Scholars have spent lifetimes (even non-christian ones) just exploring how and what and why of Genesis.

Let me suggest something.. Maybe, just maybe.. maybe you are not ready to just decide Genesis is worthless.
Not yet.

can we agree?:
We love Him because He first Loved us.

 

i have read the Bible, i am currently starting on Revelations, since around early summer, i didn't choose an order, i read straight as given. because i learnt soo much from the book. not one page was worthless, and it taught me things, yet i cannot take it as seriosuly on some things that some claim, as i do not believe it is perfect, because i believe only God is perfect.

i continue to take lessons from the Bible because it contains a lot of truth, and the reason i have a lot of confusion recently is because i have to accept it all to be a christian, which is why i am not a christian.

i have been on many websites surrounding genesis, but they still do not make sense. the creation story, literal or metaphorically doesn't seem connect in my mind. you may be right, it doesn't connect at present. by the way i am not someone who will just throw evolution into it. even thought that is what i have always been taught, i do not accept something that i have no idea about what so ever. so unless i leanr more about evolution i can never say i believe so.


and yes we can accept that i love him because he loved me first
peacex

 

Reading that silly book that was writen and re writen dozens of time is a waste of time.