It is fucking scary speaking my mind, it is as if I am being chained to the guillotine and any time someone has something critical to say I must face death itself.
I literally feel myself freezing with fear in this part of myself. I feel it in my head and neck. I am afraid because I am authentic and therefore introverted, but also because I am projecting how my past self would respond to my present self. I feel as though my past self is just not worth it. He is too stuck in his beliefs, he needs time to grow and see the light. He is experiencing his own kind of light which is fine but the light is not as pure as he thinks. This could come through simplifying his beliefs and being sharp about it. He is at his own place in his journey and I want to ignore him.
[Mat. 6:23 but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!]
The doom of being shown the truth in my past and the depression it brought me pushes me to criticize my past self, or past ideas, which is my projection of christianity upon christians, this has become half of my purpose, because if you are going to be for something and own a perspective, than you are going to be against something as well, and it is going to come across as judgemental. This is true for anyone who claims to have the truth or even a higher truth than they had in their past. This naturally comes by age, but some people never actually look into anything new and see how it might change their paradigm, and I should not expect them to. People rationalize their intuition, which is good, and they don't usually feel things due to their conscious rationality because people are not rational beings. Emotions come from the subconscious. We are also bounded by our limited minds, not able to take all things into account.
This is where we must understand the nature of truth: Truth is something generally abstract until applied to specific knowledge or relativism. There are high forms of truth: Existence, Self-awareness, sensation, mathematics etc. but we as humans can make some seriously detrimental mistakes when trying to apply some of these to the real world. There are secondary forms of truth that have to do with things outside of our experience or knowledge, not that they can not be experienced or known, it is just a majority of people either have or have not had the privelege of knowing these experiences. These are what people do not know that they do not know, and for those who have had the experience: they are those who know that they know, and as the third person who may even be a friend or aquaintance to these knowers, I can not know what they know or have the experience which they have experienced, but this only applies to the exact way that they have experienced it. I can merely listen to their experience and try to understand their story, comparing it to other stories of similar nature, in order that I may hear both sides of the argument. Whether a thing be true or not true. In this way, these secondary truths which contain things outside of the "NOW" reality are things which I can not know, other than by reading about them. This kind of secondary knowledge is what is called "blind faith". It is an echo of someone else's interpretation of their own experience. IF God is love, then he wants us to have a first person experience and first person understanding which have more to do with the mathematical and scientific truths which exist within ourselves and within the boundaries of the "NOW". This includes the universe as we know it, hence: "Astrotheology" and "Cosmology" which was used to develop ancient mythology.
This is why through comparative mythology, you can understand the bible, it was written based on normal and somewhat primitive moral psychology, which is now 2000 years out of date. Is the truth of this hard to accept? It should only be hard to accept if you have not discerned what you actually know first hand to what you know second hand. The second hand knowledge is how division and cults are created, and the first hand is this frightening place of authenticity and vulnerability. I have peace apart from the 2ndary knowledge, but I have fear concerning the outward expression of my first hand knowledge. I feel as though I have never truly been free to be myself. I have fragmented my consciousness into parts which seem to be loved more than the real me. This was more due to the process of socialization and the religions which keep people tied to a bad developmental psychology and from thinking creatively about these things and questioning everything. I will say it again: People know what they know, and they do not know what they do not know. This makes it appear to others that they have cognitive dissonance. That is not usually the case from my experience. Let me explain: I discovered through recent gematria, astrotheology and comparative mythology that the bible was just another mythology created by the Romans who had a reputation for creating religions like this. It became extremely clear that this is what the bible is due to the hundreds of cosmological parallels and old cosmology in the original languages of the text. This caused one of my catholic friends realize I was now against traditional christianity. This person thought I was open - minded but now he saw that I was rejecting his traditional beliefs. This appeared to be a contradiction in his mind. The truth is that these two things compliment each other. What I know I can stand under and understand, because I have been there and dealt with the logic first hand. This knowingness compliments what I do not know. It is actually a healthy place to be psychologically. What rubs me the wrong way is being a student of what I understand to be wrong. It feels like giving birth to a cactus, because that is what falsehood always seems to lead to: pain. This is actually a kind of growing pain. In the bible this is called: Pruning. Once pruned, why should I move bacwards in time? We can't forget what we have learned, the mind can only be renewed. The mind is not made to stay in one belief system its whole life, or it will atrophy. This growth can only occur if one feels loved enough by their parental upbringing to believe that things will go well for them. If they feel loved, then they will not be affected by phobias concerning strange symbols or teachings. In this case, love has set them free, and truth and love go hand in hand. Truth needed to be understood, which for catholocism is if there was a historical Jesus or apostles. For me it is unreasonable because to me the only evidence which exists is actually anthropomorphized astrotheology. This just means that the only evidence the catholics have is actually evidence against a historical Jesus or apostles, and there is a lot of this kind of evidence, since sun-worship was so ubiquitous in ancient times and to the Jews especially.
I really don't want to burden people with a higher level of truth that they are not prepared for. These people are not stupid, they are just surviving and meeting their emotional needs in a religious community which teaches doctrines I happen to disagree with.
For myself, I can find spiritual communities that rely more on first hand knowledge and realize and accept the futility of harsh accusation and criticism. The truth itself is what actually accuses and criticizes, but people reason with their emotions. Christians rely on how they feel about specific words in the bible in order to interpret them the way they wish to interpret them instead of how they are actually being used intertextually. If that were to happen, then they would not teach what they are teaching, and they would turn into spiritual love based communities that rely on first hand simple knowledge. This would incorporate divine philosophy such as: Authenticity, Creativity, Ethics, Virtues, and States of being(Existence) in order to understand the divine nature of ourselves. This is all natural philosophy which anyone can come up with and anyone can see that this is how the bible was written. The flip side of this argument for traditionalists is that God understood our nature. The key is to know that this knowledge is called divine by men, and some of the text concerning this contradicts itself and is false on purpose. The bible is complimentary, some call this cognitively dissonant. The bible condemns astrology in the law of darkness and it teaches to look at the sun, moon and stars in the covenant of light.
So how is this not God inspired?
because it never actually claims to be inspired, and it is essentially the same as the other myths. Romans 1 actually teaches that God makes things plain through creation. (Aka the world around you) primary experience, especially experience to do with the Sun:
Ecc 7:11 Wisdom is good with an inheritance, And an advantage it is to those beholding the sun.
The bible is essentially as inspired as the creation, which includes you and I.