What if the religious simulation is that all of them are connected to this mountain rock that looks like a pyramid?

Are all religions, more or less, a continous string of reiterations of some "sacred" mountain form & top from the Himalayas?

Polytheism and monotheism, saying the same thing: venerating some plate tectonic rock that fools humanity's imagination

Sumerians recreating the Himalayan mountains to worships deities.

Egyptians building pyramids to look like mountains.

Monotheistic places of worship looking like a cube, like the base & middle of the mountain.


Have I stared into the abyss, without blinking, and figured it out?

Have I stared into the abyss without blinking and realized that billions of people, by proxy, worshipping the Creator because of how this mountian rock looks?

Is everything really all about venerating mountains, respectively that particular mountain?????????

Is this why Eastern/Oriental polytheists think of themselves as superior?
I'm not even a freemason or anything relating to secret societies, mysticism, or cults.


It's fucked up to realize that Apzu, Abzu, An/Anu, Enlil, Ra, Horus, Hathor, Osiris, Isis, Hashem, Asherah, God, Allat/Allah, Zeus, Jupiter, the Great Architect of the Universe etc. – more or less 5000-6000 years of human existence – are just an endless string of representations of trying into visualizing a mountain in the Himalayas in either animal form, human form, meteorological form, celestial form...
I figured it out – we're living in derivations that were inspired by Hindu cosmogonics more or less, even others that consider that pile of plate tectonic rock as something special.

I figured it out.

>>17800654 (OP)
if that's all it takes then humanity surpassed it by going upwards into space. Pilots look at the world on an international scale because their vehicle can easily go 1000 miles, and astronauts have the "overlook effect" where being in space has a pseudo NDE result making you a leftist or some shit. There are other ways to subvert the natural hierarchies as well. If this exists it's only one pole of spiritual life.

Weak squizo bait.

>>17800694

>>17800694
He's right in a way, people don't realize the impact of scale. Until you're knocked down, you don't know how hard it is to stay standing. The wind of time is like a million hammer blows. Trees and mountains that bear it for centuries have tremendous physical and spiritual power. It's not a stretch at all to say the domineering himalayas were formative to Indian religion, although these natural temples are only the backbone of our understanding of God.

>>17800706
?

>>17800709
“Scale” and “wind of time”? What is this, a shitty Tolkien knockoff? Mountains are just big rocks, not mystical batteries storing “spiritual power.” You’re anthropomorphizing geology like a pagan larping as a philosopher.

>trees and mountains bear it for centuries, have tremendous physical and spiritual power
Mountains don’t “bear” anything; they’re inert piles of stone shaped by physics, not some divine endurance test. Calling them “spiritual” is just you projecting your feelings onto nature like a sentimental hippie. The Himalayas didn’t whisper sacred truths to ancient Indians; they were just there, same as any other mountain range. You’re romanticizing erosion into a theology.

>not a stretch to say the Himalayas were formative to Indian religion
It’s a stretch longer than a Jesuit’s sermon. Indian religion (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism) formed from complex social, cultural, and philosophical currents, not just because some big hills looked cool. The Vedas barely mention the Himalayas as divine; they’re more about rivers and fire rituals. You’re reducing a millennium of thought to “ooh, shiny mountain.” Pathetic.

>natural temples are the backbone of our understanding of God
Speak for yourself. My God’s not a fucking rock formation. Catholicism’s backbone is Christ’s sacrifice and the Church’s tradition, not some pantheist fetish for “natural temples.” You’re trying to smugly universalize your tree-hugging nonsense, but it’s just a flimsy bridge to OP’s schizo mountain cult. God’s not in a landslide.

>>17800717
Bigger is better. When you're older and have a conception of time, you'll respect things that live a long time. Pretty basic stuff, if you have a more humanistic God that's cool, but there's more to life than coffee and cigarettes. I prefer a god that's involved in the world.

>>17800721
>Bigger is better
What, are we measuring divine dicks now?

>you'll respect things that live a long time
Mountains don’t “live.” They’re not turtles or sequoias; they’re just crust getting pushed up and worn down. Slapping “spiritual” on them because they’re old is like worshiping my grandma’s couch for surviving the ‘70s.

>pretty basic stuff
Yeah, basic like a crayon drawing of theology. Your whole “big = holy” shtick is so shallow it couldn’t drown a gnat.

>more to life than coffee and cigarettes
Nice try, hipster. I don’t need your condescending life advice to know your “god in the world” is just pantheist bullshit dressed up as insight. My God’s involved: He created the world, died for it, and runs the show. Yours sounds like a glorified landscaper.

You’re not smarter than 2000 years of doctrine because you like old rocks. Take your wannabe-Zen nonsense back to the commune and leave theology to people who can think.

>>17800730
>are we measuring
Not necessarily. It's the bedrock, not the end-all be-all. You have to be aware of these elemental forces underneath our higher philosophy.
>Mountains don’t “live.”
A tree is technically much closer to a human, but there's no practical difference. Once you accept one is part of the same God given earth, the other may as well be. Inanimate objects also have a sort of birth death cycle, they have aesthetics, they're made by God, what more do you want.
> pantheist bullshit
That's quite a spin on your God creating all other religions as part of a satanic regime to torment a few million true believers.

>>17800717
>?

Jesus Christ is the nom de plume/guerre of Izates Manu that converted to Judaism and died during the Roman-Jewish war from 66-70 CE. His story behind everything and the inspiration of followers to claim that he descends from the Davidic line while claiming to be messiah (read Star and Scepter prophecy).

Apostle Paul is the projection of Flavius Josephus ben Matityahu (RIBAZ) – Izates' associate – that turned to Rome which, inevitably, helped create the fundations for both Rabbinical Judaism and Christianity.

Mary Magdalene is Mary of Bethany/Boethany, sister of Martha and Lazarus. Affluent family, and was Izates' "companion" (wife).
She annointed him.

The Nazarene-Essenes connection, why roman catholic cardinals dress in red.

>>17800767
shouldn't the jesus story have more references to the war if it was made up shortly afterwards and he was a soldier?

>>17800867

His other nom de plume/guerre is bar Kamsa. He is documented, scattered information, but covered.
The House of Hillel – House of Shammai connection.

He was saved by Josephus, asking his body to be taken down the cross, and looked after his sustained injuries. He survived and had a limp. Crucifixion was a 100% fatal execution in agony and why he, surviving the crucifixion, made such echoes about dying and resurrecting.

Josephus had to twist both religions into some form of rivalry, while covering up history, altering it even, so that Romans (Republic-Principate) and pro-Roman Israelites would know they're still on the same side, even after the war. He understood who lost and effectively gave himself. He survived and with him the history of everything.

As for Izates' followers, something had to be done. So they either became part of the Roman world (with Josephus' help among other factors), alongside the pro-Roman Israelites, or exile in the East where it was concluded they had loyalties/ties to the Parthians – since Izates himself, his family, were effectively satraps/semi-independent royalty of the Parthian Empire and Rome's primeval enemy.

Remember: Rome was still in its Republic-Principate epoch, despite the emperor figure. Israelites friends and loyal to Rome were keen of this republican-principate system, than the kingly system. Not all of them were happy, sure, like those supporting Izates.

Vespasian, the soon-to-be emperor of the Roman polity, knew that any sedition from the polity meant the end of the Roman world and peace. So history went through damnatio memoriae on steroids, even alterations, while still keeping some crumbs of truth here n' there. It's most likely why Josephus, of all writers at that time, was the most reliant/made official chronicler of the epoch to write it.

>>17800928
history was obliterated and only the heretic Josephus was left? The central figure who invented Paul and Jesus almost from wholecloth, also became the surviving chronicler? It's a bit much. I looked up Vespasian on wikipedia and it doesn't say anything about him being christian or supporting the formation of christianity.

>>17800942

1) The Flavian dynasty wasn't Christian. Why would they be the followers of an enemy satrap/king of Rome?
2) The first, earliest symbol of Christianity was an anchor – an allusion to Vespasian/Flavian sigil of the anchor and dolphin.

>>17800754
>It's the bedrock, not the end-all be-all
Bedrock? More like a pile of bullshit you’re trying to pass off as profound. “Elemental forces” sound like you’re quoting a fantasy novel, not making a point. Your whole “mountains are secretly deep” shtick is just slapping spiritual glitter on geology.

>Mountains don’t “live.” A tree is technically much closer to a human, but there's no practical difference
Are you high? Trees grow, reproduce, die. Mountains just sit there getting eroded. Conflating them because “God made both” is the kind of lazy reasoning I’d expect from a toddler with a theology degree. Mountains don’t have a “birth-death cycle”; they’re not Pokémon evolving. Aesthetics? Sure, they’re pretty, but so’s a sunset, but that doesn’t make it divine. You’re just projecting feelings onto rocks like a new-age crystal freak.

>Inanimate objects also have a sort of birth death cycle, made by God, what more do you want
I want you to stop embarrassing yourself. God made everything, but that doesn’t mean every pebble’s a fucking sacrament. Your logic’s so flimsy it could be debunked by a catechism class dropout. Creation’s not a personality contest where mountains get a soul because they’re “aesthetic.”

>pantheist bullshit. That's quite a spin on your God creating all other religions as part of a satanic regime
Nice strawman, dipshit. I didn’t say God made other religions to “torment” anyone. Other faiths exist because humans are flawed and grope for truth: some get closer, some jerk off to mountains like you. Pantheism’s just a cop-out, equating God with dirt to avoid actual doctrine. My God’s not a cosmic trickster; He’s the Truth you’re too busy sniffing rocks to see. Go crack open a Bible instead of worshiping a hill.

>>17800767
>Jesus Christ is the nom de plume/guerre of Izates Manu
You’re just regurgitating Robert Eisenman’s fever-dream nonsense, aren’t you? The idea that Jesus is some pseudonym for Izates Monobazus, a convert king from Adiabene who died in the 60s CE, is pure fanfiction. No serious historian buys this. The timeline’s a mess: Jesus was crucified around 30-33 CE, decades before the Jewish War (66-70 CE). Izates was a historical figure, sure, but there’s zero evidence he was a messianic claimant, let alone Jesus. The Star and Scepter prophecy (Numbers 24:17) was about a future deliverer, not some random Parthian noble. You’re forcing a square peg into a round hole with no textual or archaeological support. Just because both were Jewish converts doesn’t make them the same guy. That’s like saying Caesar is Napoleon because they both liked conquest.

>Apostle Paul is the projection of Flavius Josephus ben Matityahu
This is next-level stupid. Paul’s epistles predate Josephus’ career by decades. Paul was a Pharisee-turned-Christian missionary, executed under Nero around 64-67 CE. Josephus was a Jewish general who defected to Rome after 67 CE, cozying up to Vespasian and writing propaganda. Their lives overlap, sure, but equating them is like saying a lion is a housecat because they both have claws. Paul’s theology (Christ’s resurrection, grace over law) has no parallel in Josephus’ works, which barely mention Christianity and focus on sucking up to Rome. The “RIBAZ” nonsense is just Eisenman’s word salad, not evidence. You’re conflating two figures with zero textual basis.

cont.

>>17801046
>Mary Magdalene is Mary of Bethany/Boethany, sister of Martha and Lazarus
Another tired trope with no legs. Mary Magdalene and Mary of Bethany are distinct in the Gospels. Magdalene’s a Galilean with a demonic past (Luke 8:2), Bethany’s a Judean sibling of Lazarus (John 11). The “anointing” link is speculative garbage; different women anointed Jesus in different contexts (Luke 7, John 12). Calling Magdalene his “wife” is straight out of a Dan Brown novel, not history. No early source (Christian or Jewish) suggests this. You’re just splicing names and stories to fit your shitty fanfic.

>Nazarene-Essenes connection, why roman catholic cardinals dress in red
The Nazarene-Essene link is shaky at best. The Nazarenes were early Jewish Christians, not Essenes, who were ascetic weirdos obsessed with purity, not messianic rebellion. No source ties Jesus’ movement directly to Qumran’s nutjobs. As for cardinals’ red robes, that’s a medieval tradition symbolizing martyrdom and the blood of Christ, not some cryptic Essene cosplay. You’re connecting dots that don’t exist, like a conspiracy theorist with a corkboard and yarn.

Your whole post is a schizophrenic mishmash of fringe theories with no grounding in primary sources or serious scholarship. You didn’t figure out shit, you just drank the Kool-Aid of bad history. Go read the Gospels, Josephus’ actual texts, or a real historian like Geza Vermes instead of chasing your Himalayan rock fantasy.

>>17801039
>flawed
It's called sin. Most people enjoy hell by a considerable majority, or you're a pantheist. That's the biggest refutation of christianity is it comes from a misanthropic era where you could pretend other people were bad.
>Your logic’s so flimsy
The distinction between animals and rocks is unbiblical. God said to use and abuse it all. You decided on your own initiative that animals are "alive" does that mean the earth is older than 6000 years? How deep does your heresy go? If you want an exclusive definition of God, explain how you aren't a hypocrite.

>>17801056
>It's called sin. Most people enjoy hell by a considerable majority, or you're a pantheist
What the fuck is this word salad? “Most people enjoy hell”? Are you trolling or just brain-dead? Christianity doesn’t say other people are “bad” in some misanthropic fever dream; it says all are fallen, including you, me, and every saint. That’s not hatred; it’s reality. Calling me a pantheist for rejecting your rock-worshiping drivel is laughable.

>The distinction between animals and rocks is unbiblical
You’re out here rewriting Genesis now? God created animals with breath and life (Genesis 1:20-25) and man with a soul (Genesis 2:7). Rocks? Just dirt He shaped (Genesis 1:9). No “breath,” no soul, no life. That’s not my “initiative”; it’s straight from Scripture. Conflating animals and rocks because “God made it all” is the kind of mental gymnastics that’d make a Jesuit blush. The Bible doesn’t say “use and abuse” creation. It says steward it (Genesis 2:15). Your reading comprehension’s as dead as your mountain god.

>earth is older than 6000 years? How deep does your heresy go?
Nice try, dipshit, but I’m not a young-earth retard. The Church doesn’t demand a 6000-year-old earth; Augustine and Aquinas were fine with metaphorical days in Genesis. Science says 4.5 billion years; theology says God’s behind it. No contradiction unless you’re too dumb to parse allegory. Accusing me of heresy while you worship a Himalayan rock is peak irony. Look in a mirror, moron.

>explain how you aren't a hypocrite
Easy: I stick to Scripture and 2000 years of Catholic doctrine, not some schizo theory about mountains being God’s final boss. You’re the one twisting the Bible to justify your pagan rock fetish while crying “hypocrite.” If you want an “exclusive definition of God,” try John 1:1-14: Christ, the Word, not your tectonic idol. Take your half-baked, crystal-gripping nonsense back to >>>/x/ where it belongs.

>>17801046
>>17801051

Meet Izates "JC" Manu, the satrap of Parthia – enemy of the Roman Republic/Principate, respectively enemy of Europe.
Enemy & traitor to the Roman-allied republican Israelites.

No wonder they knew how to paint him on icons and get the proportions right, even color.

>>17801105
>Meet Izates "JC" Manu, the satrap of Parthia – enemy of the Roman Republic/Principate
Oh, look, another brain-dead conspiracy nut dragging Izates Monobazus into the Jesus slot. This guy was a petty Adiabenian king, not a Parthian satrap, you illiterate moron. He converted to Judaism around 30-40 CE, allied with Rome against Parthia, not the other way around. Your “enemy of Europe” bullshit collapses faster than a house of cards in a hurricane. Jesus was a Galilean preacher, crucified under Pilate. Absolute zero evidence ties him to Izates’ court. You’re just slapping “JC” on a random name because it sounds edgy.

>enemy & traitor to the Roman-allied republican Israelites
What the fuck are you even babbling about? “Republican Israelites”? There was no such thing; Israel was a Roman province by 6 CE, not a republic. Izates’ conversion pissed off his Parthian neighbors, sure, but he wasn’t betraying anyone tied to Rome; he was cozying up to Jewish elites and later Rome itself. Your history’s so warped it’d make a tabloid blush. Jesus’ ministry was about spiritual kingdom, not geopolitics, you dumbass.

>no wonder they knew how to paint him on icons and get the proportions right, even color
You’re pointing at some ancient relief and a mosaic like they’re mugshots of Izates/Jesus? The left’s a Palmyrene relief, likely of local gods or kings (note the radiate crowns, typical of solar deities), not a Jewish messiah. The right’s a Dura-Europos synagogue scene, maybe depicting a biblical event, but it’s stylized as fuck, not a portrait studio. Proportions and color? Artists back then winged it based on convention, not some secret Izates fan club. No early Christian iconography matches these. Your “evidence” is a stretch so thin it’s invisible.

>>17801046
>>17801051
>>17801120

“God of my ancestors and Lord of mercy, by your word you have created all things, and in your wisdom you have fashioned man to have power over all the creatures you have made to govern the world in holiness and righteousness, and to mete out justice with an upright heart.

Grant me Wisdom, who sits beside your throne, and do not exclude me from the number of your children.

For I am your servant and the son of your handmaid, a weak man with but a short time to live and with meager comprehension of justice and law.

Indeed, even one who is perfect among the sons of men will be of no account if he lacks the Wisdom that comes from you.

You have chosen me to be king of your people and to sit in judgment over your sons and daughters.

You have commanded me to build a temple on your holy mountain, and an altar in the city that is your dwelling, a replica of the sacred tabernacle that you prepared from the beginning.

With you is Wisdom, who knows your works and was present when you created the world.

She understands what is pleasing in your eyes and what is in conformity with your commandments.

Send her forth from your holy heavens, and dispatch her from the throne of your glory, so that she may labor at my side and I may learn what is pleasing to you.

For she knows and understands all things, and with prudence she will guide me in my deeds and guard me with her splendor.
(...)

>>17801046
>>17801051
>>17801120

>>17801140
(...)

Then will my works be acceptable to you, and I will judge your people uprightly and be worthy of the throne of my father.

What person can have knowledge of the counsel of God, or who can discern what the will of the Lord is?

The reasonings of mortals are faulty and our reflections are unstable.

For a perishable body burdens the soul, and its earthly tent weighs down the mind filled with many cares.

With difficulty do we assess what is on earth, and that which is within our reach we discover only after arduous labor; who then can seek out the things of heaven?

Who could ever have known your counsel if you had not given Wisdom and sent your Holy Spirit from on high?

And thus the paths of those on earth were straightened, and men were taught what pleases you and were saved by Wisdom.”

>>17801046
>>17801051
>>17801120

Your Izates-Jesus was an enemy of the Roman polity and, at large, European nations, and a Parthian cipher.
An enemy of his brethren, of which he converted to their religion, only to have their place of worship destroyed to this day.
For which many Europeans, women and men, lost their lives, and their children debased, murdered or sold in slavery.

As for you – you believe in a guy that not only declared war on civilization but, had it not been for his former associate, Josephus-Saul, he couldn't save himself.

>>17801069
Yes, everyone is fallen in sin. Only a few make it to heaven. Most of history is a conga line to hell. This sounded great to ignorant bronze age people but it doesn't explain why all people and all religions are more or less created equal.

Breath and life are not theologically relevant, and trees aren't included anyway. Bad argument in bad faith.

In fact, this whole argument is in bad faith. You just wanted me to know your feelings. Your shitty, crabby little feelings.
>allegory
there it is. Maybe the whole thing is allegory, who decides? Do you believe hell is empty, like your precious leftist pope said?

when Jesus said "no one comes to the father but through me" he was being allegorical. The Jesus in that case is all gods, but especially KALI. Thugees are the true people of Chrust.

>>17800654 (OP)
>>>/x/
>>17800694
Enjoy Hell.