Refuting the Creed | A Critical Look at Christian Dogmatism 

You are fresh on the trail. Try the Ra Material, which discusses the densities and chakras. To wit, the Higher Self/ Atman is located precisely at mid 6th density. Secondly, note the image of the Flower of Life, with it's two outermost circles. The meaning of "no one comes to the father but through me" becomes evident. For the Flower of Life is the creation pattern itself. Peace to you. The Kingdom is at hand.

Could you say more please?

Archons a gnostic idea or Hindu? Purusha sacrificed for what?

@@waltershumer4211 the idea of the heavenly rulers or archons is pretty universal. In Hinduism they are the Devas (gods) & asuras. The sacrifice of Purusha is related to creation. Everything in the manifestation/creation contains an element of sacrifice. The initial unity or oneness of Purusha becomes divided & 'drawn out as threads' by the manifesting gods as it becomes the entire emanation...a sacrifice of the One/monad for it to become the many. Then the reverse process proceeds as the gods & man kindle this 'sacrificial fire' (Agni) to produce the Purusha which is now 'the Son', 'Child of Power', 'fountain of Life' as the Rig Veda says.....“Twice-born am I, the first-born Son of Order” (Rig Veda 10:61:19)

Jesus spoke to a man who had called him ‘good,’ asking him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.’ (Luke 18:19) And he said to him, ‘Why are you asking me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.’ (Matthew 19:17)

‘My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) ‘My father is greater than all.’ (John 10:29)

Let’s not pretend this isn’t contradictory to the notion that Jesus is God.

,“Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” I AM, (John 8:58) being how God identified himself to Moses. The Jews knew this, that's why they tried to stone him after he said it. Also, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14) Immanuel meaning God with us. This was prophesied before the time of Christ. Careful application of the Bible leads to nothing other than the Trinity, though I agree it is confusing. Nice video it was well put together.

​@@americanesotericFather is God without attributes, Son is God with attributes. Son is the closest thing we can personally know to God. Because the Father is unknowable.

@lutherwilcox2249 What I’m reading here is “if you think about Christianity through any other lens than the dogmatic you are wrong.” Here’s where you are wrong: 1. The scriptures were never stated to be the words of God. They were written by humans. As well, let’s not pretend that “God” in the Old Testament does not relate to time-specific and geography-specific peoples. Biblical archeology and scholarship takes all of this into account. 2. That God may only be approached through Jesus is not scripture, it is Dogma. 3. Only begotten son is Dogma. Much like the virgin birth, which has no basis in scripture. This goes on and on. And if you read any early Christians outside of the scriptures you have to reconcile the popularity of Plato and the Platonists, and therefore the entire Greek Philosophic tradition and it’s influence on Christianity. That’s just one example. This context can’t be dismissed just because it’s convenient to dogmatists.

A few mistakes with your position: 1. Your scriptures were compiled by the early Catholic Church. Since you sound like a Protestant, you should know that Protestants took out several apocryphal texts that the people who decided which gospels you would have access to thought were also edifying. 2. Christianity is based in the Old Testament and Judaism, and so it must be compared to that original context to be justified. Christians make claims that are radically different from what the Jews originally believed, so you better be certain-certain that abandoning Judaism was right, or else you might find that you’re actually an idolater, worshipping a dead man, due to an immoral and irrational greed to be freed from responsibility for all of your sins. You heard a sweet-sounding promise, and without proving it beyond doubt, you just believed it. 3. Additionally, your current Catholic-provided, Protestant-edited, English scriptures are translations of Greek and Latin texts, which are translations of Aramaic and Hebrew texts, and informed by their contemporary ideas, and later gradually dogmatized by theologians, unto the present day where you take your current Bible understanding strategy for granted. 4. There are internal contradictions in the Bible. The New Testament texts don’t claim to be prophetic, except for Revelation, but are mostly letters from pastors to flocks, or histories gathered from local memories and traditions about Jesus. Did Judas die from hanging himself? Or did he fall off a Cliff and explode? Which day of the week was Jesus crucified on in each gospel? 5. The Bible itself does not demand Sola Scriptura, Scripture Alone. It even mentions oral traditions, such as when Paul says to obey something he has spoken to a flock in person, but which is not written in the Bible. Paul also commands things that are not written in the Bible, like his claim that the scriptures prohibit a woman to speak aloud in church. He either made it up, or it was an unwritten cultural assumption of his. These are just a few things. Your view of the place of scripture is modern, and reactionary, hopeful for a simplicity that cannot be, because we know too much. It is better to hold to what is actually true based on the merits, and not just cling to what you like most on the strength of tradition. This doesn’t mean the Bible isn’t extremely valuable. It just means you need a better way of thinking about it, and about God.