jgreen44

"Voodoo" has a pejorative connotation. I think what this and all such stories are about is ego-death and the life-long process of individuation. This process involves recognizing, accepting (the storm subsides) and working with the contents of the unconscious, essentially becoming conscious of what was unconscious. Haven't studied it at all but I'm sure voodoo practices (i.e. possession by a spirit) correlate with this idea as well.
Are you referring to the "John" who authored the gospel of John? And this "John" or a "John" supplanted Jesus the crucified who was raised "prematurely"? I'm lost.

Johnny Skeptic

Since you are a newcomer, you are not yet aware that long ago, Chili admitted that he just makes posts for entertainment. Most people do not reply to his posts or take him seriously. Advancing Biblical Criticism and History is definitely not part of Chili's agenda.

Chili

You are rght Johnny, advancing Bibical Criticism is not my agenda but providing answers as possible solutions is.

Johnny Skeptic

In this thread, not to mention many other threads, you have not provided any solutions in plain, clear, reasonably understandable English. No one that I have ever come across expresses themselves as unclearly as you do. If you want to persuade people of anything, you will first have to learn to communicate much better in English than you do. Your strange, odd use of the English language might titillate you, but it titillates almost no one else, as is apparent by the very few people who reply to your posts.

Chili

Yes it does and all we are doing here is crucify the ego to set the Man free. This man was introduced with "mother there is your son" as spoken by Jesus from the cross, and this John was first introduced in early Mark and Luke. No, only in Matthew was he raised prematurily and therefore went back to Galilee instead of heaven. Notice that Herod is not part of Luke and that when the magi came in Luke they found Mary and Joseph with the baby in a manger while in Matthew Joseph was not 'home' and there was no manger.

My point is that if Jesus was an imposter (the ego to be crucified) there was an insurrectionist working from behind the scene and that was John who was born 'of old' from Elizabeth (only in Luke), and this is the [same] John who was beheaded earlier to make it a voluntary event by Jesus that was driven by 'involution' (= beheaded John from the netherworld) and so against religion itself but is needed to be mediator in this event = betrayal, accusations and knowledge that Jesus must die while Pilate does not have a clue in his matter = in Jonah "I worship the God of Heaven."

Chili

But I a not here to titillate you for it is your mind that must do that, which is at least to say that I look with my eyes but read with my mind.

bacht

I actually agree with this as a general "mission statement" for aspiring sages. But this forum is focused on the basic teachings and artifacts of the pre-medieval Jewish and Christian traditions. Metaphysics and philosophy really belong somewhere else afaik.

Toto

But was this the gnostic interpretation of the crucifixtion? If so, it is relevant to this forum.

bacht

sorry I missed that, I thought Chili was talking in general terms

Toto

No one actually knows what Chili is talking about, but if you can interpret it to be relevant, might as well go with that.