Laura's Book "From Paul to Mark" is out!!!! ... And in French too
- Thread starter Chu
- Start date
Do you mean real page numbers corresponding to the page numbers in the hard cover version?
This time the order with the book is shipped. I should get it in about 10 days. I hope it will arrive.
This is totally weird! I bought it on Amazon.de for 39,06€, but still thats half of 82€.... and this shoe Lala is totally strange....
Yes the actual page numbers are not showing, but only the location and percentage of progress in the Kindle book. For example, in the Kindle version of Laura's new book, I don't see "1% Page 1 of 298 . Location 35 of 5087" as I do in one of the romance novels I've just started right now, but rather "1% Location 74 of 19213" when on the first page of her book's Forward section. All my other Kindle books when opened on my Windows 10 PC using the Kindle For PC application don't have this problem,
Yep I got the book for the same reason just in case. Also this is odd since I have 41 books in my Kindle library so far and all of them show page numbers except Laura's new book. Also none of the romance novels that I have purchased through Amazon.ca have this problem either. Are the romance novels you are referring to with missing page numbers free PDF version imported to your Kindle from elsewhere or actual Kindle books purchased online? I haven't checked with my Kindle tablet yet to see the missing page numbers problem is on there as well; however, since you reported the same problem on your Kindle tablet, I don't see any need now to find mine, charge it, and check. Thank you.I noticed the same thing on my Kindle, too. Not just with Laura's book, with a few romance novels as well. I am going to order the book, in case our computers and Kindles won't work any longer and use the Kindle version for the time being, as Kindle is easy on the hands and eyes.
Added: This is weird. Dutch Amazon sells Laura's books, but From Paul to Mark will set you back 82 euros. Apparently, FPTM is sold by a company in Florida called Shoe Lala.
And they don't sell the Dutch translation of Political Ponerology, but it is available in other languages!
I‘ve just started to read the book and can say that the foreword (which I’m not even half through yet) inspires a great thirst that consists of wanting to understand 1; who Paul was, 2; the times and circumstances he lived in and 3; what his message/theology/gospel actually was. In short in makes one very curious as a reader to know more about all of it. I don’t know if it was intended in that way, but it surely is a very engaging and good way to start such study/book!
By the way, while starting to read all the C‘s sessions from start to finish recently, I came across the following curious remark that could explain where Paul found a great deal of his inspirations:
By the way, while starting to read all the C‘s sessions from start to finish recently, I came across the following curious remark that could explain where Paul found a great deal of his inspirations:
Before reading this book, I had the fundamental problem: when 4D STS throughout our history have been deceiving people with massive shows of power in their religious revelations, such as Fatima or Joseph Smith of the Mormons, how can we accept that Paul's revelations were not by 4D STS? Why would Paul be the special exception? Wouldn't it be wiser to regard the source of Paul's revelations as 4D STS?
After finishing the book, I see my problem was my assumptions. It turns out, we don't know what Paul's revelations were, so my assumption that Paul had received shows of power revelations was wrong.
But then, there were other problems.
The first is that Paul's appears to have made a mistake in violating free will by the use of deception. Paul pretended to be someone else, pretended to be like his Jewish audience, only to try to convert them to his religion. I think it was a mistake of Paul to have anything to do with Judaism and the Jerusalem church, and I think it was a mistake to make a connection from Jewish Adam to Christ and Yahweh to Christ.
p.265
p.395
I think what Paul did was teaching a radical new understanding of religion, but using the vessel of an existing religion, which in Paul's case was Judaism. Paul's Judaism was totally opposite of the Jerusalem Judaism. It was Judaism in brand name only, but clearly anyone could see it was not Judaism when the Law no longer applied.
Mark appears to have made a mistake in creating fictional Jesus in the place of Paul. It can be argued that Jesus was not deception because Jesus might have been code word for Paul that Paul's followers recognized, but nonetheless fake Jesus and the fake life of Jesus quickly outgrew and concealed the historical facts and Paul's true teachings.
Instead of Paul overtaking and converting Judaism/Jewish Christianity by deception within the Jewish ranks, Paul's Christianity was overtaken from within through the Gospels by supporters of Judaism/Jewish Christianity. The Gospel of Mark opened the door to the hijackers such as Matthew to take Mark's Jesus and make him teach the opposite of what Paul taught, eg Torah not abolished and Law to be obeyed. Thus, the defeated Judaism was resurrected in the form of post-Paul Christianity.
Was this a case of live by the sword, die by the sword? Paul and Mark tried to use Judaism/Jewish Christianity and fake Jesus as the groundwork or framework for the new religion of Pauline Christianity, but 4D STS turned the table and used fake Jesus to legitimize Judaism/Jewish Christianity and subjugate Paul's teaching. It appears the use of deception or codenames was not without consequence.
Keeping information between the lines was a mistake (or the redactors coverup was complete). It would have been better that the information was stated plainly in light. For the information between the lines was kept in a sort of darkness to outsiders, and over the time darkness would grow to eclipse the information completely.
Perhaps Paul's Christianity didn't even last 100 years. Might there have been a different outcome if Paul and Mark had not engaged in deception, had not tried to incorporate Judaism or Jewish elements, or had not created a fictitious Jesus character?
Might this be a warning to us now, not to follow Paul's tactic of using a preexisting religion to introduce new ideas (ideas new to the current generation)?
There are obviously advantages to using an existing religion to seek converts, so it is understandable why Paul did it. We might be faced with the same dilemma as Paul. People today can accept Paul, at least a lot more readily than people can accept anything to do with the Cassiopaeans. There are some of Paul's teachings that align with what the Cassiopaens have said. So it might seem easier to present Cassiopaean ideas as a new understanding/interpretation of Paul as to piggyback on the thousand year old household name of Christianity. Paul seemed to do the same thing by piggybacking on Judaism. I think it is a mistake.
Perhaps this potential issue is solved, by sincerely representing Paul's teachings, as Laura has done in this book, and not adding anything else that cannot be attributed directly to Paul. Anything else would then need to be taught as something separate than Paul's Christianity, however complementary it might be.
Other scattered thoughts that I don't know how to incorporate into the above.
There is also a problem of Paul preaching to know nothing of this world. That seems to be opposite of the C's, who encourage awareness of this world, as knowledge cannot be in a vacuum.
p.417
It reminds me of the Gurdjieff groups that exist today.
I think the C's want us to learn and acquire knowledge. It was first body and immediate environment, then the world, then the cosmos. Like Castanada seers, we must master the petty tyrants of this world first before we can deal with beyond this world.
On a different thought, Mark thought he was being ironic in pointing out that the Jewish Christian messiah didn't come with angel legions to destroy the Romans, but that Jesus came with the Roman legions to destroy Jerusalem and the temple. But behold, has the Jewish messiah materialized in the form of Israel and Mossad, controlling the Roman equivalent, American military and the US, as something that they move around easily?
After finishing the book, I see my problem was my assumptions. It turns out, we don't know what Paul's revelations were, so my assumption that Paul had received shows of power revelations was wrong.
But then, there were other problems.
The first is that Paul's appears to have made a mistake in violating free will by the use of deception. Paul pretended to be someone else, pretended to be like his Jewish audience, only to try to convert them to his religion. I think it was a mistake of Paul to have anything to do with Judaism and the Jerusalem church, and I think it was a mistake to make a connection from Jewish Adam to Christ and Yahweh to Christ.
p.265
p.395
I think what Paul did was teaching a radical new understanding of religion, but using the vessel of an existing religion, which in Paul's case was Judaism. Paul's Judaism was totally opposite of the Jerusalem Judaism. It was Judaism in brand name only, but clearly anyone could see it was not Judaism when the Law no longer applied.
Mark appears to have made a mistake in creating fictional Jesus in the place of Paul. It can be argued that Jesus was not deception because Jesus might have been code word for Paul that Paul's followers recognized, but nonetheless fake Jesus and the fake life of Jesus quickly outgrew and concealed the historical facts and Paul's true teachings.
Instead of Paul overtaking and converting Judaism/Jewish Christianity by deception within the Jewish ranks, Paul's Christianity was overtaken from within through the Gospels by supporters of Judaism/Jewish Christianity. The Gospel of Mark opened the door to the hijackers such as Matthew to take Mark's Jesus and make him teach the opposite of what Paul taught, eg Torah not abolished and Law to be obeyed. Thus, the defeated Judaism was resurrected in the form of post-Paul Christianity.
Was this a case of live by the sword, die by the sword? Paul and Mark tried to use Judaism/Jewish Christianity and fake Jesus as the groundwork or framework for the new religion of Pauline Christianity, but 4D STS turned the table and used fake Jesus to legitimize Judaism/Jewish Christianity and subjugate Paul's teaching. It appears the use of deception or codenames was not without consequence.
Keeping information between the lines was a mistake (or the redactors coverup was complete). It would have been better that the information was stated plainly in light. For the information between the lines was kept in a sort of darkness to outsiders, and over the time darkness would grow to eclipse the information completely.
Perhaps Paul's Christianity didn't even last 100 years. Might there have been a different outcome if Paul and Mark had not engaged in deception, had not tried to incorporate Judaism or Jewish elements, or had not created a fictitious Jesus character?
Might this be a warning to us now, not to follow Paul's tactic of using a preexisting religion to introduce new ideas (ideas new to the current generation)?
There are obviously advantages to using an existing religion to seek converts, so it is understandable why Paul did it. We might be faced with the same dilemma as Paul. People today can accept Paul, at least a lot more readily than people can accept anything to do with the Cassiopaeans. There are some of Paul's teachings that align with what the Cassiopaens have said. So it might seem easier to present Cassiopaean ideas as a new understanding/interpretation of Paul as to piggyback on the thousand year old household name of Christianity. Paul seemed to do the same thing by piggybacking on Judaism. I think it is a mistake.
Perhaps this potential issue is solved, by sincerely representing Paul's teachings, as Laura has done in this book, and not adding anything else that cannot be attributed directly to Paul. Anything else would then need to be taught as something separate than Paul's Christianity, however complementary it might be.
Other scattered thoughts that I don't know how to incorporate into the above.
There is also a problem of Paul preaching to know nothing of this world. That seems to be opposite of the C's, who encourage awareness of this world, as knowledge cannot be in a vacuum.
p.417
It reminds me of the Gurdjieff groups that exist today.
I think the C's want us to learn and acquire knowledge. It was first body and immediate environment, then the world, then the cosmos. Like Castanada seers, we must master the petty tyrants of this world first before we can deal with beyond this world.
On a different thought, Mark thought he was being ironic in pointing out that the Jewish Christian messiah didn't come with angel legions to destroy the Romans, but that Jesus came with the Roman legions to destroy Jerusalem and the temple. But behold, has the Jewish messiah materialized in the form of Israel and Mossad, controlling the Roman equivalent, American military and the US, as something that they move around easily?
No, they are actual Kindle books purchased online, like Kerrigan's Byrne Three Ways to Start a Scandal (3 novels in one of the Victorian Rebels series).
That's one reading of it, but the other one is to look at what was actually preserved at least in part because of Mark and not despite of him. Those with the capability of subtle thinking, even in mainstream Christianity, actually do get a lot out of it. Christianity is still teaching a radically different gospel than Judaism, despite the massive attempts to distort, fake, overtake etc.
Also, consider the historical situation Mark found himself in: after the Jewish War, the Romans turned their destruction of Jerusalem into a massive propaganda campaign that naturally led to extreme hatred of anything even remotely connected to Judaism/Palestine. Mark's masterpiece was written partly to dissociate the Christian communities (Pauline and Christian-Jewish) from Judaism, and to enshrine Pauline theology into an accessible story. And in that, it seems Mark succeeded quite well: he probably even managed to infuse the Christian-Jewish (non-Pauline) communities with Pauline theology (being extremely threatened by the anti-Jewish Zeitgeist, they were ripe for the picking!!), and maybe without Mark, nothing of Pauline Christianity (or any Christianity) would have survived?
In other words, Mark used Roman propaganda and the anti-Jewish sentiments as a vehicle to "Paulinize" Christianity and separate it from Judaism, at the price of "mythilization". This is quite something!
I see your point, but I don't think you can take this excerpt too literally and without context. Another way to understand it is the realization that we "can't think the way we think", and that all that matters is an all-engulfing alignment with the Christ-spirit, as discussed in "Paul and the Stoics" and "Paul's Necessary Sin". In other words, not be in love with what one thinks one knows, and instead be in love with Christ, which then guides everything we do, including our gathering of knowledge and studying the world.
I can see what you are trying to reconcile here, but I have a different take on this idea of “Paul using deception”. Context is key. Laura points out very clearly how during those times “it was just a mess of rivalries and conflicting interests that hat been simmering for many years” (p.312) so we could say the context was rife with hystericization as per Lobaczewski and ideological possession in the form of religious zealotry.
Although the timeline and actual places Paul visited are somewhat unclear, we know he did make visits, and he did have the opportunity to speak and preach, in addition to letter writing – in a sense, he was invited to speak, and the letter-readers could choose whether or not to read them or not, therefore I would not see any violation of free will here.
In addition, he would only be externally considering the context and situation, by using the format of the Old Testament (like a Jew) by quoting its scripture (as Laura points out) when speaking to this audience made up of the messianic zealot “Jerusalem Christians” and the old school Jews - who knows, there could have been a few transformed ones in there too, as we know this group has always been small. This could be seen as taking the opportunity to speak the Truth, while invited and given the opportunity to do so, applying strategic enclosure in a very wise manner. Paul was simultaneously speaking or writing his letters within the framework of "knowing God's will” and “direction for behaviour,” and “keeping the religious adherent aligned on their path", as per Ashworth.
A contemporary example would be if one of us was in a position to speak to others, such as a pastor or lay preacher called in to speak to a Christian congregation. We would know there are only a few of us around the world that understand the depth of a real transformation, but we would still speak “as a Christian” (“as a Jew” like Paul did) the Truth of the situation. Depending on our situation, we would also have to be careful what we say, especially if we have others to protect, where Paul did not have to consider those things, so he could just “let ‘er rip”
My two cents as I am still working through the Chapter 7 (Paul and The Gospel of Mark).
PS. I thought I would be able to mix the romantic reading with this one – no dice! It is just too compelling of a read.
As promised, Laura's book is now also available on our French/EU website!
www.pilulerouge.com
From Paul to Mark – Paleochristianity – Les Editions Pilule Rouge
www.pilulerouge.com
