Catholic Bishops' Advice on Afghanistan

Myths-
"Typical characteristics
The main characters in myths are usually gods or supernatural heroes.[11][12][13] As sacred stories, myths are often endorsed by rulers and priests (preachers, rabbis and imams) and closely linked to religion.[11] In the society in which it is told, a myth is usually regarded as a true account of the remote past.[11][14][15][12] In fact, many societies have two categories of traditional narrative—(1) "true stories", or myths, and (2) "false stories", or fables.[16] Myths generally take place in a primordial age, when the world had not yet achieved its current form.[11] They explain how the world gained its current form[17][18][7][19] and how customs, institutions, and taboos were established.[11][19]".

Story/myth/fable tellers have now been replaced by stand-up comics and late night show hosts making fun of said myths although we still tolerate the myths promulgated by kings, queens, priests, rabbis, preachers and imams. Big money to be made all of these "callings" with very few taking the vow of poverty.

The Bhagawat Geeta, OT, NT, koran and the Book of Mormon are good sources of said myths with "pretty, wingie, talking thingies" and their clones being in the top ten category.

Before they pen anything else, the bishops should read this:

"Christ = neoPharaoh in several ways:

Son of the Creator God: expressed (from Dyn.4 onward) as "Son of Re (i.e. the sun)". From the Middle Kingdom (c.2000-1750 BC) this supreme deity was construed as Amun-Re, i.e. transcendent hiddenness expressing itself in the reigning principle of nature, singular source of all light.

The fullness of the godhead: from pre-dynastic times, the Nilotic king was understood to be THE earthly manifestation of the cosmic lord Horus (whose name conveys something like "distant" and "above").

Incarnate Son of God: the epithet used to express this relation was "his (i.e. the creator god's) bodily son". When the king was referred to as incarnate god, the term used was "His (i.e. the god's) Person".

Beloved Son of God: the previous could be further qualified thus: "his bodily son, whom he loves".

Great high priest: in Egypt, the King was theoretically the ONLY ONE qualified to represent humanity to the divine, and the divine to humanity. In local temple cult, the king's role was delegated to priests, who were thus his proxies (like Roman Catholic priests are stand-ins for Christ in the Mass).

Begotten on a mortal mother by the creator god (cf. conception of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahri, Amenophis III at Luxor).

Baptised: Ritually lustrated with "living" water (a nice example at Karnak shows Ramesses II being baptised with ankh signs by Horus - principle of rule - and Thoth - principle of records).

Crowned with many crowns: a common introductory epithet before cartouches is "lord (i.e. owner) of diadems".

Killed by the machinations of his demonic enemy (Osiris, the king-as-mortal, representing all kings in their death, murdered by the uncanny chaotic Seth.)

Mourned by faithful women who attend his burial (the dead king Osiris lamented by Isis and Nephthys).

Placed in a tomb and resurrected, emerging from the tomb to ascend to the sky (Pyramid Texts, Amduat, Book of Gates, Book of Caverns...etc.).

One part of a divine triad: Osiris (static ground of Being) + Re (perpetual Becoming) + the king (mediator between earth and heaven, who, in life and death, represents god to humanity, and humanity to god) (see Amduat, Book of Gates, Litany of Re, Book of Caverns).

Becoming joined to him leads to immortality: Every person, even the poorest, could be identified in death with Osiris, the paradigm deceased king, and thereby could overcome death, emerging from the tomb/grave just like he did (see Book of the Dead).

If there is an "OT" for the divinity of Christ, it is not the Tanakh, but the funerary texts of ancient Egypt. Now, didn't Moses and Pharaoh have something of a falling out?

Christianity didn't really take off among Jews, but was particularly popular in Roman Egypt. The way had been prepared... "

Hmmm, the annual $4 billion/each we give to Israel and Egypt should be given to Pakistan for fighting the Taliban and al- Qaeda. And Afghanistan should allow Pakistan troops to cross its border to pursue these religious fruit cakes.

Right now, what Pakistan needs is infrastructure. NGO's are not helping with this and neither are the "lenders." Never have. It occurs to me that if the Catholic Church could raise hundreds of millions to pay off the families of pedophile priest victims in order to keep them quiet, they could raise say fifty million to build in Pakistan, and building there is cheap.

Afghanistan is too dangerous right now, although a few mil' would surely come in helpful as thousands have lost limbs due to senseless bombing.

Pass this missive along to Hubbard, please, Tom.

Good ideas BUT this will also take a lot of money. Why is it that thoes groups that pay no tax are always up front in telling how taxes should be used on political issues? 501 (c) (3) of 1913

The Catholic Bishops said:

"Address the root causes of terrorism rather than relying solely on military means to solve conflict."

Apparently, said bishops have not read the koran, the root cause of Islamic terrorism!!! Until said book is cleansed of all references to "death to all infidels", no Muslim can be trusted.