I want to be Content: Can you be truly content with your life?
Feeling alone? Talking with a patient listener is just a click away
Was Jesus the Messiah or a moral teacher? Read the article
Connecting Through Technology
Do you use technology to stay in touch with family and friends?
>Watch
While I certainly believe in the divinity of Jesus there is another option which the trilemma does not cover and which forms the basis for the book “The Da Vinci Code.” Brown claims that Jesus never claimed to be God and that idea was created by His followers. I don’t believe it but it’s not covered by the liar/lunatic/Lord options.
One question, If a man came up to you today and claimed to be the son of God would you just follow him? No matter how great his teachings you would never think that he was the son of God. You would probably think that he needed to be medicated. Why is Jesus any different. There is no way, Jesus was the son of any divine spirit. He was a normal human who probably had some pretty serious mental conditions.
…Or there is a third option… and it’s probably a fairly complex concept for those who are not familiar with the concepts of Non-Duality or Advaita.
According to the concept and teachings of Non-Duality: God is Everything: Manifest & unmanifest, male & female, darkness and light, Creator and Created, plants, animals, humans, all that is was, and ever shall be. All are the workings of God. God is not ‘out there’ or ‘up there’… God is the fabric and the weaver. If there is joy and goodness – it’s God. If there is suffering and discontent – that’s God too. When these things are witnessed – the witness is God. No separation. The practice of this form of spirituality teaches non-judgment – and teaches that we are all facets of the Divine, and need no intermediary in order to commune with the Divine.
With the advent of the patriarchies, the personification of the ‘dark’ polarity, or Satan was born (read the book of Genesis) as an effort to ‘control’ the undesirable aspects of existence. Death, disease, suffering… Patriarchs chose to give allegance to a solar, masculine God of war, so as to win victory over enemies, etc…. therefore separating God quite effectively into two deities. So in the myth that was created (Genesis) we have the mythical story of this separation, and in the process – an effective reason for the subjugation of women (the fall).
I am fairly certain that Jesus was speaking through the wisdom of Non-dualism. There are so many resemblances between his teachings and many other wise ones in the East (who had demostrably well-developed teachings about Non-duality). Remember, we know nearly nothing about Jesus before he was 33 years of age. Non-Dualism was a very prevalent teaching among spiritual seekers or Saddhu’s throughout the East (India, China) at least 10,000 years before – and well-past the time of Jesus – up to now. Nothing hidden. So it was and is, available knowlege – and hugely what was going on spiritually for most of Asia. But not for Hebrews. Culturally there was a huge rift between the liturgical practices of the Priestly or Rabbinical set and the ordinary people… who still worship a solar war deity… their actions, it was believed were on behalf of God, and acted as intermediaries to the populace. Historically, the time of Jesus’ life was a period of intense political and social unrest. The common Hebrew had faith in the priests, in scripture, but were hoping for deliverance from their social and religious oppression in this complex situation.
Jesus arrived and told his followers – over and over – that any of them could do the same things he did. He performed ‘miracles’ to alleviate suffering -and- to give authority to the people so that they would trust their OWN divinity – to become thier God-selves. His assertations that ‘no one can realize the father except through the I AM…’ was an indirect assertation of every human’s divinity (beneath the exterior of ego’s suffering) – that we are all capable of discovering this divinity… I say indirect, because what Jesus was saying was dangerous to those in power. He knew this – and therfore was careful.
Jesus wasn’t insane – and he wasn’t any different than you or I. He was, however, a realized being. He was merely conveying to them and us that we have this capacity also.
Someone once said that — taking the claims Jesus made — we have no choice but to conclude that He was either insane or the Son of God. I have trouble believing that someone insane would have built up a following as Jesus did. I believe He was God’s Son — even God Himself who came into the world to do several things:
1. Call us into a new relationship with God — God created us for relationship with Him, but sin separates us from God and makes that relationship impossible. Jesus called us back to that relationship God created us for.
2. Make that new relationship with God possible — Jesus died on the cross — paying the price for our sins and the things that separate us from God and the relationship God created us for. He also rosen again — so we might have victory in this world and the world to come.
3. Make new relationships with others possible — Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection make it possible for us to live in relationsip with God — and relationships for love — peace — healing and justice with others. The fact that no one does this perfectly — and some distort what Jesus taught so they can exert authoirty over others — does not change the fact that we are created for — and through Jesus saved for — relationships with God and others.
Bob said: If a man came up to you today and claimed to be the son of God would you just follow him? No matter how great his teachings you would never think that he was the son of God. You would probably think that he needed to be medicated. Why is Jesus any different. There is no way, Jesus was the son of any divine spirit. He was a normal human who probably had some pretty serious mental conditions.
My response: This is a very good question. There is nothing wrong with being skeptical as long as it’s accompanied by an open mind. You seem very convinced that Jesus is nothing more than human. Before anyone could answer your question satisfactorily, you need to tell us what it would take to convince you that Jesus was the Son of God, fully human yet also fully divine. If there is nothing that would convince you, then your mind is closed and we’re just wasting time. What kind of evidence are you looking for?
Geez, I was really hoping for more than rhetoric in a serious discussion of Jesus’ claims…
I wonder how many people really contemplate the words and teachings of Jesus on their own without the direction of dogmatic slant – and against the backdrop of historic accuracy (which has to favorably or at least neutrally include other faiths) or have read any of the other gospels (Thomas, Phillip, etc. in the Nag Hammadi, or have read the Aramaic to English translations of the words of Jesus…). Do most people even know what they are saying when they say ‘He died for our sins’… ??? I have yet to hear an intelligent explanation of this statement (from a Christian). Unfortunately the deeper truths, which so many people never take the time to discover the beauty and wholeness of, lie much deeper than the surface of which modern Christendom cares to address… because this would entail inclusiveness (of science, of other religions, etc.).
Actually I don’t necessarily disagree with the above regarding the ‘why’ of Jesus’ being here…closer relationship with Source is always what should be aspired to… the point is, however (and He said it himself) We are all God. Not just Jesus. We should treat each other as such. We should treat ourselves as such. The concept of ’sin’ is subjective, however. For instance, the bible says gluttony is a sin. That doesn’t stop people from eating way too much, consuming way too much… We are selective with our own concepts of sin and judge others pitifully. We ignore our own internal compass, our own relationship with balance, we fall out of grace with God that way. The bible is mostly hearsay at best with a few good suggestions and even fewer historical relevancies (some of them pretty violent and horrible) thrown in as far as I’m concerned.
Dan Brown’s book is fiction, inaccurate and simple-minded. But hopefully it will entice people to dig deeper, find the real Jesus. He’s much more amazing because we can aspire to be like him than if he represented an unattainable reality.
Naiya — we are not as far apart in our beliefs as some might think we are! I appreciate your honesty and your wilingness to ask questions — too many people are not willing to question, and thus never learn!
To me, saying “Jesus died for my sins” means that I believe that Jesus took upon Himself my propentsity to hurt others — rebel against serving others — rebel against following God’s will — and so many other things that separate me from God and others. I can not say that I am now perfect — for I am far from it — but it does mean that I can confess those imperfections to God and be forgiven — and can even be strengthened to be more the person God would have me be.
For me — the point of the Christian life is trying to live in relationships with God and others. The more we can accept — love — and serve others, the more we are like Christ. Of course, no one is perfect in doing this. The Church has failed miserably at this many times (because it is filled with people who act like people instead of perfectly in the way God would have us act). The fact that the Church is not perfect does not negate the will of God for us — it only means that we do not perfectly live out that will.
What do we do?
I believe we keep trying — keep loving — keep accepting — keep serving. In other words, we keep trying to live like Christ.
…and I appreciate yours as well. No, we aren’t so different. Two facets of the same gem…
For me (and really the end of any further debate from me, as I think I say my entire peace in this) THE overriding flaw in biblical verse is that it is written (and interpreted) by humans. Just because ’someone’ has sanctioned it as holy word of God does not make it so. When something is written by humans – humans who stand to gain by being believed (power or authority) to have an understanding of ego is necessary… Who was Paul, for instance? What did he stand to gain? What were his human fears and shortcomings, his aspirations? Most importantly – Did he seek to give us (and the folks in Corinth) tools for believing in our capacity for spiritual transcendence? No, not by the accounts we are left with. He had difficulty conveying the message of Jesus with integrity in a difficult political landscape full of agenda. He stood to gain power by proclaiming that Humans are inherently sinful (just like the Hebraic tradition from which Paul came, and just like the contemporary church fathers do also.) All, except for Christ stood to gain worldly power … it extends to this day. Christ was alone Selfless. He gave us hope for believing in ourselves & in our innocence. ‘Be ye as little children’… He understood that at our very cores, we are Love, and proved it with his dying words. He understood our need to forgive ourselves. We accumulate muck along our life’s journey which keeps us in pain & separation (therefore, in self-judgment and sin). We need to feel loved by God (since we project God as outside ourselves) before we can truly merge with God… Because the truth is that we *are* God. Christ gives us reassurance that if we self-examine, are honest about oursleves, forgive others and forgive ourselves… and really reconcile our accumulated ‘junk’ – we experience the Kingdom here and now. Heaven is now, if we are willing.
I don’t think of his crucifixion as an act of martyrdom, according to our contemporary understanding of the term. His act seemed to be based from an understanding of something called Boddhisattvaism – or the spiritual warriorship. The concept is that the Boddhisattva comes to help alleviate karma and suffering in dense or difficult times (Hebrews call it Messiah) – often the Boddhisattva enacts the role of Rebel. It is a conscious choice – made by a spirit (sort of akin to what we might call an Angel). Usually the Boddhisattva doesn’t fully realize it until later, after they spiritually awaken, around the age of maturity (about the time Jesus disappeared from biblical accounts) that they are chosen for a task.. and have to undergo some specific spiritual training to help keep them from succumbing to ego. It is common in ancient eastern literature and tradition that it is known when these ‘lamas’ are born, and are visited by magi in order to determine if they are little boddisattvas.
I don’t speak with any authority, or any agenda for that matter. Just a real interest in discovering what lies behind a book of contradictory words that never made sense to me. Honestly, I’ve read and read and read about ancient cultures and traditions, meditated on Jesus & His words. Studied other religions and spiritual traditions – I’ve found lots of beauty… and what Ive gotten is a richer, more substantial understanding of Jesus, and what He wanted us to become… I don’t (unfortunately) find it reflected much in the bible, ironically.
I don’t know if he was married to the Mary of Magdala. I do suspect that she was a priestess of an Egyptian/Coptic tradition in the Isisian lineage, (that can be known) and I suspect strongly that their relationship was very special – but that’s all I will say. I’ve read a number of books about the subject, but there is no real proof of anything. It is mentioned in the book of Thomas that Paul saw Jesus kiss Mary on the lips, and became angry. He asked Jesus ‘why do you love her more than us?’ and Jesus replied ‘why would i not love her more?’
It is also known that Mary did travel to France after Jesus’ death…
Interesting…
That’s all… Bless…
Naiya said: For me (and really the end of any further debate from me, as I think I say my entire peace in this) THE overriding flaw in biblical verse is that it is written (and interpreted) by humans. Just because ’someone’ has sanctioned it as holy word of God does not make it so.
My response: In a different post you said that you were hoping for a little less rhetoric. From where I’m sitting, that’s all that you have provided. I certainly see no substantiation for any of your comments. Christians believe that the Bible was written by the Holy Spirit moving on men so that they wrote what He wanted although the style remained their own. Certainly there is a certain amount of faith in this belief but the fact that the Bible contains prophecies of future events which have come to pass. And we’re not talking about vague prophecies here like the nonsense from Nostradamus. Isaiah, writing around 800 BC, predicts a future ruler of Persia by name (Cyrus). Isaiah also predicts the method of Jesus’ execution even though crucifixion did not exist in Isaiah’s time. There are 360-some prophecies of Jesus’ first coming all of which were fullfilled exactly as predicted. One or two of these might be chalked up to dumb luck but it is absurd to think it could happen by accident as often as it has. If you want to believe that the Bible was written by men, how do you explain its prophetic accuracy?
It is true that sometimes people do interpret the Bible but, in doing so, they are disobeying it. 2 Pet 1:20-21 is very specific in prohibiting such private interpretation. As a Catholic I believe that the Holy Spirit has been given to the Church in such a way as to enable it to interpret the Bible as necessary. I know not everybody here will agree with that statement, however.
Naiya said: When something is written by humans – humans who stand to gain by being believed (power or authority) to have an understanding of ego is necessary… Who was Paul, for instance? What did he stand to gain? What were his human fears and shortcomings, his aspirations? Most importantly – Did he seek to give us (and the folks in Corinth) tools for believing in our capacity for spiritual transcendence? No, not by the accounts we are left with. He had difficulty conveying the message of Jesus with integrity in a difficult political landscape full of agenda. He stood to gain power by proclaiming that Humans are inherently sinful (just like the Hebraic tradition from which Paul came, and just like the contemporary church fathers do also.) All, except for Christ stood to gain worldly power … it extends to this day. Christ was alone Selfless.
My response: You apparently have not read much of the history of the early Church. Of the twelve apostles, including Matthias who replaced Judas, only St. John escaped martyrdom. St. John escaped only because God protected him when he was submerged in boiling oil. St. Paul was executed after multiple imprisonments and shipwrecks. The early Christians were dipped in oil and used to provide light for Nero’s chariots. Others were fed to wild beasts to provide entertainment. Jesus was, as you point out, truly selfless but the others learned from Him and followed His example. They gave up any kind of normal life to take the Gospel to the people so that they too might enjoy the fruits of salvation. Today people are still giving up wealth and family to bring spiritual and material aid to those who are wanting.
Naiya said: He gave us hope for believing in ourselves & in our innocence. ‘Be ye as little children’… He understood that at our very cores, we are Love, and proved it with his dying words. He understood our need to forgive ourselves. We accumulate muck along our life’s journey which keeps us in pain & separation (therefore, in self-judgment and sin). We need to feel loved by God (since we project God as outside ourselves) before we can truly merge with God… Because the truth is that we *are* God. Christ gives us reassurance that if we self-examine, are honest about oursleves, forgive others and forgive ourselves… and really reconcile our accumulated ‘junk’ – we experience the Kingdom here and now. Heaven is now, if we are willing.
My response: I wonder if you have ever read the gospels. If so, you have completely misunderstood the teaching of Jesus. It’s not just a matter of forgiving ourselves or even forgiving others. Justice mus be fulfilled and that is what Jesus did at Calvary. He died so that we might be free from sin. Forgiveness is necessary but it does not pay the price for our sins, the shedding of blood does. Neither Buddha, Confuscious, Mohammed or any Hindu master could do this for us even if they wanted to because they are sinners themselves. But God showed His love for us by sending His only Son to die for us so that we might be saved.
So feel free to sit in full lotus position and chant OM! all you want but your warm fuzzy feelings will do nothing for you in the end. Your sins must still be dealt with and nothing imperfect (unclean) can enter Heaven (Rev 21:27). And you have certainly not earned the right to bad-mouth the likes of St. Paul and the apostles.
Wow… That was rather hateful.
I guess you’re angry then…why? because I’m going to hell? I think that it pleases you to think so… I’m certainly not worried about it, obviously. If there is a heaven I’ll more likely be there than most. But I’d rather work on transforming the here and now just in case. ;)
are you mad because because I ‘bad-mouthed’ an apostle by suggesting he was human?
‘Jesus Christ died for your sins’… so metphysically how did that work exactly? you don’t care how it worked, why it was so… you just believe what others tell you.
*I find it disturbing how the Christian Mind has subtly aligned with right-wing WAR propaganda over the past few years.* I used to hear from most Christians that it was all about forgiveness and Love. Now its about ‘justice’ & punishment. hmmm… we’re moving backwards…
You seem pretty sensitive about the Christian martyrdom. I can tell tell you have some victim identification issues.
We don’t need to give up family nor wealth to help people… so get off your soapbox.
BTW, Do you know anything at all about Buddha? (Confucious was arguably not an enlightened being, but rather a conservative literalist who rose to power after Lao Tzu – the Taoist guy, who might be more in line with what you’re talking about…) Buddha predated modern Christendom and the concept of ‘being saved’ by believing in Christ as one’s personal savior… (Siddhartha Gautauma, the Buddha (c. 563-483) … so how do you know he was a sinner? Did a priest tell you he was? Has this priest (or you ever studied the teachings of Buddha? He never killed nor hurt anyone, was not concerned with power, led a simple life, and did many good works. His practical teachings have been a very positive influence on the planet, for the most part. How do you know the holy spirit didn’t ‘move on him’… ?
You Say: ‘Forgiveness is necessary but it does not pay the price for our sins, the shedding of blood does…’
(I just saw that) Is that the message of His crucifixion, really?? I would wager my soul that it’s not. I guess I am wagering my soul.
Humanity cannot thrive peacefully with themes of vengefulness & violence. We have not so far. If the Christianity you speak of is salvatory, should it not provide methods for reconciling our ‘failings’ other than ‘the shedding of blood’? Why would Christ die to make that statement?? I say YOU want to make that statement. Not Him.
RE: Rhetoric
Rhetoric can be described as the persuasive or “suasory” function of all human action, including symbolic action like language use. Both the terms “rhetoric” and “sophistry” are also used today in a pejorative or dismissive sense, when someone wants to distinguish between “empty” words and action, or between true or accurate information and misinformation, propaganda, or “spin,” or to denigrate certain forms of verbal reasoning as spurious…
far as I can tell, i haven’t described anything in a ’symbolic’ sense, and my words are my own, linguistically, thank you very much – i’m not indoctrinated to any particular method of believing in God. Since there are multiple meanings for the word ‘rhetoric’, i am clarifying what i meant with my criticism by giving the above definition. i think when someone says ‘christ died on the cross at calvary for our sins’ and ‘the holy spirit moves on men’ or ‘calling us into relationship with God’ they are using phrases which did not originate with them, but have heard and parroted over and over – they have lost their meaning culturally because of overuse, misuse and laziness.
i’m not saying its not true that Christ knowingly committed an act of self-sacrifice to prove that God finds us worthy, or to prove that death is not the end and we can conquer it, or to ensure that a tradition of forgiveness and non-judgment continues in the hearts of
people, or for whatever reason. but we need to define fully what we mean so as to engage in intellectual discussion.
So far there has been no intellectual discussion. You have not thus far provided me with one.
With my posts, i have only offered some cross-cultural context and offered some related ideas which could hopefully be regarded as an alternate point of view that supports *inclusiveness* of the world’s other spiritual traditions. To just accept that Christ meant what an interested 3rd party says he meant is lazy (and dangerous for you, if what you believe about Hell is true)…
Regarding your claim that predictions in the bible prove it’s superiority in accuracy – divination has been used since the beginning of time (no direct ‘act of God’ necessary, just an ability one can develop that requires nothing more than deep study.) And there are several prophetic manuscripts which have proven to be amazingly accurate. The Hopi, the Egyptians, the Mayans and the Hindus have very specific predictions which have so far all come to pass… and remain in the working, like the revelation of John -and- they all are in agreement with each other, despite thousands of miles and years between… Interestingly the Mayans have based a number of their calenders on these events as they correspong to cosmic, or galactic events, such as the precession of the equinoxes and the upcoming alignment of the galactic center of the milky way to our own sun in December of 2012. (The Mayans have 17 calendars all of which are more accurate and larger in scope than our own).
The fact that a work of fiction is causing so much uproar in the Christian community is telling.
If there were no doubt, then what is there to defend so vehemently? Surely most Christians
have some issues with the corruptions of the church – and there have been many many many abuses of power, corruptions and violations.
Why not stop denying it and help heal the church’s relationship to the world community – with women, with other faiths… So much is at stake…
It’s time for a good house-cleaning.
Until it does, then the church is not in alignment with Christ… and therefore it is Anti-Christ.
(And yes, that’s exactly what I mean.)
You Say: ‘Forgiveness is necessary but it does not pay the price for our sins, the shedding of blood does…’
(I just saw that) Is that the message of His crucifixion, really?? I would wager my soul that it’s not. I guess I am wagering my soul.
Humanity cannot thrive peacefully with themes of vengefulness & violence. We have not so far. If the Christianity you speak of is salvatory, should it not provide methods for reconciling our ‘failings’ other than ‘the shedding of blood’? Why would Christ die to make that statement?? I say YOU want to make that statement. Not Him.
Gary’s response: The requirement for the shedding of blood was God’s idea, not mine. If you object to it, your problem is with Him. It was God who instituted the Old Testament sacrificial system. Get a Bible and read Hebrews chapter 9. The requirement for the shedding of blood is quite clear there. It is not my idea at all and it is completely absurd to think that it was.
Naiya said: i think when someone says ‘christ died on the cross at calvary for our sins’ and ‘the holy spirit moves on men’ or ‘calling us into relationship with God’ they are using phrases which did not originate with them, but have heard and parroted over and over – they have lost their meaning culturally because of overuse, misuse and laziness.
My response: The fact remains that these are the best descriptions for the realities they represent. Did you notice, however, that you are contradicting yourself. First you accuse me of inventing the view that Jesus had to die for our sins to be forgiven. Now I’m parroting someone else. You can’t have it both ways.
I’ll save you the trouble of having to figure it out. I am using the terminology that was used when I was taught these truths. However, even if I am using a learned set of phrases to speak of a truth, it does not detract from its truthfulness. If you ask some physicists to define momentum or Einstein’s theory of relativity, you will get almost identical answers. The same would be true if asked a mathematician to tell you the Pythagorean theorem. That does not mean that these things are figments of their imagination; it means that those who discuss such things settled on what they feel is the best way to describe it.
Naiya said: i’m not saying its not true that Christ knowingly committed an act of self-sacrifice to prove that God finds us worthy, or to prove that death is not the end and we can conquer it, or to ensure that a tradition of forgiveness and non-judgment continues in the hearts of people, or for whatever reason. but we need to define fully what we mean so as to engage in intellectual discussion.
So far there has been no intellectual discussion. You have not thus far provided me with one.
My response: Maybe the problem is that you just don’t want to believe. I suspect that you would find some reason to not believe even if we had Sts. Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas here.
Naiya said: With my posts, i have only offered some cross-cultural context and offered some related ideas which could hopefully be regarded as an alternate point of view that supports *inclusiveness* of the world’s other spiritual traditions. To just accept that Christ meant what an interested 3rd party says he meant is lazy (and dangerous for you, if what you believe about Hell is true)…
My response: Your resposes are not cross-cultural, they are the same relativistic nonsense that has poisoned our eductional system in recent years. It serves no purpose other than to make those who hold it feel good about how open-minded they are.
If you had a sharp pain in your lower right side, would you go to the hospital to have a doctor check your appendix? Would you also go to some shaman to encircle you with candles and dance the demon out? I doubt it and that is so terribly uninclusive of you. How uninformed of you to reject consideration of the world’s other medical traditions. Don’t you understand that the sugeon, an interested third party, will make enough money off the operation to spend a weekend in the Bahamas? How lazy of you. Of course I’m being sarcastic but it does show the flaws in your reasoning. Just because alternatives exist, doesn’t bestow any validity on them. Additionally, you have no idea of my background. For all you know I spent the 1970s in India studying under some guru. I didn’t but you don’t know that. You just make rash assumptions about the people here because it helps you “prove” your little worldview.
Naiya said: Regarding your claim that predictions in the bible prove it’s superiority in accuracy – divination has been used since the beginning of time (no direct ‘act of God’ necessary, just an ability one can develop that requires nothing more than deep study.) And there are several prophetic manuscripts which have proven to be amazingly accurate. The Hopi, the Egyptians, the Mayans and the Hindus have very specific predictions which have so far all come to pass… and remain in the working, like the revelation of John -and- they all are in agreement with each other, despite thousands of miles and years between… Interestingly the Mayans have based a number of their calenders on these events as they correspong to cosmic, or galactic events, such as the precession of the equinoxes and the upcoming alignment of the galactic center of the milky way to our own sun in December of 2012. (The Mayans have 17 calendars all of which are more accurate and larger in scope than our own).
My response: I was very careful to avoid saying that the accuracy of the Bible’s prophecies prove anything. I said that, in the end, it is faith, but that things like the prophecies make that leap of faith less precipitous. I have never heard of any fullfilled prophecies from any of the sources you mentioned. Please provide details so that your claim can be validated.
Naiya said: The fact that a work of fiction is causing so much uproar in the Christian community is telling. If there were no doubt, then what is there to defend so vehemently? Surely most Christians have some issues with the corruptions of the church – and there have been many many many abuses of power, corruptions and violations.
Why not stop denying it and help heal the church’s relationship to the world community – with women, with other faiths… So much is at stake…
It’s time for a good house-cleaning.
Until it does, then the church is not in alignment with Christ… and therefore it is Anti-Christ.
(And yes, that’s exactly what I mean.)
My response: This is a very telling statement. It shows to me that your motivation is emotional outrage. You don’t like the way the church is and you want to remold it into something more to your liking. Guess what. That’s not your job. The Church does not have to change to fit you. You either take it or leave it as it is.
Gary Says: The requirement for the shedding of blood was God?s idea, not mine. If you object to it, your problem is with Him. It was God who instituted the Old Testament sacrificial system. Get a Bible and read Hebrews chapter 9. The requirement for the shedding of blood is quite clear there. It is not my idea at all and it is completely absurd to think that it was.
My Reply: Pfff… Okay.
So if we’re still operating by the old testament, then rape and slaughter of virgin children are good things, Gary. Women are unclean and should be treated as sex-slaves to bear male children, and blood sacrifices are desired by God… It’s not only in Hebrews though. Almost all of them – Exodus, Deuteronomy etc. You say ‘God’ says… ‘Take it up with Him.’ The point is that God *didn’t* write it. Logic would have that. Barbarian guys did that stuff on thier own. We still have problems with barbarian guys, Gary… same old stuff. Maybe its because two of our main religions endorse the behavior. I was 10 years old when I first read the story of Moses commanding the Levites to kill the Midianites, save for the girl children who were virgins, and commanded the soldiers to sacrifice a portion of them to Yahweh and keep the rest for themselves… the number totals like 12,000 little Midianite girls being raped by soldiers at God’s command via Moses… wholesome family values worthy of bedtime story material. Bet that’d make a great movie, huh Gary?
It took me a number of years after that to stop having nightmares about Moses, and to realize that God is not really an Asshole, just that people like to say God’s responsible for the stupid shit they decide to do in order to conquer other people….
Again, I find no intelligence…
Gary Says: If you ask some physicists to define momentum or Einstein?s theory of relativity, you will get almost identical answers.
My Reply: No I won’t. They will be able to adjust their lesson to the capacity of the student. Either they will write the mathematical formula down and describe it according to KNOWN PHYSICAL LAWS or they will help you to understand those laws in a simpler way. they won’t use emotionally evocative, nebulous, persuasive or baby language … as you do – and they won’t be speaking from scripted rebuttals or from memorized sermons – as you do. their language will describe the mechanics of the theory, and they will use examples and metaphors to illustrate it. You have just regurgitated propaganda… and it does most certainly detract from its truthfulness. You are supposed to be describing a personal experience of Jesus. Maybe you’re not actually having one. Just borrowing someone else’s.
Mary asks Jesus after the resurrection ‘Are you Soul or Spirit (Pneuma)?’ and Jesus says ‘It is neither, but the nous between the two.’ meaning he was conscious and interacting with this plane of existence, with her… but merely essence – not solid. He was able to interact, even physically – but transcended the limitations of being flesh… he could disappear, appear, travel anywhere instantaneously… This is the same thing others have done. Jesus wasn’t the only one who ever did this…. Oh but the others were sinners because they didn’t worship a God that wanted His followers to kill babies & rape virgins… maybe they were fags.
Gary Says: Your resposes are not cross-cultural, they are the same relativistic nonsense that has poisoned our eductional system in recent years. It serves no purpose other than to make those who hold it feel good about how open-minded they are.
My Reply: No, what has poisoned our educational system is the religious right’s attack on science & intellectualism (not to mention schools in general, as well as the environment and pretty much everything else worthy of protecting.). That’s why you people cannot even formulate your own verbage to describe the crucifixion or anything else for that matter. It’s only nonsense because *you* don’t understand it. You’re afraid of books… You want to bring back leeches & bloodletting and the stork, burn witches & books, and for our children to be so stupid that they are easily brainwashed by your old testament hoodoo-hate crap.
Gary Says: I was very careful to avoid saying that the accuracy of the Bible?s prophecies prove anything. I said that, in the end, it is faith, but that things like the prophecies make that leap of faith less precipitous. I have never heard of any fullfilled prophecies from any of the sources you mentioned. Please provide details so that your claim can be validated.
My Reply: Yeah, like you’re qualified to ‘validate’ Mayan, Hindu or Hopi prophecy. How arrogant… DO some research. It’s not exactly hidden information.
Gary Says: If you had a sharp pain in your lower right side, would you go to the hospital to have a doctor check your appendix? Would you also go to some shaman to encircle you with candles and dance the demon out? I doubt it and that is so terribly uninclusive of you. How uninformed of you to reject consideration of the world?s other medical traditions.
My Reply: No, Id probably go to my Naturopath or Chinese Practitioner first. I have not taken prescription or over the counter medications since I was a child (when, at my mother’s insistence). It is not likely I’ll ever have appedicitis anyway. If I were given the choice between Western Medicine and a Shaman in that case, however – since I would need visual diagnostic analysis for probable surgery, I would likely choose the Allopath who would be able to provide it. I might choose the Shaman in a different case, however.
Gary Says: Just because alternatives exist, doesn?t bestow any validity on them.
My Reply: You are correct. That is why there is investigation, intelligent discussion, testing and communication to find and substantiate practices and methods that are logical, healthy and beneficial. For instance, Chinese Medicine predates Western medicine by several thousand years, and there is ample evidence of course that it is quite effective, and that treatments have no side effects and do not require invasive treatments compared with western medicine. western medicine is best if you need the invasive treatment, however. Old testament blood sacrifices and virgin-raping to appease the bloodthirsty patriarchal War-God Yahweh is not even worthy of anymore intelligent discussion especially as another lame comparison postulated by a funda-mental midget… You just hate gay people and are afraid of women and want to keep the old testament stuff in circulation for those reasons. admit it, Gary ;)
Gary Says: Additionally, you have no idea of my background. For all you know I spent the 1970s in India studying under some guru. I didn?t but you don?t know that. You just make rash assumptions about the people here because it helps you ?prove? your little worldview…
My Reply: Naw Gary, I could tell right away the only reason you’d ever go to India was if your plane crashed there or to convert heathen scum. Seriously, your language gave it away. I think you spent the 1970’s being an uptight anal-retentive asshole, lol. I don’t need to prove anything. The world is the world open your eyes and see it for yourself.
Gary Says: The Church does not have to change to fit you. You either take it or leave it as it is.
My Reply: This is true. If you people don’t destroy the planet in your race for domination of everything, I can watch from the sidelines while it all burns down to the ground, a behemoth’s long struggle to keep power in spite of all it’s inconsistencies, hate-filled reasonings, atrocities, broken mechanisms, etc… the struggle will surely end if it doesn’t change. I’m not for throwing the baby out with the bath-water… but it’s not my baby, its yours.
Naiya said: Wow… That was rather hateful.
I guess you’re angry then…why? because I’m going to hell? I think that it pleases you to think so… I’m certainly not worried about it, obviously. If there is a heaven I’ll more likely be there than most. But I’d rather work on transforming the here and now just in case.
My response: I was not trying to be hateful at all. Just trying to snap you out of delusion into reality. I don’t know if you’re going to Hell, it’s not my job to decide and, for what it’s worth, I certainly hope you see the light. You say you’d rather work on transforming the here and now but what give you the right to decide what the here and now should be like? If God resigned and passed on the position to you, I, for one, did not get the memo. Perhaps you need to spend a little more time on ridding yourself of pretentiousness before you take on the task of changing the rest of the world to your idea of what’s better.
Naiya said: are you mad because because I ‘bad-mouthed’ an apostle by suggesting he was human?
My response: The apostles were human. Even Jesus was fully human although he was fully divine at the same time. (I know. It’s not logical. But don’t you think that a God that we could fully wrap our minds around would be a pretty pathetic God?)
If I’m upset at anything or anyone it’s what passes for education and intellectualism these days. Most of them are the blind leading the blind and, whenever someone tries to buck the trend of this silliness, they are called bigots or intollerant, the greatest sin against the liberal pantheon.
Naiya said: ‘Jesus Christ died for your sins’… so metphysically how did that work exactly? you don’t care how it worked, why it was so… you just believe what others tell you.
My response: There are some things which are beyond knowing on our own. They must be revealed to us. Anybody should be able to look at the world around us and know that it didn’t just pop into existance as the end result of random chance. There had to be some kind of creator. However, being the creator he must be even farther above us than we are to the amoeba. Fortunately, he chose to reveal himself to us.
Naiya said: *I find it disturbing how the Christian Mind has subtly aligned with right-wing WAR propaganda over the past few years.* I used to hear from most Christians that it was all about forgiveness and Love. Now its about ‘justice’ & punishment. hmmm… we’re moving backwards…
My response: Another example of you placing yourself in the position of the ultimate judge of what is right and what is wrong. At least the Church claims to be following what it believes God is telling it. You just come out and condemn it for not seeing things your way.
No one likes war. I wish the problems of the world could be settled in other ways. But mankind is in a fallen state and needs to be redeemed. (And no, I don’t need to be told that mankind is sinful. All I have to do is open a newspaper.) There is such a thing as a just war and I believe that our efforts in Iraq qualify as such.
Naiya said: You seem pretty sensitive about the Christian martyrdom. I can tell tell you have some victim identification issues.
My response: Not at all. I just think it is ridiculous to charge people who died for their faith for promoting that faith for personal gain.
Naiya said: We don’t need to give up family nor wealth to help people… so get off your soapbox.
My response: I never said that it was necessary in all cases. I just pointed out that a lot of the people you were attacking did do so. Maybe you have some issues.
re: Buddha
“How do you know the holy spirit didn’t ‘move on him’… ?”
Very simple, the Holy Spirit doesn’t say one thing to one person and something else to another. Buddha taught falsehood.
Naiya said: Naw Gary, I could tell right away the only reason you?d ever go to India was if your plane crashed there or to convert heathen scum. Seriously, your language gave it away. I think you spent the 1970?s being an uptight anal-retentive asshole, lol. I don?t need to prove anything. The world is the world open your eyes and see it for yourself.
My response: Gee, and you accused me of being angry. You want an intellectual discussion yet you result to insults and foul language. I have no patience for people who resort to this sort of thing. I will continue to pray for your soul, that you would repent before it is too late, but I won?t waste my time with this sort of thing.
Gary Says: Very simple, the Holy Spirit doesn?t say one thing to one person and something else to another.
‘…Thou shall not kill…’
‘…And you must not spare the life of any living thing. Lay them under the curse of destruction: Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, as Yahweh your God has commanded you…’
Yahweh then said to Moses, ‘Take vengeance on the Midianites. Treat the Midianites as enemies and kill them. After that you will be gathered to your people.’
‘…Thou shalt not commit adultery…’
“Thou shalt betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her.” Deut. 28:30
‘ ‘Kill all the male children! And kill all the women who have known a man! But spare the lives of the young girls who have never known a man. Keep them for yourselves.’
‘…Thou shall not steal…’
The Israelites took the Midianite women and children as captives. They took their cattle, their flocks, and all their wealth.
‘…Thou shall not covet… thy neighbors wife…’
Deuteronomy 21:11 ‘And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;
21:12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;
21:13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.
21:14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.
How should the Moabites be treated?
Do not fight against them or take their land.
Deuteronomy 2:9
And the LORD said unto me [Moses], Distress not the Moabites, neither contend with them in battle: for I will not give thee of their land for a possession; because I have given Ar unto the children of Lot for a possession.
Kill them and take their land.
Judges 3:28-30
And he [Joshua] said unto them, Follow after me: for the LORD hath delivered your enemies the Moabites into your hand….. And they slew of Moab at that time about ten thousand men … and there escaped not a man. Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel.
Is it necessary to keep the Sabbath?
Yes.
Exodus 16:29
The LORD hath given you the sabbath. … abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.
Exodus 20:8
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exodus 31:13-15
Six days my work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
Exodus 34:21
Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest.
Exodus 35:2
Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.
Leviticus 19:3, 30
Ye shall … keep my sabbaths: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 23:3
Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the LORD.
Numbers 15:32, 36
And they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day …. And all the congregation brought him without the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.
Deuteronomy 5:12
Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.
Isaiah 56:2
Blessed is the man … that keepeth the sabbath.
No.
Isaiah 1:13
The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity.
Matthew 12:2
Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
John 5:16
And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.
Romans 14:5
One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Colossians 2:16
Let no man therefore judge you in meat and drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon; or of the sabbath days.
should I continue? there are lots of them.
what falsehoods did Buddha teach?
“Only 68 of 200 Anglican priests polled could name all Ten Commandments, but half said they believed in space aliens.” – Randy Cassingham
OK… language kids.
I’m shutting down comments on this thread as it’s just getting nasty. Calm it down or I’ll start moderating!