There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along.

But they are going to the same heaven...

Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice.

So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there.

Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth?

This is politics, not religion. MODS please move this question.

azulene wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along. But they are going to the same heaven... Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice. So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there. Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth?

shouldnt this be on extreme?

Only Christians believe Jesus is the son of god, the rest of them believe he was a prophet.
Jews, Muslims and Christians believe in the one god and have spent thousands of years beating each other around as to the best way to worship that 1 god.
Makes no sense to me but what the heck   :D

adelcrow wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:43am:

Only Christians believe Jesus is the son of god, the rest of them believe he was a prophet. Jews, Muslims and Christians believe in the one god and have spent thousands of years beating each other around as to the best way to worship that 1 god. Makes no sense to me but what the heck   :D

so you also think  its political... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Na..Im sure it will be moved soon but Im happy to put my 2 cents worth in
What can I say, its a cold day, the missus is at work and Im home recovering from the surgery I had on Tuesday so Im happy to chat about any old rubbish  :D

adelcrow wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:51am:

Na..Im sure it will be moved soon but Im happy to put my 2 cents worth in What can I say, its a cold day, the missus is at work and Im home recovering from the surgery I had on Tuesday so Im happy to chat about any old rubbish  :D

And are you well   ;)

adelcrow wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:51am:

Na..Im sure it will be moved soon but Im happy to put my 2 cents worth in What can I say, its a cold day, the missus is at work and Im home recovering from the surgery I had on Tuesday so Im happy to chat about any old rubbish  :D

ugh hope not to serious you make me feel bad now for picking on you...

hey it wasnt ulcers was it?.. from what happening to your party of choice...lol.. just joking..

anyway wish you a speddy recovery I am thinking it cant be too bad otherwise th missus wouldnt have gone to work and left you all alone.. :)

progressiveslol wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:40am:

This is politics, not religion. MODS please move this question.

The mods let all kinds of things go on here. Threats, blatant racism, sexism, gay bashing etc.

A lot of these very prejudiced people are religious and many happen to be Liberal supporters.

I am by no means saying that all Labor supporters aren't religious, but I am probing the stability and source of prejudice as it relates to religion and political stance.

adelcrow wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:43am:

Only Christians believe Jesus is the son of god, the rest of them believe he was a prophet. Jews, Muslims and Christians believe in the one god and have spent thousands of years beating each other around as to the best way to worship that 1 god. Makes no sense to me but what the heck   :D

But they still go to the same heaven don't they?

cods wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:40am:

azulene wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 8:37am: There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along. But they are going to the same heaven... Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice. So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there. Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth? shouldnt this be on extreme?

What is extreme about it?

azulene wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along. But they are going to the same heaven... Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice. So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there. Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth?

In my experience Christians don't think about Heaven at all, although many do seem to have a pretty fixed idea of what hell is meant to be like.

Christians are united by the Nicean Creed, a document that came out of the first Council of Nicea in 325 ACE, a few hundred years after Jesus died. What amazes me is how all the heterogenous churches do believe pretty much the same thing.

adelcrow wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:43am:

Only Christians believe Jesus is the son of god, the rest of them believe he was a prophet.

Which reminds me (although this is going off topic a bit) that there is an excellent book by Swami Prabhavananda, called "The Sermon on the Mount According to Vedanta".  I bought a copy about seven or eight years ago in the Adyar Bookshop in Sydney.

You can also access it online at http://www.filestube.com/s/sermon+on+the+mount+according+to+vedanta although I haven't downloaded it, as I already have a copy.

Frances wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 4:36pm:

adelcrow wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 8:43am: Only Christians believe Jesus is the son of god, the rest of them believe he was a prophet. Which reminds me (although this is going off topic a bit) that there is an excellent book by Swami Prabhavananda, called "The Sermon on the Mount According to Vedanta".  I bought a copy about seven or eight years ago in the Adyar Bookshop in Sydney. You can also access it online at http://www.filestube.com/s/sermon+on+the+mount+according+to+vedanta although I haven't downloaded it, as I already have a copy.

Thanks for this. I've read some great yoga teachings on the Bible. Paramahamsa Yogananda is another fantastic read.

I like the Jesus quote, "If thine eye be single, thy whole body will be filled with light." I.e, if you meditate on the "third eye" chakra, you see divine light. Your "energy" body will be illuminated.

Read with this in mind, it's difficult to understand that Jesus meant it any other way. But the point of Jesus's teachings - and much of the Bible - is that they contain layers of meaning.

This is where fundamentalists make their fundamental mistake: the Bible is only as literal as you're prepared to make it.

The religious everywhere make the same mistake, from Muslims to atheists.

i am not religious

i observe many in a state of confusion

with forgiveness

namaste

-:)

azulene wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 9:33am:

adelcrow wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 8:43am: Only Christians believe Jesus is the son of god, the rest of them believe he was a prophet. Jews, Muslims and Christians believe in the one god and have spent thousands of years beating each other around as to the best way to worship that 1 god. Makes no sense to me but what the heck   :D But they still go to the same heaven don't they?

We need more information before we can provide an informed reply. Can you please provide a kml file with the precise location of heaven first?

I did a Google maps search and could only find Captain America's Hamburger Heaven, and a very questionable establishment in South Yarra called Heaven's Gate.  

Now it is possible that Jews, Muslims and Christians go to that particular establishment but probably wouldn't want to acknowledge the fact.


cods wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:40am:

shouldnt this be on extreme?

Maybe it should be under Real Estate.

azulene wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along. But they are going to the same heaven... Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice. So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there. Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth?

Heaven ?

Is that how you describe heaven ?

A place where there is contention ?



Romans 14:17
For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.


My understanding of 'heaven', is that 'heaven' is to live, to dwell, in the presence of God.


1 John 1:5
This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.


Will darkness and contention, dwell with light and peace ?

Do you think so ???

How does darkness and light, dwell together ?

Would you care to explain that to me ?




+++


Psalms 51:11
Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.


Psalms 15:1
LORD, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill?
2  He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart.
3  He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his neighbour, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour.
4  In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the LORD. He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.


Psalms 5:4
For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee.
5  The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.


Numbers 16:5
...the LORD will shew who are his, and who is holy;...even him whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him.


John 8:34
Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
35  And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.


Malachi 3:14
Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his ordinance, and that we have walked mournfully before the LORD of hosts?
15  And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.
16  Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.
17  And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.
18  Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not.

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 9:09pm:

i am not religious i observe many in a state of confusion with forgiveness namaste -:)

Confused? Make thine eye be single.

And your whole body shall be filled with Light!

Forgiven.

Karnal wrote on Aug 12^th, 2011 at 4:57pm:

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 9:09pm: i am not religious i observe many in a state of confusion with forgiveness namaste -:) Confused? Make thine eye be single. And your whole body shall be filled with Light! Forgiven.

Confusion and sadness are incompatible emotions.
Those who are confused are too busy being confused to feel sad.  

Long reign confusion  :P

- namaste

Confused? Make thine eye be single.

And your whole body shall be filled with Light!

Forgiven.

___________

one eyed references unto set be forgiven yes

along with your confusions and that which you do

not fully comprehend beloved

namaste

-:)

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 10:56am:

Confused? Make thine eye be single. And your whole body shall be filled with Light! Forgiven. ___________ one eyed references unto set be forgiven yes along with your confusions and that which you do not fully comprehend beloved namaste -:)

Perhaps you would like to suggest which confusions and one-eyed references are not fully comprehended, dear one.

Forgiven.

Claiming that you will go to Heaven obviously does not guarantee that you will be going to Heaven.

Who created Heaven? God.

Therefore, who owns Heaven? God.

Who will decide who goes to heaven? God.

Puny humans have no say in who goes to Heaven.

falah wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 8:16pm:

Claiming that you will go to Heaven obviously does not guarantee that you will be going to Heaven. Who created Heaven? God. Therefore, who owns Heaven? God. Who will decide who goes to heaven? God. Puny humans have no say in who goes to Heaven.

Yes, but what if all are God?

Not religious you see.

I am that I am that

I am

Forgiven.

muso wrote on Aug 12^th, 2011 at 8:09am:

azulene wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 9:33am: adelcrow wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 8:43am: Only Christians believe Jesus is the son of god, the rest of them believe he was a prophet. Jews, Muslims and Christians believe in the one god and have spent thousands of years beating each other around as to the best way to worship that 1 god. Makes no sense to me but what the heck   :D But they still go to the same heaven don't they? We need more information before we can provide an informed reply. Can you please provide a kml file with the precise location of heaven first? I did a Google maps search and could only find Captain America's Hamburger Heaven, and a very questionable establishment in South Yarra called Heaven's Gate.   Now it is possible that Jews, Muslims and Christians go to that particular establishment but probably wouldn't want to acknowledge the fact. cods wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 8:40am: shouldnt this be on extreme? Maybe it should be under Real Estate.

LMAO! MUSO .. BEHAVE LOL :P

Perhaps you would like to suggest which confusions and one-eyed references are not fully comprehended, dear one.

Forgiven.

_________________

it is not upon i to manifest your ignorance

with forgiveness

namaste

-:)

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 11:10pm:

Perhaps you would like to suggest which confusions and one-eyed references are not fully comprehended, dear one. Forgiven. _________________ it is not upon i to manifest your ignorance with forgiveness namaste -:)

Thank you for not manifesting my ignorace, Light.

Forgiven.

Karnal wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 11:14pm:

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 13th, 2011 at 11:10pm: Perhaps you would like to suggest which confusions and one-eyed references are not fully comprehended, dear one. Forgiven. _________________ it is not upon i to manifest your ignorance with forgiveness namaste -:) Thank you for not manifesting my ignorace, Light. Forgiven.

Allow me to manifest your ignorance by pointing out that you have misspelled the word "ignorance" :)

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 11:10pm:

Perhaps you would like to suggest which confusions and one-eyed references are not fully comprehended, dear one. Forgiven. _________________ it is not upon i to manifest your ignorance with forgiveness namaste -:)

But yours to determine the nature of said manifestation?

Hamassed.

Lisa Jones wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 11:19pm:

Karnal wrote on Aug 13th, 2011 at 11:14pm: it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 13th, 2011 at 11:10pm: Perhaps you would like to suggest which confusions and one-eyed references are not fully comprehended, dear one. Forgiven. _________________ it is not upon i to manifest your ignorance with forgiveness namaste -:) Thank you for not manifesting my ignorace, Light. Forgiven. Allow me to manifest your ignorance by pointing out that you have misspelled the word "ignorance" :)

Oh no, that's just the way I meant to spell it. Light knows exactly what I mean.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 11:32pm:

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 13th, 2011 at 11:10pm: Perhaps you would like to suggest which confusions and one-eyed references are not fully comprehended, dear one. Forgiven. _________________ it is not upon i to manifest your ignorance with forgiveness namaste -:) But yours to determine the nature of said manifestation? Hamassed.

ROFLMAO!

the CHRIST is within all you much beloved and angelic souls

do any deny this fact?

with forgiveness you shall manifest this

it is so

and so it is

so be it

i LOVE you

namaste

-:)

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 14^th, 2011 at 7:00am:

the CHRIST is within all you much beloved and angelic souls do any deny this fact? with forgiveness you shall manifest this -:)

Yes, but we can't be forgiven by you for ever, Light.

Will you send someone else down to forgive us when you depart this dimension?

Karnal wrote on Aug 14^th, 2011 at 3:08pm:

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 14th, 2011 at 7:00am: the CHRIST is within all you much beloved and angelic souls do any deny this fact? with forgiveness you shall manifest this -:) Yes, but we can't be forgiven by you for ever, Light. Will you send someone else down to forgive us when you depart this dimension?

I think it's time to shoot his dog... To, y'know, test his capacity to forgive ;D

Yes, but we can't be forgiven by you for ever, Light.

____________

forgiveness is eternal much beloved

and highly regarded angelic brother being

does this fact manifest comfort unto you?

im interested

with forgiveness

namaste

-:)

Will you send someone else down to forgive us when you depart this dimension?

____________

there are countless of my brother sister angelic beings here already

i am not alone

for i am that

i am

namaste

-:)

it_is_the_light wrote on Aug 14^th, 2011 at 5:00pm:

Yes, but we can't be forgiven by you for ever, Light. ____________ forgiveness is eternal much beloved and highly regarded angelic brother being does this fact manifest comfort unto you? im interested with forgiveness namaste -:)

Jesus forgives sins, dear one. Just open thy heart unto Him and ye shall enter His Kingdom.

This manifests much comfort, I'm told.

i do observe the CHRIST yes

within us all

so be it

namaste

-:)

Blasphemy, beloved brother.

Forgiven.

you do repeat a colloquialism grounded in a confusion that

i do not comfort

freewill you see?

forgiven

namaste

Yes, but we can't be forgiven by you for ever, Light.

_________

another statement i do observe and do not judge

for it is grounded within confusions and ignorances

forgiven

namaste

do any really believe GOD would send HIS one and only son

amongst all HIS sons and daughters?

are you not worthy?

this may be a self loathing aspect you may have the care to confront

with forgiveness

see how you go

namaste

-:)

falah wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 8:16pm:

Claiming that you will go to Heaven obviously does not guarantee that you will be going to Heaven. Who created Heaven? God. Therefore, who owns Heaven? God. Who will decide who goes to heaven? God. Puny humans have no say in who goes to Heaven.

Incorrect. He subcontracted its construction to Brahma.  


Quote:

Vishnu spoke to his servant: 'It is time to begin.' Brahma bowed. Vishnu commanded: 'Create the world.'

falah wrote on Aug 13^th, 2011 at 8:16pm:

Claiming that you will go to Heaven obviously does not guarantee that you will be going to Heaven. Who created Heaven? God. Therefore, who owns Heaven? God. Who will decide who goes to heaven? God. Puny humans have no say in who goes to Heaven.

I don't worry about 'heaven'.

'Heaven' is a [spiritual] concept, not a place/location, imo.





+++


Read...

Psalms 23:1
The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
2  He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
3  He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
4  Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
5  Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
6  Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.


Psalms 32:1
Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
2  Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.


Psalms 51:10
Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
11  Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.




IMO, David [Psalms] demonstrated that he understood the nature of God, and that he understood the importance of such an understanding.

I see God, as my spiritual redeemer, and as a [my] 'shelter from the storm'.

And that is the only 'heaven' i need.



Romans 14:17
For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

azulene wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along. But they are going to the same heaven... Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice. So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there. Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth?

Actually, if you examine the different christian churches, all are convinced that ONLY members of their own particular version will go to heaven.....Which means if they are all correct, then no one would get in...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 11:53am:

azulene wrote on Aug 11th, 2011 at 8:37am: There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along. But they are going to the same heaven... Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice. So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there. Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth? Actually, if you examine the different christian churches, all are convinced that ONLY members of their own particular version will go to heaven.....Which means if they are all correct, then no one would get in...

LOL

Exactly so.



+++





Isaiah 64:4
For since the beginning of the world men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee, what he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.
5  Thou meetest him that rejoiceth and worketh righteousness, those that remember thee in thy ways: behold, thou art wroth; for we have sinned: in those is continuance, and we shall be saved.
6  But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
7  And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities.


1 Corinthians 2:6
Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
7  But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8  Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9  But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.


Q.
Who are 'the princes of this world' spoken of above ???

A.
They are all of those among men who seek mastery, in this world, and those who justify themselves to men.

They are among those who say;

"If you wish to enter Heaven, you must be a member of OUR church."




+++


Jesus said...
"...thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."
Revelation 2:6
Revelation 2:15

Nicolaitans???

'Nicolaitan', refers to those who [Nico] 'rule over' or 'conquer', and [the laity] 'the people'.

Jesus in Revelation, and, in the Gospels, said that he hated those hypocrites, who use the authority of 'religion' [a false, worldly 'spirituality'], to rule over men.

Matthew 20:25
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:

Popes???

'Papa'?


"....And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
"...But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."
Matthew 23:1-13

Yadda wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 11:34am:

falah wrote on Aug 13th, 2011 at 8:16pm: Claiming that you will go to Heaven obviously does not guarantee that you will be going to Heaven. Who created Heaven? God. Therefore, who owns Heaven? God. Who will decide who goes to heaven? God. Puny humans have no say in who goes to Heaven. I don't worry about 'heaven'. 'Heaven' is a [spiritual] concept, not a place/location, imo. +++ Read...

Your belief is not necessarily scriptural:

See:

2 Corinthians 12 verse 2:


Quote:

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven.

Acts Chapter 1: verse 10,11


Quote:

They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

Revelation 21, verses 15 to 21 (Describing the New Jerusalem ie Heaven if you read verse 1)


Quote:

15 The angel who talked with me had a measuring rod of gold to measure the city, its gates and its walls. 16 The city was laid out like a square, as long as it was wide. He measured the city with the rod and found it to be 12,000 stadia[c] in length, and as wide and high as it is long. 17 The angel measured the wall using human measurement, and it was 144 cubits[d] thick.[e] 18 The wall was made of jasper, and the city of pure gold, as pure as glass. 19 The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, 20 the fifth onyx, the sixth ruby, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth turquoise, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst.[f] 21 The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl. The great street of the city was of gold, as pure as transparent glass.

and particularly

John 14 verses 2,3and 4:


Quote:

2 My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. 4 You know the way to the place where I am going.”

I never knew god was italian!
I think I have driven past that house, I think it had green painted concrete in the front yard, and a couple of cement lions on the front steps.

muso wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 2:08pm:

Your belief is not necessarily scriptural: See: 2 Corinthians 12 verse 2: Acts Chapter 1: verse 10,11 Revelation 21, verses 15 to 21 (Describing the New Jerusalem ie Heaven if you read verse 1) John 14 verses 2,3and 4:

muso,

That is a difficult one.

IMO, these verses are trying to describe spiritual realities, to fleshly minds [to minds which only understand [have only experience of] a fleshly, physical world].

You quoted Paul.....

2 Corinthians 12:2
I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.
3  And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)

Which i believe, was an account of an out of body experience.
Was Paul speaking of his own out of body experience ???
Paul is not explicit.

And again, in Jesus words;

John 14:2
In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3  And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
4  And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

And again Jesus refers to spiritual concepts...

John 3:11
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12  If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

+++

Now, despite apparently measuring spiritual Jerusalem, despite Jesus disappearing into the clouds [to go to 'heaven'], despite Paul describing being 'caught up to the third heaven', i do not believe that heaven can have a temporal, fleshly, physical location.

But i also, do not at all understand the spiritual world with my fleshly mind, and i believe that no person can [do that].

But i believe that the physical world and the spiritual world exist some-what together [within the same underlying reality???], but that they may exist at different 'vibrational frequencies', in much the same way that within the 'construct' of light, colours are revealed to our eyes, due to the different vibrational frequencies within the spectrum of light.


Trying to pursue these paradoxical thoughts [about the nature of spiritual 'locations'] a little further;
Heaven may have a spiritual 'location' [or perhaps a thought location].

i.e.
In my muddled, fleshly mind, 'heaven' is a spiritual concept, which [i believe, also] has a spiritual reality.

But what those words mean, i do not know, and i cannot explain, because i [we] do not understand such things.

As i said, i do not at all understand the spiritual world with my fleshly mind.

The best way to try to describe what i mean by that [that 'heaven' may have a spiritual 'location'], is to relate to you that the buildings of the primary school that i attended as a child, [were torn down, and] no longer exist.

But when i access my memories, [in my consciousness] i can 'visit' the school [buildings] of my childhood.

I believe that in the same way, heaven may 'exist' or have a similar spiritual 'local'.

I know that such spiritual realities do exist [that they are 'real' [in the same way, that the man Jesus, 'was' real], but my mind cannot comprehend these spiritual realities, because in trying to understand these things, my fleshly mind is pushing the boundry [the limits] of my comprehension.


Isaiah 55:8
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9  For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

John 3:6  That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7  Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8  The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

John 8:23
And he [Jesus] said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.

Romans 8:5
For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.



Is it foolish for a person to meditate upon such things ?

Of course it is.

Malachi 3:14-18

muso wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 2:08pm:

Your belief is not necessarily scriptural: See: 2 Corinthians 12 verse 2: Acts Chapter 1: verse 10,11 Revelation 21, verses 15 to 21 (Describing the New Jerusalem ie Heaven if you read verse 1) John 14 verses 2,3and 4:

muso,

You quoted the verse; "In my Father's house are many mansions:" [John 14:2].

I believe that verse is referring to how we may regard our own body, as having the function of a 'house' [or a temporary prison!] for our spirit(s).

e.g.
Lamentations 3:33
For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men.
34  To crush under his feet all the prisoners of the earth,

Psalms 69:33
For the LORD heareth the poor, and despiseth not his prisoners.



Here are some further bible verses which refer [sometimes obliquely] to this circumstance [of our own body, being a 'house' [or prison] for our spirit(s)]...

Matthew 12:43
When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
44  Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.
45  Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.

John 2:19
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20  Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21  But he spake of the temple of his body.

Acts 7:46
Who found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob.
47  But Solomon built him an house.
48  Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,

1 Corinthians 3:16
Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

2 Corinthians 5:1
For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2  For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3  If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
4  For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened....

2 Peter 1:13
Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance;
14  Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me.
15  Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance.



There is also this description of the nature of the relationship between God [spirit] and man [flesh], attributed to Moses;

"...the God of the spirits of all flesh,"

Numbers 16:22
And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation?

and;

Numbers 27:16
Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation,


One day we must all 'put off' this body, we [our spirit] will be redeemed, OR, not.

What do i believe happens to our spirit, when this body is 'let go' ?


Ecclesiastes 12:7
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Hebrews 9:27
And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

To the origy dig q


Quote:

A question about Jesus religions There are quite a few different ones and they don't get along. But they are going to the same heaven... Meaning heaven is going to be filled with argument, hatred and prejudice. So they have turned heaven into hell before they even got there. Why should we trust such people with what goes on on earth?

You are probably quite righter and more enlightened than the Christians.
For, like reincarnation cannot be anything other than continuing what you have attained,
So must the afterlife be with as much laughter.

Why trust the deluded?

Religion is the same as politics, as the second hand to the minute hand, and the hour hand to your hand.
And the hour is at hand.

If we have faith no more question will intervene this issue..especially about Jesus..for me..Jesus is spiritually there..we cannot see him..but I myself could say that we could feel His presence wherever and whenever we are...all you have to do is to believe.

"If thine eye be single, thy whole body will be filled with light."

= means no other than if you focus only on your Spirituality, you will be dIVINE.


No need more to be babbling babboons or buffoons. ;D Although I'm an ID-iot.

Superman1 wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2011 at 10:38pm:

"If thine eye be single, thy whole body will be filled with light." = means no other than if you focus only on your Spirituality, you will be dIVINE. No need more to be babbling babboons or buffoons. ;D Although I'm an ID-iot.

Means "no other"? Are you saying there can only be one reading of the Bible? Sounds a tad fundamentalist to me.

But your reading is valid. Jesus was adept - as many wise people are - at speaking many different truths at once.

Jesus taught his disciples practical ways of reaching enlightenment - the "Kingdom". Of course, I have no evidence of this, it's just a hunch. A spiritual master (or even God) would not have 12 people following him around for a couple of years if he didn't give them something to take with them.

These techniques are only taught to people who are ready for them. The religion that arose from the teachings of Yeheshua avoided them. In fact, it actively rooted them out during the Council of Nicea, the establishment of the official Roman church ordered by Constantine.

The Nag Hamadi texts, discovered in Egypt in the 1940s, provide a different reading of Yeheshua's teachings to the aproved gospels. Like the Dead Sea scrolls, they have been authenticated (carbon dated to the time of the Council of Nicea). The gospels of Thomas, Mary Magdalene and Judas present a different twist to the teachings of the desert mystic that was Jesus. Like the gospels of the New Testament, of course, we have no idea who wrote them.

Some of the Christian spiritual practices were rediscovered in the monastic traditions of medieval Europe. However, the emphasis changed during the reformation, and then in the Enlightenment. The teachings of Jesus became a system of belief, rather than a progressive method of reaching the Kingdom. A lot of monastic practices fell away as the church sought, post-Darwin, to be rational and scientific. In the 19th century it became utilitarian, its focus shifting to welfare and social justice.

After two world wars and the rise of the welfare state, the church occupied a vacuum. Its power and meaning had been stripped away along with with the bells and incense. From this existential crisis, Billy Graham rode in to rescue Christianity. The born-again movement spread throughout Protestant and Catholic arms, but it fueled a then fringe movement, Pentacostalism.

Today, this is the fastest growing Christian movement in the world. In China, underground Pentacostal cells are springing up all over the place. The Australian Hillsong Church has gone international - even spreading in Orthadox communities in Eastern Europe.

Pentacostalism teaches that God performs miracles now - that God can heal, make you happy and make you rich. In the west, it meets an impatient, consumerist population who want instant results and quick fixes. In Australia, research has shown that people stay for an average of five years. After conversion and imersion (Bible study, groups, volunteer programs and missionary service), people tend to lose interest. This pattern could be completely different in other populations, such as China, Eastern Europe, Africa and South America.

This is my own potted history. I'm sure you've got your own. My point is that much of the point of Jesus's teachings have been lost. I believe that if you want to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, you now have to look elsewhere. It's interesting that when the English Buddhist nun, Tenzin Palmo taught in Italian monestaries, they all wanted to learn Buddhist meditation practices over the ancient Christian practices she was trying to teach. Buddhism teaches that you should stick to your own tradition, be it Christian, Muslim or Jew as much as possible. Buddhist teachings are agnostic.

This does not make the Christian religion wrong. It still serves a valuable purpose, particularly in a rational, consumerist world with few ethical teachings. But the belief that you just have to believe that Jesus is God and you're saved from hell is a fundamental error in the teachings of the church. This, of course, is exactly what the Anglican church in Sydney has focused on during the reign of the Jensen brothers. It's what makes Christianity a religion rather than a spiritual path, and it's what leads to much conflict with other religions.

And it's not the point. The point is to develop love for others and a relationship with, or an awareness of, God. Belief in jesus is just the first step in the Christian path, but many believe now that it's the only step, that it's all that's necessary. Once you convert, you're saved. This "baptism of the heart" now occupies the place baptism with water used to occupy. Baptism with water is an initiation used in many spiritual traditions, but it is initiation only. It is not salvation.

karnal

Quote:

..........that God can heal, make you happy and make you rich. In the west, it meets an impatient, consumerist population who want instant results and quick fixes. In Australia, research has shown that people stay for an average of five years. After conversion and imersion (Bible study, groups, volunteer programs and missionary service), people tend to lose interest........

God can and does heal.
5 years, sounds quite biblical to me. You are not meant to find the right church and just stay there. You are meant to go out into the world.
You are meant to go back to the church when required, not as a weekly fillup for decades.


Quote:

........Belief in jesus is just the first step in the Christian path, but many believe now that it's the only step, that it's all that's necessary. Once you convert, you're saved. This "baptism of the heart" now occupies the place baptism with water used to occupy. Baptism with water is an initiation used in many spiritual traditions, but it is initiation only. It is not salvation.......

baptism of the heart is often the first ...... recognition.
A water baptism is voluntary, comes after.
I don't agree with the "convert and be saved" idea. it's against the bible teachings.
likewise the accusations of "Jesus forgives any crime you commit after becoming a xian" are quite false.

I more see it as an ongoing struggle, where I can often say "Well, I failed there."

Very true, SC. God can and does heal, and baptism is just the first step. I'm not sure about forgiveness of serious crimes against others. I don't know how God or the universe works. But harder than external forgiveness is forgiving yourself.

I'm not sure about other churches. People leave Hillsong on average after five years. Many don't go to other churches. Many lose hope, I think, in the whole prosperity doctrine that they signed up for. Life does not get magically better in all areas once you commit your life to Jesus.

You have an opportunity to change, true, but you have to sieze it. Changing lifelong habits and thinking patterns is very hard.

forgiveness for serious crimes - yes.
Jesus has paid for it.
But, once knowing Jesus one would not go on sinning. It'ld be like slapping the person that helped you to your feet.
If one kept seriously sinning once becoming a xian, you never really knew jesus.
"Crimes" should be less frequent and of less severity, if not stop immediately.
That's a sign of a "conversion" aka Paul on the road to Damascus.

Once Paul met Jesus, it changed his life. Paul did not go back to who he was.

The prosperity doctrine is preached out of proportion from what is in the Bible. It is only a little part of the Bible.


Quote:

........Life does not get magically better in all areas once you commit your life to Jesus.......

- hahahah, indeed not !!!!!!! Sometimes it worsens.
It was the death knell to my marriage.



Quote:

...........You have an opportunity to change, true, but you have to sieze it. Changing lifelong habits and thinking patterns is very hard. ......

10/10 for that one.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 6^th, 2011 at 1:35pm:

forgiveness for serious crimes - yes. Jesus has paid for it. But, once knowing Jesus one would not go on sinning. It'ld be like slapping the person that helped you to your feet. If one kept seriously sinning once becoming a xian, you never really knew jesus. "Crimes" should be less frequent and of less severity, if not stop immediately. That's a sign of a "conversion" aka Paul on the road to Damascus.

I have never spoken to any Christian who's had a road to Damascus experience.

You hear a lot of "god told me this", or "God told me that". It's rather convenient sometimes.

There must be a lot of Christians around who never knew Jesus. And yes, Jesus said this himself.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 6^th, 2011 at 1:06pm:

Quote: ........Belief in jesus is just the first step in the Christian path, but many believe now that it's the only step, that it's all that's necessary. Once you convert, you're saved. This "baptism of the heart" now occupies the place baptism with water used to occupy. Baptism with water is an initiation used in many spiritual traditions, but it is initiation only. It is not salvation....... baptism of the heart is often the first ...... recognition. A water baptism is voluntary, comes after. I don't agree with the "convert and be saved" idea. it's against the bible teachings. likewise the accusations of "Jesus forgives any crime you commit after becoming a xian" are quite false. I more see it as an ongoing struggle, where I can often say "Well, I failed there."

Yep.

IMO, even though we accept Christ, the world continues to be a distraction, [still] trying to entice us away from 'the path' [...of righteousness].

I think that accepting Christ, is an important personal acknowledgement, that,
'Yes, i can see now, that the world will always try to entice and deceive me. And now, i can move on past that paradigm.' .

This world, this life, has a lot to teach us [about ourselves, about our nature], but it is not the path.

Recognition of the harmful, corrupting influence, which the world can have upon us, should reveal to us, that we need to try to seek the ['higher'] path.

And if we do [seek that higher path], God will help us, that is his promise to us.





Psalms 25:4
Shew me thy ways, O LORD; teach me thy paths.
5  Lead me in thy truth, and teach me: for thou art the God of my salvation; on thee do I wait all the day.
6  Remember, O LORD, thy tender mercies and thy lovingkindnesses; for they have been ever of old.
7  Remember not the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions: according to thy mercy remember thou me for thy goodness' sake, O LORD.
8  Good and upright is the LORD: therefore will he teach sinners in the way.
9  The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.
10  All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.
11  For thy name's sake, O LORD, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.
12  What man is he that feareth the LORD? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.

A damascus experience is not very common. Normally he is more gentle i guess ?
But they do occur. he has not changed.


one guy i used to know was given prophesies to tell to others.
The pressure on im was too much, he gave that "gift" back.
It was too much for him.

Did he give any good prophesies?

He gave an awesomely strong word during a church service once.
Very powerful, it was emotionally hard for him.
I did not envy thay, he said he had to do it or felt his chest would explode.
Gave quotes from the OT during it.

What's a strong word, SC? Did he prophecise anything would happen?

oh, that was jargon.

yes, he did prophesise something about the church.
His phrasing and terminology was very powerful, we were all amazed.

to your next questions, yes it has been fulfilled.
No, I won't say what it was.

Karnal wrote on Oct 6^th, 2011 at 12:47pm:

Buddhist teachings are agnostic.

Buddhist teachings (at least in their purest form - i.e. the basic tenets of Buddhism from which all Buddhist traditions have descended) are more accurately defined as non-theistic as opposed to atheistic or agnostic.

The original teachings (at least insofar as they can be discerned) make no statements about a supreme god (or any gods) and do not refer to a state of unknowing about the existence of god... All the teachings have their roots in the basic tenets, those being - the four noble truths, the eightfold path to enlightenment and the three 'poisons' (that obstruct the adherent from attaining enlightenment) - lobha, dvesha and moha, translated as greed, hate/anger and ignorance.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 7^th, 2011 at 3:36am:

Karnal wrote on Oct 6th, 2011 at 12:47pm: Buddhist teachings are agnostic. Buddhist teachings (at least in their purest form - i.e. the basic tenets of Buddhism from which all Buddhist traditions have descended) are more accurately defined as non-theistic as opposed to atheistic or agnostic. The original teachings (at least insofar as they can be discerned) make no statements about a supreme god (or any gods) and do not refer to a state of unknowing about the existence of god... All the teachings have their roots in the basic tenets, those being - the four noble truths, the eightfold path to enlightenment and the three 'poisons' (that obstruct the adherent from attaining enlightenment) - lobha, dvesha and moha, translated as greed, hate/anger and ignorance.

All true, Helian. But really, God is just a label for what Buddhists describe as emptyness. I have no problem with the term "God" - as long as you don't claim to understand it/Him/Her, etc.

I think the Buddhist approach makes things a lot simpler: do away with God altogether. The whole idea of God leads to confusion and supersticion.

But I like the notion that there is a force much more powerful than yourself that you can submit to. If done properly, this reduces the ego: the very point of Buddhism.

The Dali Llama says that different religions are like different medicines. Doctors don't prescribe the same medicine for the same sickness. Different religious paths serve different natures and tempraments.

Of course, they can also have their side effects too.

Old Teatament and Jesus agrees with Quran, there is no "trinity":

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.  (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 6:4)"

"God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?  (Numbers 23:19)"

"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.  (From the NIV Bible, Mark 12:29)"



But Jesus was silent, and The High Priest answered and said to him, “I adjure you by THE LIVING GOD that you tell us if you are The Messiah, the Son of God.” Jesus said unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man
Matthew 26:63-4


Most sane people acknowledge that Paul The Trinitarian was a liar who invented much in the name of Christianity:


Thomas Jefferson: "Paul was the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus."


George Bernard Shaw: "No sooner had Jesus knocked over the dragon of superstition than Paul boldly set it on its legs again in the name of Jesus."

Thomas Hardy: "The new testament was less a Christiad than a Pauliad."


Carl Jung (Psychologist): "Paul hardly ever allows the real Jesus of Nazareth to get a word in." (U.S. News and World
Report, April 22, 1991, p. 55)


Jeremy Bentham (English Philosopher):"If Christianity needed an Anti-Christ, they needed look no farther than Paul."

Wil Durant (Philosopher): "Paul created a theology of which none but the vaguest warrants can be found in the words of
Christ."
Fundamentalism is the triumph of Paul over Christ

Karnal wrote on Oct 7^th, 2011 at 9:45am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 7th, 2011 at 3:36am: Karnal wrote on Oct 6th, 2011 at 12:47pm: Buddhist teachings are agnostic. Buddhist teachings (at least in their purest form - i.e. the basic tenets of Buddhism from which all Buddhist traditions have descended) are more accurately defined as non-theistic as opposed to atheistic or agnostic. The original teachings (at least insofar as they can be discerned) make no statements about a supreme god (or any gods) and do not refer to a state of unknowing about the existence of god... All the teachings have their roots in the basic tenets, those being - the four noble truths, the eightfold path to enlightenment and the three 'poisons' (that obstruct the adherent from attaining enlightenment) - lobha, dvesha and moha, translated as greed, hate/anger and ignorance. All true, Helian. But really, God is just a label for what Buddhists describe as emptyness. I have no problem with the term "God" - as long as you don't claim to understand it/Him/Her, etc. I think the Buddhist approach makes things a lot simpler: do away with God altogether. The whole idea of God leads to confusion and supersticion. But I like the notion that there is a force much more powerful than yourself that you can submit to. If done properly, this reduces the ego: the very point of Buddhism. The Dali Llama says that different religions are like different medicines. Doctors don't prescribe the same medicine for the same sickness. Different religious paths serve different natures and tempraments. Of course, they can also have their side effects too.

I'm not sure that Buddhism's emptiness could or should be equated (even roughly) to Western ideas of god... In western culture, the idea of god immediately implies the possibility of knowledge of it and that you can speak directly to it and it to you.

The Dalai Lama also says that the essence of all religions is (or should be) the expression of loving kindness to the other... (whether that 'other' is all living beings or confined to members of our own species).

True. The Judeo Christian religions put God outside us. The tradition the Buddha lived in placed God within. Hindus think the Buddha was an incarnation of Rama, I think. They believe Buddhism is an offshoot of Vedantic thought, and it's true. They are very similar - with the exception of God.

It depends how you see God. You can still become enlightened and believe in God. I don't think it matters, it's quibbling over terms. Some people are suited to more devotional paths, and some are suited to rationalist paths like Buddhism.

One thing's for sure. You don't get to the Kingdom with hate in your heart.

Karnal wrote on Oct 8^th, 2011 at 10:21pm:

True. The Judeo Christian religions put God outside us. The tradition the Buddha lived in placed God within. Hindus think the Buddha was an incarnation of Rama, I think. They believe Buddhism is an offshoot of Vedantic thought, and it's true. They are very similar - with the exception of God. It depends how you see God. You can still become enlightened and believe in God. I don't think it matters, it's quibbling over terms. Some people are suited to more devotional paths, and some are suited to rationalist paths like Buddhism. One thing's for sure. You don't get to the Kingdom with hate in your heart.

Yes, there's no Buddhist proscription against belief in God, its just that traditional (or original) Buddhist teachings don't go there, but neither do they rail against it.

Karnal wrote on Oct 8^th, 2011 at 10:21pm:

The Judeo Christian religions put God outside us.

Not so.

God declares that it is we [men and women], which separate ourselves from God, by our own ['unlawful' and offensive, to him] actions.

But nevertheless some element of God's spirit always remains with us, with all of us [at least for this present time].





John 2:19
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20  Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21  But he spake of the temple of his body.

Acts 7:46
Who found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob.
47  But Solomon built him an house.
48  Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,

Acts 17:27
That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

1 Corinthians 3:16
Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

Psalms 32:2
Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.

Psalms 5:4
For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee.
5  The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.








Karnal wrote on Oct 8^th, 2011 at 10:21pm:

The tradition the Buddha lived in placed God within. Hindus think the Buddha was an incarnation of Rama, I think. They believe Buddhism is an offshoot of Vedantic thought, and it's true. They are very similar - with the exception of God. It depends how you see God. You can still become enlightened and believe in God. I don't think it matters, it's quibbling over terms. Some people are suited to more devotional paths, and some are suited to rationalist paths like Buddhism. One thing's for sure. You don't get to the Kingdom with hate in your heart.

So your sure that good moslems have no chance then ?

I would have to concur.      ;)





Matthew 7:12
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Matthew 22:36
Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37  Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38  This is the first and great commandment.
39  And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Exodus 22:21
Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him...

Exodus 23:9
Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger...

Leviticus 19:33
And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.
34  But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself...

Deuteronomy 1:16
And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him.

Deuteronomy 10:17-19
For the LORD your God... loveth the stranger, ...Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.



+++

"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves....."
Koran 48.29

Yadda wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 3:06am:

Karnal wrote on Oct 8th, 2011 at 10:21pm: The Judeo Christian religions put God outside us. Not so.

John 14:18
I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
19  Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20  At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
21  He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
22  Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
23  Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.


Exodus 29:45
And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God.
46  And they shall know that I am the LORD their God, that brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell among them: I am the LORD their God.


Jeremiah 31:31
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32  Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33  But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34  And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

There are no Roman records of Jesus ever existing.

It's all a made up story based on earlier Egyptian mythology.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 12:45pm:

There are no Roman records of Jesus ever existing. It's all a made up story based on earlier Egyptian mythology.

OK, the New Testament character, Jesus, is just a myth.

I'm happy for you to believe that.

It is your choice.

I can NOT prove anything different.

we know you can't yadda

we know you can't

josef bobcat wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 6:33pm:

we know you can't yadda we know you can't

Still, it's an awesome achievement for a non-existent man to be the cornerstone of 2000 years of civilisation, of artistic, scientific, literary, legal and social development.

I bet youi wish you didn't exist if that meant a similar advancement of humanity in your name....

Soren wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 9:17pm:

josef bobcat wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 6:33pm: we know you can't yadda we know you can't Still, it's an awesome achievement for a non-existent man to be the cornerstone of 2000 years of civilisation, of artistic, scientific, literary, legal and social development.

Sorta like Robin Hood or King Arthur.... Only older.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 9:23pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 9:17pm: josef bobcat wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 6:33pm: we know you can't yadda we know you can't Still, it's an awesome achievement for a non-existent man to be the cornerstone of 2000 years of civilisation, of artistic, scientific, literary, legal and social development. Sorta like Robin Hood or King Arthur.... Only older.

You all need to watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeTJWp06BxA


Quote:

Horus is the sun God of Egypt.  He was born of a virgin under a star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 3000BC Attis is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Mithra is the sun God of Persia. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Day of worship was Sunday Krishna is the sun God of India. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 900BC Dionysus is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 200BC Jesus Christ is the latest SUN God. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected

Bobby. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 10:04pm:

Quote: Horus is the sun God of Egypt.  He was born of a virgin under a star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 3000BC Attis is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Preformed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Mithra is the sun God of Persia. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Preformed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Day of worship was Sunday Krishna is the sun God of India. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Preformed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 900BC Dionysus is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Preformed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 200BC Jesus Christ is the latest SUN God. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Preformed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected

A bit of a coincidence about the magic 12 disciples, 3 Kings and the 3 day resurrection or was it just a case of plain old plagiarism ;)

Good old  plagiarism  Nail.

It still works today.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 10:28pm:

Good old  plagiarism  Nail. It still works today.

And so many gullible people can't see through the church and their scam :(

And the significance of December 25 in the Northern Hemisphere?

It's the first day after the Winter Solstice that the days are perceptibly longer.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 10:34pm:

And the significance of December 25 in the Northern Hemisphere? It's the first day after the Winter Solstice that the days are perceptibly longer.

Watch this Helian -
the church today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMWjV2zRD3w

Bobby. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 10:36pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 10:34pm: And the significance of December 25 in the Northern Hemisphere? It's the first day after the Winter Solstice that the days are perceptibly longer. Watch this Helian - the church today:

Ah, dere's nuttin loike a pissed off Oirish Priest ;D

Shows you what they really think of people particularly young boys :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 10:45pm:

Shows you what they really think of people particularly young boys :(

Yep, I think the esteem of the Catholic priesthood is in irreversible and terminal decline.

Probably only a female priesthood could reverse the trend (and marriage permissible within the priesthood).

Sir lastnail wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 10:45pm:

Shows you what they really think of people particularly young boys :(

And all that high value property came from the poor over centuries.

I don't know that "Zeitgeist" holds the truth wholly in the story of Christianity, but it certainly did deliver some food for thought, ..as was it's intention.

Amadd wrote on Oct 10^th, 2011 at 7:39am:

I don't know that "Zeitgeist" holds the truth wholly in the story of Christianity, but it certainly did deliver some food for thought, ..as was it's intention.

Did you watch that angry priest?
The language he used!

Soren wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 9:17pm:

josef bobcat wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 6:33pm: we know you can't yadda we know you can't Still, it's an awesome achievement for a non-existent man to be the cornerstone of 2000 years of civilisation, of artistic, scientific, literary, legal and social development. I bet youi wish you didn't exist if that meant a similar advancement of humanity in your name....

Really? Greece and Rome were civilizations. The middle ages were not. The Renaissance was a rebirth of Greek and Roman (pagan) ideas of democracy, humanism, etc.

We have not had 2000 years of civilization. In the West, it's only a recent development. Christianity is important to the development of the West, but it's not pivotal.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 9^th, 2011 at 10:04pm:

Horus is the sun God of Egypt.  He was born of a virgin under a star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 3000BC Attis is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Mithra is the sun God of Persia. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Day of worship was Sunday Krishna is the sun God of India. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 900BC Dionysus is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 200BC Jesus Christ is the latest SUN God. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected

Good post, but some of the details are completely wrong. Many of these gods weren't crucified. Krishna certainly wasn't - and he wasn't known as the lamb of God.

Jesus's story certainly WAS put together from older pagan deities, but this doesn't mean there wasn't a real Yeheshua ben Joseph.

We know that his birthday was chosen to match the pagan festival of the Winter Solstice. We know that other details - such as the 3 wise men were added. This was a deliberate ploy to superimpose Christianity over paganism. It still happens today when Christianity comes in to take over cargo cults, etc. The stories and ideas are adapted. The Virgin Mary has taken the place of many pagan godesses.

Some other parallels between earlier pagan gods and the Jesus story are also interesting. The cave birth of Dionysis was turned into a stable. The riding into town on a donkey and having palm fronds placed in his path by an adoring crowd parallels with the story of Mithras, I think. It does sound all a little convenient.

But so what? Jesus still appears to people in dreams and near-death experiences. He still has a place in the collective unconscious. When praying to Jesus or Mithras or Dionysis or Krishna, you pray to a personality of the one God. Jesus is just an embodiment of God in the same way all these other deities are.

It becomes problematic when one faith starts saying their's is the best or the only way. Hare krishna's call Krishna the "supreme personality of Godhead." Christians say Jesus is the ONLY "way, truth and light". If this is true, no one could have had a religion before Christianity. Everyone other than Hare Krishnas are just wasting their time.

This is just fundamentalism, although the seeds are often contained in the original texts. In the Bhagivad Gita, Krishna says to offer him a flower. Today, many Krishna shrines are set up to do just that. But Krishna meant more than this. Jesus also said that no man shall come to God but through him. Was he talking about his own personality, or his evolved stage of Christ consciousness?

Deity worship has been around for a long time. It can serve a purpose. Atheism is just as misguided as fundamentalism, trying to prove its own story rather than looking at the benefits of spiritual paths and seeking to achieve them.

Sure, you can do it without deities or a notion of God - as Buddhists do, as many gnostics even do. But you do need a conception of something other than just your own ego.

This is where deities are useful. They can facilitate humility and awe. At the other end, of course, they can facilitate fundamentalism, so it's a dual edged sword.

Good post, Karnal.

Karnal wrote on Oct 10^th, 2011 at 11:46am:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 10:04pm: Horus is the sun God of Egypt.  He was born of a virgin under a star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 3000BC Attis is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Mithra is the sun God of Persia. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Day of worship was Sunday Krishna is the sun God of India. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 900BC Dionysus is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 200BC Jesus Christ is the latest SUN God. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected Good post, but some of the details are completely wrong. Many of these gods weren't crucified. Krishna certainly wasn't - and he wasn't known as the lamb of God. Jesus's story certainly WAS put together from older pagan deities, but this doesn't mean there wasn't a real Yeheshua ben Joseph. We know that his birthday was chosen to match the pagan festival of the Winter Solstice. We know that other details - such as the 3 wise men were added. This was a deliberate ploy to superimpose Christianity over paganism. It still happens today when Christianity comes in to take over cargo cults, etc. The stories and ideas are adapted. The Virgin Mary has taken the place of many pagan godesses. Some other parallels between earlier pagan gods and the Jesus story are also interesting. The cave birth of Dionysis was turned into a stable. The riding into town on a donkey and having palm fronds placed in his path by an adoring crowd parallels with the story of Mithras, I think. It does sound all a little convenient. But so what? Jesus still appears to people in dreams and near-death experiences. He still has a place in the collective unconscious. When praying to Jesus or Mithras or Dionysis or Krishna, you pray to a personality of the one God. Jesus is just an embodiment of God in the same way all these other deities are. It becomes problematic when one faith starts saying their's is the best or the only way. Hare krishna's call Krishna the "supreme personality of Godhead." Christians say Jesus is the ONLY "way, truth and light". If this is true, no one could have had a religion before Christianity. Everyone other than Hare Krishnas are just wasting their time. This is just fundamentalism, although the seeds are often contained in the original texts. In the Bhagivad Gita, Krishna says to offer him a flower. Today, many Krishna shrines are set up to do just that. But Krishna meant more than this. Jesus also said that no man shall come to God but through him. Was he talking about his own personality, or his evolved stage of Christ consciousness? Deity worship has been around for a long time. It can serve a purpose. Atheism is just as misguided as fundamentalism, trying to prove its own story rather than looking at the benefits of spiritual paths and seeking to achieve them. Sure, you can do it without deities or a notion of God - as Buddhists do, as many gnostics even do. But you do need a conception of something other than just your own ego. This is where deities are useful. They can facilitate humility and awe. At the other end, of course, they can facilitate fundamentalism, so it's a dual edged sword.

Can't you see that it's all made up nonsense?

Karnal wrote on Oct 10^th, 2011 at 11:46am:

Good post, but some of the details are completely wrong. Many of these gods weren't crucified. Krishna certainly wasn't - and he wasn't known as the lamb of God. Jesus's story certainly WAS put together from older pagan deities, but this doesn't mean there wasn't a real Yeheshua ben Joseph. We know that his birthday was chosen to match the pagan festival of the Winter Solstice. We know that other details - such as the 3 wise men were added. This was a deliberate ploy to superimpose Christianity over paganism. It still happens today when Christianity comes in to take over cargo cults, etc. The stories and ideas are adapted. The Virgin Mary has taken the place of many pagan godesses. Some other parallels between earlier pagan gods and the Jesus story are also interesting. The cave birth of Dionysis was turned into a stable. The riding into town on a donkey and having palm fronds placed in his path by an adoring crowd parallels with the story of Mithras, I think. It does sound all a little convenient. But so what? Jesus still appears to people in dreams and near-death experiences. He still has a place in the collective unconscious. When praying to Jesus or Mithras or Dionysis or Krishna, you pray to a personality of the one God. Jesus is just an embodiment of God in the same way all these other deities are. It becomes problematic when one faith starts saying their's is the best or the only way. Hare krishna's call Krishna the "supreme personality of Godhead." Christians say Jesus is the ONLY "way, truth and light". If this is true, no one could have had a religion before Christianity. Everyone other than Hare Krishnas are just wasting their time. This is just fundamentalism, although the seeds are often contained in the original texts. In the Bhagivad Gita, Krishna says to offer him a flower. Today, many Krishna shrines are set up to do just that. But Krishna meant more than this. Jesus also said that no man shall come to God but through him. Was he talking about his own personality, or his evolved stage of Christ consciousness? Deity worship has been around for a long time. It can serve a purpose. Atheism is just as misguided as fundamentalism, trying to prove its own story rather than looking at the benefits of spiritual paths and seeking to achieve them. Sure, you can do it without deities or a notion of God - as Buddhists do, as many gnostics even do. But you do need a conception of something other than just your own ego. This is where deities are useful. They can facilitate humility and awe. At the other end, of course, they can facilitate fundamentalism, so it's a dual edged sword.

Religion does nothing to improve the thinking of blinkered racist bigots obviously. Dickhead.

Karnal (IamNotaRacistBUTT) - I'm not racist, but us whites have made this country what it is. I have nothing against the lower races - some of them are good friends of mine. I'd have no problem visiting them in their own countries - just not here.

Look what I said about you Karnal ;-) hahahaha only meant it as satire of course. <bangs head against wall and moans, sorry :-[ :'( >

Karnal wrote on Oct 10^th, 2011 at 11:46am:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 10:04pm: Horus is the sun God of Egypt.  He was born of a virgin under a star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 3000BC Attis is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Mithra is the sun God of Persia. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Day of worship was Sunday Krishna is the sun God of India. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 900BC Dionysus is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 200BC Jesus Christ is the latest SUN God. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected Good post, but some of the details are completely wrong. Many of these gods weren't crucified. Krishna certainly wasn't - and he wasn't known as the lamb of God. Jesus's story certainly WAS put together from older pagan deities, but this doesn't mean there wasn't a real Yeheshua ben Joseph. We know that his birthday was chosen to match the pagan festival of the Winter Solstice. We know that other details - such as the 3 wise men were added. This was a deliberate ploy to superimpose Christianity over paganism. It still happens today when Christianity comes in to take over cargo cults, etc. The stories and ideas are adapted. The Virgin Mary has taken the place of many pagan godesses. Some other parallels between earlier pagan gods and the Jesus story are also interesting. The cave birth of Dionysis was turned into a stable. The riding into town on a donkey and having palm fronds placed in his path by an adoring crowd parallels with the story of Mithras, I think. It does sound all a little convenient. But so what? Jesus still appears to people in dreams and near-death experiences. He still has a place in the collective unconscious. When praying to Jesus or Mithras or Dionysis or Krishna, you pray to a personality of the one God. Jesus is just an embodiment of God in the same way all these other deities are. It becomes problematic when one faith starts saying their's is the best or the only way. Hare krishna's call Krishna the "supreme personality of Godhead." Christians say Jesus is the ONLY "way, truth and light". If this is true, no one could have had a religion before Christianity. Everyone other than Hare Krishnas are just wasting their time. This is just fundamentalism, although the seeds are often contained in the original texts. In the Bhagivad Gita, Krishna says to offer him a flower. Today, many Krishna shrines are set up to do just that. But Krishna meant more than this. Jesus also said that no man shall come to God but through him. Was he talking about his own personality, or his evolved stage of Christ consciousness? Deity worship has been around for a long time. It can serve a purpose. Atheism is just as misguided as fundamentalism, trying to prove its own story rather than looking at the benefits of spiritual paths and seeking to achieve them. Sure, you can do it without deities or a notion of God - as Buddhists do, as many gnostics even do. But you do need a conception of something other than just your own ego. This is where deities are useful. They can facilitate humility and awe. At the other end, of course, they can facilitate fundamentalism, so it's a dual edged sword.

Oh, the wisdom of the post-colonial, post-modern, self-conscious undergraduate who can, at last, see the world as it really is.
All knowldge is to hand, the Geist has arrived at its destination of knowing itself fully.

Priceless.

Karnal wrote on Oct 10^th, 2011 at 11:46am:

The riding into town on a donkey and having palm fronds placed in his path by an adoring crowd parallels with the story of Mithras, I think. It does sound all a little convenient.

Riding into Jerusalem on a donkey was a ritual reserved for Kings of the line of David, I believe.

Which means that the Jesus myth of his entry into Jerusalem was (or would have been construed as) a direct statement regarding his claim to the throne of David.

These Jesus threads just won't go away even after
sane people like me prove they are myths.

Quote:

Atheism is just as misguided as fundamentalism, trying to prove its own story rather than looking at the benefits of spiritual paths and seeking to achieve them.

Within that, I'd like to hear your definition of atheism.
I'd prefer to use my own words on this, but I haven't the time atm.


Quote:

Can an atheist be a spiritual person, and if so, in what sense? Is it meaningful to talk of atheist spirituality, or should the term be reserved for religious believers? .... What is spirituality? From what I have read on the psychology of religion, I have learned that experts in this field lack consensus on the meaning of spirituality but generally agree on what it is not. Spirituality is not the same thing as religion, or even religious belief. One can be deeply spiritual while simultaneously rejecting anything recognizable as religious belief of religious practices. Moreover, not all religious believers are necessarily spiritual..... Can an atheist be a spiritual person? Absolutely. If we think of something like trait spirituality as ranging on a continuum from low to high, atheists can score at any point along the continuum just like anyone else. High scores would indicate someone who seeks spiritual experiences or who experiences the various components of spirituality, depending on how the measure functions. http://www.atheistrev.com/2008/01/atheist-spirituality.html

Bobby. wrote on Oct 10^th, 2011 at 6:46pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 10th, 2011 at 11:46am: Bobby. wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 10:04pm: Horus is the sun God of Egypt.  He was born of a virgin under a star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 3000BC Attis is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Mithra is the sun God of Persia. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 1200BC Day of worship was Sunday Krishna is the sun God of India. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 900BC Dionysus is the sun God of Greece. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 200BC Jesus Christ is the latest SUN God. He was born of a virgin under star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected Good post, but some of the details are completely wrong. Many of these gods weren't crucified. Krishna certainly wasn't - and he wasn't known as the lamb of God. Jesus's story certainly WAS put together from older pagan deities, but this doesn't mean there wasn't a real Yeheshua ben Joseph. We know that his birthday was chosen to match the pagan festival of the Winter Solstice. We know that other details - such as the 3 wise men were added. This was a deliberate ploy to superimpose Christianity over paganism. It still happens today when Christianity comes in to take over cargo cults, etc. The stories and ideas are adapted. The Virgin Mary has taken the place of many pagan godesses. Some other parallels between earlier pagan gods and the Jesus story are also interesting. The cave birth of Dionysis was turned into a stable. The riding into town on a donkey and having palm fronds placed in his path by an adoring crowd parallels with the story of Mithras, I think. It does sound all a little convenient. But so what? Jesus still appears to people in dreams and near-death experiences. He still has a place in the collective unconscious. When praying to Jesus or Mithras or Dionysis or Krishna, you pray to a personality of the one God. Jesus is just an embodiment of God in the same way all these other deities are. It becomes problematic when one faith starts saying their's is the best or the only way. Hare krishna's call Krishna the "supreme personality of Godhead." Christians say Jesus is the ONLY "way, truth and light". If this is true, no one could have had a religion before Christianity. Everyone other than Hare Krishnas are just wasting their time. This is just fundamentalism, although the seeds are often contained in the original texts. In the Bhagivad Gita, Krishna says to offer him a flower. Today, many Krishna shrines are set up to do just that. But Krishna meant more than this. Jesus also said that no man shall come to God but through him. Was he talking about his own personality, or his evolved stage of Christ consciousness? Deity worship has been around for a long time. It can serve a purpose. Atheism is just as misguided as fundamentalism, trying to prove its own story rather than looking at the benefits of spiritual paths and seeking to achieve them. Sure, you can do it without deities or a notion of God - as Buddhists do, as many gnostics even do. But you do need a conception of something other than just your own ego. This is where deities are useful. They can facilitate humility and awe. At the other end, of course, they can facilitate fundamentalism, so it's a dual edged sword. Can't you see that it's all made up nonsense?

Of course it's made up.

If you want to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, you have to make it up.

Hi Karnal,


Quote:

Horus is the sun God of Egypt.  He was born of a virgin under a star in the east on December 25. He had 12 disciples was adorned by 3 Kings. Was a teacher at 12 Performed miracles Was known as lamb of God and the light. He was crucified dead for 3 days and resurrected 3000BC

I do see some similarities there.  ;D

Exactly. Horus, Mithras, Jesus...

Sieze the day, my friend. Pick a god, or leave him be. If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds.

Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior.

Karnal wrote on Oct 11^th, 2011 at 9:07pm:

Exactly. Horus, Mithras, Jesus... Sieze the day, my friend. Pick a god, or leave him be. If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds. Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior.

I worship the God of science.

Karnal wrote on Oct 10^th, 2011 at 11:42am:

Soren wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 9:17pm: josef bobcat wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 6:33pm: we know you can't yadda we know you can't Still, it's an awesome achievement for a non-existent man to be the cornerstone of 2000 years of civilisation, of artistic, scientific, literary, legal and social development. I bet youi wish you didn't exist if that meant a similar advancement of humanity in your name.... Really? Greece and Rome were civilizations. The middle ages were not. The Renaissance was a rebirth of Greek and Roman (pagan) ideas of democracy, humanism, etc. We have not had 2000 years of civilization. In the West, it's only a recent development. Christianity is important to the development of the West, but it's not pivotal.

Not pivotal ???




Weren't Judeao/Christian laws [along with Christianity] essentially accepted, and adopted in much of Europe ?

And didn't those Judeao/Christian laws, adopted in much of Europe, and the human values which those laws nurtured, mould the psyche of European man ?

I like to believe that they did.

And although the results was far from 'perfection', perhaps the imperfections had more to do with the innate nature of men, rather than a failing of [the influence of] those laws ?



Dictionary;
psyche = = the human soul, mind, or spirit.




I know that many people in this 'modern' age would suppose, that the OT laws [of Moses] were 'vicious' and 'barbaric' laws.

They are often portrayed in that way, by many people today.

But having read and become a little familiar with those OT [criminal] laws, i would have to say that yes, although those laws [OT laws of Moses relating to strictly criminal matters] were sometimes very harsh to criminals, yet i believe that those O.T. laws do teach man [would instil in men] a propensity for ethical behaviour.

And personally, i would be happy to live in a society where those were laws were 'imposed' on the society, because i know [that is, i believe] that such a society, would be a safe and decent place to live [for honest, and non-violent people].


e.g.

Deuteronomy 19:15
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
16  If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;
17  Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;
18  And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;
19  Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
20  And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
21  And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.



Deuteronomy 4:1
Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the LORD God of your fathers giveth you.
2  Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
3  Your eyes have seen what the LORD did because of Baalpeor: for all the men that followed Baalpeor, the LORD thy God hath destroyed them from among you.
4  But ye that did cleave unto the LORD your God are alive every one of you this day.
5  Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the LORD my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it.
6  Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.
7  For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for?
8  And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?




The problem was, that Israel did not keep God's laws [did not keep, their covenant with their God].

And in so doing, the children of Israel corrupted themselves.

Yadda wrote on Oct 12^th, 2011 at 2:08am:

And personally, i would be happy to live in a society where those were laws were 'imposed' on the society, because i know [that is, i believe] that such a society, would be a safe and decent place to live [for honest, and non-violent people].

Proverbs 29:2
When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.

Karnal wrote on Oct 11^th, 2011 at 9:07pm:

Sieze the day, my friend. Pick a god, or leave him be. If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds.

And always remember that each dawning day may be your last... So seize the day, trusting as little as possible in tomorrow.... Or at least Wednesdays.

Quote:

Sieze the day, my friend. Pick a god, or leave him be. If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds. Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior.

Please allow me to dissect some meaning from the above  ::)

"Pick a god, or leave him be."
So if you choose a God, are you then not leaving the remaining Gods to be (or not to be)?

" If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds."

I've heard that premise over and over.
If you do not choose a specific dogma (for want of a better word), then you must thereby be considering yourself as God?
It makes as little sense to me now as did when I first heard this ridiculous contrived assertion by the dogmatic ones.

Could it be that some people can merely consider what holds true to themselves without any requirement to consider themselves as being anything more than an ordinary person? I think it's a distinct possibility.

"Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior."

Well first you need to tell me your definition of the "old boy above".
Then you need to tell me what he (?) told you.
It seems to me that you are speaking of "the opinions of men", 2000 yr old men no less. Not of something that you have intimate or spiritual knowledge.

The lamb of God...indeed  ::)

My contention revolves around "Yeah but.."

Yeah but can't I pick and choose what holds true to me within science, within buddhism, judaism, christianity, Islam, left wing, right wing, satanism..etc.?
It seems to me that you are the considered God.

Amadd wrote on Oct 12^th, 2011 at 6:41am:

Quote: Sieze the day, my friend. Pick a god, or leave him be. If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds. Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior. Please allow me to dissect some meaning from the above  ::) "Pick a god, or leave him be." So if you choose a God, are you then not leaving the remaining Gods to be (or not to be)? " If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds." I've heard that premise over and over. If you do not choose a specific dogma (for want of a better word), then you must thereby be considering yourself as God? It makes as little sense to me now as did when I first heard this ridiculous contrived assertion by the dogmatic ones. Could it be that some people can merely consider what holds true to themselves without any requirement to consider themselves as being anything more than an ordinary person? I think it's a distinct possibility. "Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior." Well first you need to tell me your definition of the "old boy above". Then you need to tell me what he (?) told you. It seems to me that you are speaking of "the opinions of men", 2000 yr old men no less. Not of something that you have intimate or spiritual knowledge. The lamb of God...indeed  ::) My contention revolves around "Yeah but.." Yeah but can't I pick and choose what holds true to me within science, within buddhism, judaism, christianity, Islam, left wing, right wing, satanism..etc.? It seems to me that you are the considered God.

Amadd, of course you can pick from Judaism, Buddhism, science, satanism et al. If you have an interest in these things, it's unavoidable. If you're a fundamentalist, however, you'll place limits on what you learn. It's up to you.

freewill, you see?

And no, my beliefs are not formed from any divine or spiritual revelations. They are just my beliefs. I don't expect anyone to practice them - practice your own beliefs.

But please practice them.

Yadda wrote on Oct 12^th, 2011 at 2:08am:

Karnal wrote on Oct 10th, 2011 at 11:42am: Soren wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 9:17pm: josef bobcat wrote on Oct 9th, 2011 at 6:33pm: we know you can't yadda we know you can't Still, it's an awesome achievement for a non-existent man to be the cornerstone of 2000 years of civilisation, of artistic, scientific, literary, legal and social development. I bet youi wish you didn't exist if that meant a similar advancement of humanity in your name.... Really? Greece and Rome were civilizations. The middle ages were not. The Renaissance was a rebirth of Greek and Roman (pagan) ideas of democracy, humanism, etc. We have not had 2000 years of civilization. In the West, it's only a recent development. Christianity is important to the development of the West, but it's not pivotal. Not pivotal ??? Weren't Judeao/Christian laws [along with Christianity] essentially accepted, and adopted in much of Europe ? And didn't those Judeao/Christian laws, adopted in much of Europe, and the human values which those laws nurtured, mould the psyche of European man ? I like to believe that they did.

I think they did too. Democracy, however, is a pagan invention. And civilization existed long before it was taken by pagans to European shores.

Christianity invented social justice and universal human rights - the idea that all are equal before Gud, that no person is intrinsically any better than anyone else.

And yes, Christianity also invented socialism. From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs.

It's post-colonial mumbo jumbo, of course.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 11^th, 2011 at 10:18pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 11th, 2011 at 9:07pm: Exactly. Horus, Mithras, Jesus... Sieze the day, my friend. Pick a god, or leave him be. If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds. Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior. I worship the God of science.

If you were a scientist, you might find that to be quite a lonely position to hold - the position that Science somehow replaces religion. In fact most scientists tend to be accommodationists, including those who are atheistic, and quite a few scientists are actually religious.

Accommodationists hold, for various reasons, that when defending science, such as evolution, defenders should not assert that science is in opposition to religion. Instead, they should merely defend science. It seems to me a logical stance.

To take the position that they know everything is not very scientific.  It's a common fallacy among atheists without formal scientific training.

muso wrote on Oct 12^th, 2011 at 3:27pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 11th, 2011 at 10:18pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 11th, 2011 at 9:07pm: Exactly. Horus, Mithras, Jesus... Sieze the day, my friend. Pick a god, or leave him be. If you choose to leave him be, be a god yourself. But remember, it's much harder that it sounds. Listen to the old boy above. He has much wisdom in his faux Danish exterior. I worship the God of science.  It's a common fallacy among atheists without formal scientific training.

Exactly, but it highlights the sectarian theology of atheists.

Quote:

Amadd, of course you can pick from Judaism, Buddhism, science, satanism et al. If you have an interest in these things, it's unavoidable. If you're a fundamentalist, however, you'll place limits on what you learn. It's up to you. freewill, you see?

Well, isn't it Christianity that we're talking about?
Ergo, most Christians will not be open to truths from other religions - and by "truths", I am meaning poignant facts concerning the human condition, not mumbo jumbo superstitions which are aimed soley at increasing business.


Quote:

Exactly, but it highlights the sectarian theology of atheists.

..And once again I hear this rubbish oxymoron "theistic atheists".

To my knowledge, there are no "atheist scriptures". Even if there were, I think that it would be more likely that atheists would find religious scriptures far more interesting as these religious scriptures do tell a story of history (mumbo jumbo aside) and the "zeitgeist" of particular cultures.

Personally, my own definition of "an atheist" is one who will not feel threatened by the so-called word of God.
Most atheists will understand that these are merely the words of men. And yes, historically, they are but the words of men, not women...and certainly not some supernatural being.

IMO, an atheist does not fear the written or spoken threats of "historical or present time men or women" concerning supernatural forces which may or may not exist. An atheist acts as if these threats are non-existent, ie: those threats hold no power or control over the mind in the realistic world of an atheist.

However, all of that stuff about wanting to control your fellow being belies to a great extent the word "spirituality".
IMO, spirituality involves something that can be learned from various religions when reading with the right attitude, or it can be devalued if reading with the wrong attitude.
Similarly, an atheist can also fall into the same trap (or be in the same trap to begin with) of devaluing spirituality.

Amadd wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 4:29am:

Quote: Amadd, of course you can pick from Judaism, Buddhism, science, satanism et al. If you have an interest in these things, it's unavoidable. If you're a fundamentalist, however, you'll place limits on what you learn. It's up to you. freewill, you see? Well, isn't it Christianity that we're talking about?

Not sure - this thread is called "Jesus religions". Christianity is the biggest Jesus religion, but it borrows largely, as others here have said, from the words of Paul.

I thought christianity was the only jesus religion ?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 9:05am:

I thought christianity was the only jesus religion ?

Islam and Mormonism are the two obvious others. There may be others........ Bahaii too.  Then there's Manichaeism, Ahmadiyya and a few other minor religions.

- and Mandaeanists regard Jesus as a false prophet.

muso wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 9:54am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 13th, 2011 at 9:05am: I thought christianity was the only jesus religion ? Islam and Mormonism are the two obvious others. There may be others.

mormons are a subset of christianity.
islam are mohammadians, not christians.
They have nothing to do with him, despite their rhetoric.

christian refers to "Christ In."

I guess I was talking about religions that involve Jesus. That includes a lot of the New Age religions too. I agree that Christianity is the only group of religions that regard Jesus as the central figure.

As for Mormonism, it's the subject of debate. Most US Christians would say that it's not.

http://carm.org/is-mormonism-christian

muso wrote on Oct 12^th, 2011 at 3:27pm:

If you were a scientist, you might find that to be quite a lonely position to hold - the position that Science somehow replaces religion. In fact most scientists tend to be accommodationists, including those who are atheistic, and quite a few scientists are actually religious. Accommodationists hold, for various reasons, that when defending science, such as evolution, defenders should not assert that science is in opposition to religion. Instead, they should merely defend science. It seems to me a logical stance. To take the position that they know everything is not very scientific.  It's a common fallacy among atheists without formal scientific training.

And a considerable number scientists appear to be coming around, to believe that evolutionary theory is a crock.





More Scientists Being 'Persuaded By the Evidence'

"A growing number of scientists, some of them with worldwide reputations, are changing their minds about evolution. While many of these scientists are recognizing that evolution is in trouble, they are not necessarily becoming Christians or creationists.

The world-famous astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle announced that there is so much information within higher forms of life that they could not have evolved. Dr. Hoyle said that he could not understand why so many biologists deny this obvious fact and accept evolution.

The scientific world was solidly shaken when Dr. Colin Patterson, head of paleontology at the British Museum , admitted at the American Museum of Natural History in Chicago that he knew nothing about evolution that was true. He said that he had asked other scientists if they could name one thing about evolution that was true. Silence was the usual answer. Dr. Patterson called the evolutionary theory "anti-knowledge." He especially faulted those who say evolution is a fact, yet admit they don't know how it works.

Evolutionary theory is the great modern creation myth. As a myth, it is no challenge to the Bible. It's even losing support in the scientific community. If you would like more information, go to Creation Moments for information about scientists turning from evolution."
http://christiannature.blogspot.com/2011/04/more-scientists-being-persuaded-by.html
http://creationmoments.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ef70e621be0fb33b32fc8d969&id=9465033006&e=6e67421fbd

muso wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 9:54am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 13th, 2011 at 9:05am: I thought christianity was the only jesus religion ? Islam and Mormonism are the two obvious others. There may be others........ Bahaii too.  Then there's Manichaeism, Ahmadiyya and a few other minor religions. - and Mandaeanists regard Jesus as a false prophet.

And any informed Christian, would regard Mohammed as THE false prophet, and ISLAM, as having absolutely nothing to do with Jesus Christ.      :o

Or should i say, Jesus Christ has absolutely nothing to do with ISLAM.



+++

Moslems themselves, claim that ISLAM is a repudiation of Judaism and Christianity,
....and not a natural progression of those two faiths.

muso wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 10:19am:

I guess I was talking about religions that involve Jesus. That includes a lot of the New Age religions too. I agree that Christianity is the only group of religions that regard Jesus as the central figure. As for Mormonism, it's the subject of debate. Most US Christians would say that it's not. http://carm.org/is-mormonism-christian

ah right.
So a belief that "names" Jesus, but not necessarily believe in him, as such ?

Most US xians prob want to dissociate from mormons due to mormons ..... "cultish" ways. Same as the bretherens.
Some parts of the NT they breech, some they don't.
it's a fine line I guess.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 9:05am:

I thought christianity was the only jesus religion ?

The pagan sacraficial deities tell a very similar story to that of Jesus, or the Christ.

The point is that there were many "Jesus" religions before Jesus.

If the similarities between Jesus and Dionysis, Mithras, Attus, etc, don't give you food for thought, you're not thinking.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 12:45pm:

ah right. So a belief that "names" Jesus, but not necessarily believe in him, as such ? Most US xians prob want to dissociate from mormons due to mormons ..... "cultish" ways. Same as the bretherens. Some parts of the NT they breech, some they don't. it's a fine line I guess.

That recent case in Texas was hilarious.  (Pastor Robert Jeffress v Mitt Romney). The Southern Baptists calling the Mormons a cult is like the pot calling the kettle black. Of course the political candidates all did a good job of side-stepping the issue.

Karnal wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 1:30pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 13th, 2011 at 9:05am: I thought christianity was the only jesus religion ? The pagan sacraficial deities tell a very similar story to that of Jesus, or the Christ. The point is that there were many "Jesus" religions before Jesus. If the similarities between Jesus and Dionysis, Mithras, Attus, etc, don't give you food for thought, you're not thinking.

WHat is new with Jesus is the nature and purpose of sacrifice. The Olympians, for example, only took human shape as a disguise. Pagan religions all had death and resurrection - that's what nature does every year, after all.  Christianity is also new in that there was never any bringing together of 'Athens' and 'Jerusalem' before.

Yes - please keep going, OB. I, for one, am listening.

Redemption is a moral category, not a biological one. An Athenian resurrection would have been merely a restoration to immortality - and the immortals were morally indistinguishable from the mortals.
The Messiah is a Redeemer (not a mere resurrecter), but in its Jewish form perhaps too mysterious and eastern a concept for the Greek Levant of the 1st century. It is significant that Jesus, Paul and all the other Jews of the NT (they are all Jews) 'speak' to posterity in Greek, Greek after Classical and Hellenist, in a thoroughly hellenised Roman milleau. They are no longer the Jews of the OT, but bilingual, Hebrew and Greek speaking Jews. The horizons of both 'Athens' and 'Jerusalem' have ben enormously broadened by this, leading to the fruitfulness of Christianity.

Soren,

Quote:

the fruitfulness of Christianity

Like the Catholic Inquisition which lasted 600 years?

---

Burning people.

---

Ah yes, those holey intrusions. They sure had an imagionative spin on the word "holey" didn't they?
One might wonder what on earth they heard God say  ::)

OK, we can excuse them for a few dire centuries of ...oopsville.
Actually, they just misinterpreted the word of God to mean kill torture kill, kill torture kill, instead of the peace and understanding that God intended.
Yes we can forgive them can't we? ....Not!!

I cannot forgive such a misinterpretation...sorry. I cannot forgive that at all.

muso wrote on Oct 12^th, 2011 at 3:27pm:

To take the position that they know everything is not very scientific.  It's a common fallacy among atheists without formal scientific training.

And, of course, they're missing the irony...

To know everything requires that you know (with absolute certainty) that you know everything... To be above doubt in the absolute.

Amadd wrote on Oct 14^th, 2011 at 7:45am:

Ah yes, those holey intrusions. They sure had an imagionative spin on the word "holey" didn't they? One might wonder what on earth they heard God say  ::) OK, we can excuse them for a few dire centuries of ...oopsville. Actually, they just misinterpreted the word of God to mean kill torture kill, kill torture kill, instead of the peace and understanding that God intended. Yes we can forgive them can't we? ....Not!! I cannot forgive such a misinterpretation...sorry. I cannot forgive that at all.

who are you not going to forgive for what ?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 14^th, 2011 at 8:21am:

Amadd wrote on Oct 14th, 2011 at 7:45am: Ah yes, those holey intrusions. They sure had an imagionative spin on the word "holey" didn't they? One might wonder what on earth they heard God say  ::) OK, we can excuse them for a few dire centuries of ...oopsville. Actually, they just misinterpreted the word of God to mean kill torture kill, kill torture kill, instead of the peace and understanding that God intended. Yes we can forgive them can't we? ....Not!! I cannot forgive such a misinterpretation...sorry. I cannot forgive that at all. who are you not going to forgive for what ?

The church can't be forgiven.
Their philosophy led to the crimes they commited.

How did the sermon on the mount lead to burning at the stake?

Answer: it didn't.

The philosophy of Christianity is influenced by Plato, Aristotle, stoicism and a range of other pagan influences.

Somewhere within medieval cosmology the teachings of Jesus were forgotten.

Still, it's unfair to judge history from this side.

Karnal wrote on Oct 14^th, 2011 at 11:11am:

Answer: it didn't. The philosophy of Christianity is influenced by Plato, Aristotle, stoicism and a range of other pagan influences. Somewhere within medieval cosmology the teachings of Jesus were forgotten. Still, it's unfair to judge history from this side.

Wrong - when you create devils & witches you then have the problem
of finding them, & what to do about them.
Cleansing with fire was an obvious solution.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 14^th, 2011 at 9:35am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 14th, 2011 at 8:21am: Amadd wrote on Oct 14th, 2011 at 7:45am: Ah yes, those holey intrusions. They sure had an imagionative spin on the word "holey" didn't they? One might wonder what on earth they heard God say  ::) OK, we can excuse them for a few dire centuries of ...oopsville. Actually, they just misinterpreted the word of God to mean kill torture kill, kill torture kill, instead of the peace and understanding that God intended. Yes we can forgive them can't we? ....Not!! I cannot forgive such a misinterpretation...sorry. I cannot forgive that at all. who are you not going to forgive for what ? The church can't be forgiven. Their philosophy led to the crimes they commited.

Well bobby, for what you have indicated, you won't get any argument from me.
Nor from Jesus.


“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness.
You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. "

Matthew 23:23 - 25


the pharisees were the "church" leaders of the day

Mathew 12

Jesus said:

Quote:

26] And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? [27] And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. [28] But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you

.


Jesus talked a lot about devils - but he was able to cast them out -
the church had to resort to fire!

You see - once you create this idea & philosophy about devils the
falshood gives rise to crazy acts done in the name of religion.
Religion is to be feared by normal people.
It can happen again - it's still happening but more so now  in Islamic religion.

If we can't get rid of religion we're doomed as a species.
It holds us back with Middle Age superstitious thinking.

Karnal wrote on Oct 14^th, 2011 at 11:11am:

Answer: it didn't. The philosophy of Christianity is influenced by Plato, Aristotle, stoicism and a range of other pagan influences. Somewhere within medieval cosmology the teachings of Jesus were forgotten. Still, it's unfair to judge history from this side.

Yes but the bible says to kill witches which is exactly what they did. The question is why don't they still burn witches at the stake ?? Is it because they have got rid of all of them :D LOL

Hi Nail,
The Bible does say an awful lot about withcraft -
& yes it does say to kill witches.
Why don't they still do it?


Quote:

Exod.22 [18] Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Deut.18 [10] There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, 1Sam.15 [23] For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king. 2Kgs.9 [22] And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many? 2Chr.33 [6] And he caused his children to pass through the fire in the valley of the son of Hinnom: also he observed times, and used enchantments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit, and with wizards: he wrought much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger. Mic.5 [12] And I will cut off witchcrafts out of thine hand; and thou shalt have no more soothsayers: Nah.3 [4] Because of the multitude of the whoredoms of the wellfavoured harlot, the mistress of witchcrafts, that selleth nations through her whoredoms, and families through her witchcrafts. Wis.12 [4] Whom thou hatedst for doing most odious works of witchcrafts, and wicked sacrifices; Gal.5 [20] Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

Bobby. wrote on Oct 14^th, 2011 at 11:34pm:

Hi Nail, The Bible does say an awful lot about withcraft - & yes it does say to kill witches. Why don't they still do it? Quote: Exod.22 [18] Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Deut.18 [10] There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, 1Sam.15 [23] For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king. 2Kgs.9 [22] And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many? 2Chr.33 [6] And he caused his children to pass through the fire in the valley of the son of Hinnom: also he observed times, and used enchantments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit, and with wizards: he wrought much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger. Mic.5 [12] And I will cut off witchcrafts out of thine hand; and thou shalt have no more soothsayers: Nah.3 [4] Because of the multitude of the whoredoms of the wellfavoured harlot, the mistress of witchcrafts, that selleth nations through her whoredoms, and families through her witchcrafts. Wis.12 [4] Whom thou hatedst for doing most odious works of witchcrafts, and wicked sacrifices; Gal.5 [20] Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

they are all from the OT. The OT is for jews, not Xians.
Gal is from the NT, but says witchcraft is as act of the flesh. It does mnot say to harm them. Indeed that's not Jesus's way
"Do unto others as you would ahve done unto yourself."

http://www.evilbible.com/do_not_ignore_ot.htm


Quote:

“Thou Shall Not Ignore the Old Testament!”   New Testament Verses Which Demand Following the Old Testament and Law Contradictions:    I hear so many Christians now a days claim that the Old Testament is defunct for Jesus was the “lamb” to clear away its rules and regulations.  This is just another bullshit scapegoat that Christians use to ignore the atrocities and bizarre laws commanded by their god.  Their preachers spoon feed them that the Old Testament is no longer binding so that they can excuse the majority of evil that the bible promotes.  I am so tired of Christians manipulating the scriptures so that they can assign a kinder nature to their God, that I have assembled a BRIEF list of verses which clearly show that the Old Testament is not to be ignored.  Its laws should indeed be adhered to, for the New Testament demands it!  After this section I shall list where the Bible contradicts itself concerning other laws. 1) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished.  Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”  (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)  Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself.  None other then Jesus said so. 2) All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever.  "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid."  (Luke 16:17 NAB) 3) Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets.  He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament.  "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.  I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.  Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place."  (Matthew 5:17 NAB) 3b) "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..."  (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB) 3c) "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB) 4) Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law.  Mark.7:9-13  "Whoever curses father or mother shall die"  (Mark 7:10 NAB) 5) Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating.  He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.”  (Matthew 15:4-7) 6) Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole.  The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell.  (Matthew 5:27) 7) Peter says that all slaves should “be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the “good and gentle.”  This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18 8) “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,..." (John 1:17). 9) “...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

At the risk of batting back and forth, the point of Christianity is not to change the Jewish law for Jews but to call out everyone, Jew and gentile, into a new covenant, based on the first two commandments and the teachings and example of Jesus. As Jesus says somewhere, these two laws are the cornerstone of all laws and prophesies and all that. This is why, for example, there have been no dietary laws among Christians and so popes have been able to have bacon and eggs for breakfast from the year dot.
More seriously, this is what allows for the universality ('catholicism') of the church: Christianity is not a tribal affair but a universal one, meaning it is not based on any particular tribe or language or custom or whatnot but on the two 'basic commandments' and th teaching and covenant through Jesus. Being a jew, on the other hand, is about just that, being a jew, regardless of nationality, language, geographical location. It is not universal.
Christianity IS judaism for gentiles in the univesalising sense, not in the sense of talmudic law (which is for the jews).

This all makes perfect sense to Christians and anyone who is able to listen to them in their own words. Also keep in mind that the history of the exegsis of the various texts is as important as the texts themselves, not just in religion but in every intellectual endeavour.

Your intelligence and insight is wasted in here Soren.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 12:21pm:

At the risk of batting back and forth, the point of Christianity is not to change the Jewish law for Jews but to call out everyone, Jew and gentile, into a new covenant, based on the first two commandments and the teachings and example of Jesus. As Jesus says somewhere, these two laws are the cornerstone of all laws and prophesies and all that. This is why, for example, there have been no dietary laws among Christians and so popes have been able to have bacon and eggs for breakfast from the year dot. More seriously, this is what allows for the universality ('catholicism') of the church: Christianity is not a tribal affair but a universal one, meaning it is not based on any particular tribe or language or custom or whatnot but on the two 'basic commandments' and th teaching and covenant through Jesus. Being a jew, on the other hand, is about just that, being a jew, regardless of nationality, language, geographical location. It is not universal. Christianity IS judaism for gentiles in the univesalising sense, not in the sense of talmudic law (which is for the jews). This all makes perfect sense to Christians and anyone who is able to listen to them in their own words. Also keep in mind that the history of the exegsis of the various texts is as important as the texts themselves, not just in religion but in every intellectual endeavour.

Dear Soren2,
Like here?

Quote:

Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”  (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

Yeah, like here:



Matthew 22:37-40
King James Version (KJV)


37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38  This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets



(I can't believe I am swapping Bible quotes.)

Bobby, as I said earlier, there is more to Christianity than the Bible. There is 2000 years of exigesis and tradition which are as important as the Bible. Interprtation IS important.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 3:40pm:

Yeah, like here: Matthew 22:37-40 King James Version (KJV) 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38  This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (I can't believe I am swapping Bible quotes.) Bobby, as I said earlier, there is more to Christianity than the Bible. There is 2000 years of exigesis and tradition which are as important as the Bible. Interprtation IS important.

You'll also find some modern interpretations here:
http://www.evilbible.com/

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 12:21pm:

At the risk of batting back and forth, the point of Christianity is not to change the Jewish law for Jews but to call out everyone, Jew and gentile, into a new covenant, based on the first two commandments and the teachings and example of Jesus. As Jesus says somewhere, these two laws are the cornerstone of all laws and prophesies and all that. This is why, for example, there have been no dietary laws among Christians and so popes have been able to have bacon and eggs for breakfast from the year dot. More seriously, this is what allows for the universality ('catholicism') of the church: Christianity is not a tribal affair but a universal one, meaning it is not based on any particular tribe or language or custom or whatnot but on the two 'basic commandments' and th teaching and covenant through Jesus. Being a jew, on the other hand, is about just that, being a jew, regardless of nationality, language, geographical location. It is not universal. Christianity IS judaism for gentiles in the univesalising sense, not in the sense of talmudic law (which is for the jews). This all makes perfect sense to Christians and anyone who is able to listen to them in their own words. Also keep in mind that the history of the exegsis of the various texts is as important as the texts themselves, not just in religion but in every intellectual endeavour.

The Catholic Church might have a slightly different take on Tribalism versus Universalism with regards to Christianity... Depending, of course, on the definitions, it could be said that Catholicism demands 'Tribal Universalism' with all Christendom submitting to the Holy See.

Also, anyone (in principle) can convert to Judaism, it's just that Jews don't proselytise...

Bobby. wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 4:03pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 3:40pm: Yeah, like here: Matthew 22:37-40 King James Version (KJV) 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38  This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (I can't believe I am swapping Bible quotes.) Bobby, as I said earlier, there is more to Christianity than the Bible. There is 2000 years of exigesis and tradition which are as important as the Bible. Interprtation IS important. You'll also find some modern interpretations here: http://www.evilbible.com/

A new website!!!! Fascinating! Everyone, stand back, here comes the CORRECT TRUTH! It's on the internetz, still warm - must be right!!!  All those people before - what did they know?? Laughable. They didn't even have the internetz. PPffffttt!

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 7:40pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 12:21pm: At the risk of batting back and forth, the point of Christianity is not to change the Jewish law for Jews but to call out everyone, Jew and gentile, into a new covenant, based on the first two commandments and the teachings and example of Jesus. As Jesus says somewhere, these two laws are the cornerstone of all laws and prophesies and all that. This is why, for example, there have been no dietary laws among Christians and so popes have been able to have bacon and eggs for breakfast from the year dot. More seriously, this is what allows for the universality ('catholicism') of the church: Christianity is not a tribal affair but a universal one, meaning it is not based on any particular tribe or language or custom or whatnot but on the two 'basic commandments' and th teaching and covenant through Jesus. Being a jew, on the other hand, is about just that, being a jew, regardless of nationality, language, geographical location. It is not universal. Christianity IS judaism for gentiles in the univesalising sense, not in the sense of talmudic law (which is for the jews). This all makes perfect sense to Christians and anyone who is able to listen to them in their own words. Also keep in mind that the history of the exegsis of the various texts is as important as the texts themselves, not just in religion but in every intellectual endeavour. The Catholic Church might have a slightly different take on Tribalism versus Universalism with regards to Christianity... Depending, of course, on the definitions, it could be said that Catholicism demands 'Tribal Universalism' with all Christendom submitting to the Holy See. Also, anyone (in principle) can convert to Judaism, it's just that Jews don't proselytise...

The Apostle's Creed, recited by Anglicans, speaks of the καθολικός Church, meaning the original, universal sense of the Church. The C/catholic Church is both that (lower case) and a historical church (upper case) distinguished only in its concreteness by that upper case from all the other religiously or spiruitually equally καθολικός, in so far as Christian, churches.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 7:52pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 4:03pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 3:40pm: Yeah, like here: Matthew 22:37-40 King James Version (KJV) 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38  This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (I can't believe I am swapping Bible quotes.) Bobby, as I said earlier, there is more to Christianity than the Bible. There is 2000 years of exigesis and tradition which are as important as the Bible. Interprtation IS important. You'll also find some modern interpretations here: http://www.evilbible.com/ A new website!!!! Fascinating! Everyone, stand back, here comes the CORRECT TRUTH! It's on the internetz, still warm - must be right!!!  All those people before - what did they know?? Laughable. They didn't even have the internetz. PPffffttt!

Fallacy - agumentum ad hominem -

you attack the website -
yet you would not have had the time to even read it all,
yet alone, discuss any points.

Soren wrote on Oct 13^th, 2011 at 9:00pm:

Redemption is a moral category, not a biological one. An Athenian resurrection would have been merely a restoration to immortality - and the immortals were morally indistinguishable from the mortals. The Messiah is a Redeemer (not a mere resurrecter), but in its Jewish form perhaps too mysterious and eastern a concept for the Greek Levant of the 1st century. It is significant that Jesus, Paul and all the other Jews of the NT (they are all Jews) 'speak' to posterity in Greek, Greek after Classical and Hellenist, in a thoroughly hellenised Roman milleau. They are no longer the Jews of the OT, but bilingual, Hebrew and Greek speaking Jews. The horizons of both 'Athens' and 'Jerusalem' have ben enormously broadened by this, leading to the fruitfulness of Christianity.

You seem to be saying that pagan religions had/have no moral dimension - as if the notion of redemption does not exist in other religions.

You're also saying that this function of Christianity makes it superior to previous pagan religions that merely sold immortality.

The notion of Christ as a redeemer and saviour was a Paulinian addition to a small, Jewish doomsday cult. It IS a pagan concept - the idea that a god-man can save your very soul/baptise you in the spirit/whatever. It may be a step up from ushering you into the pearly gates, but it's a god that's doing it.

This function of Christianity is essentially pagan. I'm not sure why Christians sell it as a new development in the evolution of theism.

There were god-men before Jesus, and there may well be many more in future. The idea that God would send His redeemer to 30AD to be the alpha and omega of all humanity for all time is a strange one.

The Greeks knew tragedy because there was no justice in how the gods moved. There was no hope for justice for the dead in the next world, only tragedy, and revnge in this world. Oedipus, Antigone - no justice could be hoped for from the gods.

After Christ, tragedy in the sense of no-hope-for-justice-from-the-gods is not possible. God is seen as first of all just. Mysterious, of course, but ultimatly just. That is a moral dimension no Greek god had.

I'm not sure, old boy. The Greek religion of Orpheus believed in a redeemer god: Dionysus. However, the gods did not redeem you, your devotion to them did.

This is because many Greeks, along with Egyptians, Persians and Indians believed in the transmigration of souls, metempsychosis - or what we call reincarnation.

If you believe you're responsible for your own justice - through your own actions - an intercessor god cannot save your soul. Only through the dissolution of the ego can you achieve salvation.

I know, dear. It's a very alien thought, isn't it?

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 7:59pm:

The Apostle's Creed, recited by Anglicans, speaks of the καθολικός Church, meaning the original, universal sense of the Church. The C/catholic Church is both that (lower case) and a historical church (upper case) distinguished only in its concreteness by that upper case from all the other religiously or spiruitually equally καθολικός, in so far as Christian, churches.

Yes, Henry VIII, to his dying day, always considered himself a Catholic (capital C).

As for the Catholic Church... It's barely been 50 years since the hatred between Catholics and Protestants in Australia has abated - its abatement being due almost entirely to Australia's rapid secularisation. Prior to that, Catholic/Protestant marriage would split families apart with many being shunned and disinherited from both sides.

So much for universalism...

The only 'universalism' (if you can call it that) that has arisen between the different sects of Christianity is due to their mutual fear of being culturally irrelevant... And the seemingly endless sex scandals within the Churches (not limited to Catholics) has accelerated this irrelevance to the point that the term 'priest' is almost a synonym for paedophile.

Karnal wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 8:48pm:

I'm not sure, old boy. The Greek religion of Orpheus believed in a redeemer god: Dionysus.

You are full of innovation tonight. (you must have had an excellent postcolonial irrigation.)

DO expand on this theory.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 8:15pm:

The Greeks knew tragedy because there was no justice in how the gods moved. There was no hope for justice for the dead in the next world, only tragedy, and revnge in this world. Oedipus, Antigone - no justice could be hoped for from the gods. After Christ, tragedy in the sense of no-hope-for-justice-from-the-gods is not possible. God is seen as first of all just. Mysterious, of course, but ultimatly just. That is a moral dimension no Greek god had.

Didn't the rise of Greek democracy displace the gods as the source of justice by placing its administration in the hands of citizens, hundreds of years before the advent of Christianity?

Even Socrates got his day in court.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 8:52pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 7:59pm: The Apostle's Creed, recited by Anglicans, speaks of the καθολικός Church, meaning the original, universal sense of the Church. The C/catholic Church is both that (lower case) and a historical church (upper case) distinguished only in its concreteness by that upper case from all the other religiously or spiruitually equally καθολικός, in so far as Christian, churches. Yes, Henry VIII, to his dying day, always considered himself a Catholic (capital C). As for the Catholic Church... It's barely been 50 years since the hatred between Catholics and Protestants in Australia has abated - its abatement being due almost entirely to Australia's rapid secularisation. Prior to that, Catholic/Protestant marriage would split families apart with many being shunned and disinherited from both sides. So much for universalism... The only 'universalism' (if you can call it that) that has arisen between the different sects of Christianity is due to their mutual fear of being culturally irrelevant... And the seemingly endless sex scandals within the Churches (not limited to Catholics) has accelerated this irrelevance to the point that the term 'priest' is almost a synonym for paedophile.

I don't mind having a discussion about church politics. But I find it a little too hard jump in and out of theology/philosophy and politics. If every philosophical point is met with a political one and every political one with a philosophical, then I am not the man to discuss this with you.

I have minimal to no interest in Irish politics of the 20th century and only a slightly greater interest in how it was impacting on Australia.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 8:57pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 8:15pm: The Greeks knew tragedy because there was no justice in how the gods moved. There was no hope for justice for the dead in the next world, only tragedy, and revnge in this world. Oedipus, Antigone - no justice could be hoped for from the gods. After Christ, tragedy in the sense of no-hope-for-justice-from-the-gods is not possible. God is seen as first of all just. Mysterious, of course, but ultimatly just. That is a moral dimension no Greek god had. Even Socrates got his day in court.

For disrespecting the gods.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 9:00pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 8:57pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 8:15pm: The Greeks knew tragedy because there was no justice in how the gods moved. There was no hope for justice for the dead in the next world, only tragedy, and revnge in this world. Oedipus, Antigone - no justice could be hoped for from the gods. After Christ, tragedy in the sense of no-hope-for-justice-from-the-gods is not possible. God is seen as first of all just. Mysterious, of course, but ultimatly just. That is a moral dimension no Greek god had. Even Socrates got his day in court. For disrespecting the gods.

The verdict of which the Athenians came to regret.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 8:59pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 8:52pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 7:59pm: The Apostle's Creed, recited by Anglicans, speaks of the καθολικός Church, meaning the original, universal sense of the Church. The C/catholic Church is both that (lower case) and a historical church (upper case) distinguished only in its concreteness by that upper case from all the other religiously or spiruitually equally καθολικός, in so far as Christian, churches. Yes, Henry VIII, to his dying day, always considered himself a Catholic (capital C). As for the Catholic Church... It's barely been 50 years since the hatred between Catholics and Protestants in Australia has abated - its abatement being due almost entirely to Australia's rapid secularisation. Prior to that, Catholic/Protestant marriage would split families apart with many being shunned and disinherited from both sides. So much for universalism... The only 'universalism' (if you can call it that) that has arisen between the different sects of Christianity is due to their mutual fear of being culturally irrelevant... And the seemingly endless sex scandals within the Churches (not limited to Catholics) has accelerated this irrelevance to the point that the term 'priest' is almost a synonym for paedophile. I don't mind having a discussion about church politics. But I find it a little too hard jump in and out of theology/philosophy and politics. If every philosophical point is met with a political one and every political one with a philosophical, then I am not the man to discuss this with you. I have minimal to no interest in Irish politics of the 20th century and only a slightly greater interest in how it was impacting on Australia.

Philosophical positions on how we should live, when adopted by the state, invariably become political positions.

Whether you believe that god is ultimately just is practically irrelevant... Countless murders and other crimes have been committed in the name of a just (Abrahamic) god...

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 8:54pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 8:48pm: I'm not sure, old boy. The Greek religion of Orpheus believed in a redeemer god: Dionysus. You are full of innovation tonight. (you must have had an excellent postcolonial irrigation.) DO expand on this theory.

Read the rest of the thread, dear. Or look it up. My colon is overflowing with Christ light.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 8:59pm:

I have minimal to no interest in Irish politics of the 20th century and only a slightly greater interest in how it was impacting on Australia.

Not Irish politics in Australia... The problem was socio-political religious hatred driven by the Churches in the name of 'the one true god'.

The church is not god.

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 9:18pm:

The church is not god.

The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years.

Karnal wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 9:16pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 8:54pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 8:48pm: I'm not sure, old boy. The Greek religion of Orpheus believed in a redeemer god: Dionysus. You are full of innovation tonight. (you must have had an excellent postcolonial irrigation.) DO expand on this theory. Or look it up.

I don't have access to the channels that are reserved just for you.

One of us is lucky.

There is no way Christianity, as it has evolved, can be extricated from its political role (nor from its political nature) within western civilisation.

It has been a politicised religion, since Constantine and, arguably, the western Roman Empire continued its existence with the Popes assuming the role of the Caesars.

The dogma that we have today was sanctioned by Heads of State 1800 years ago with all other interpretations destroyed and nearly all non-Rome sanctioned orthodoxy (heresy) ruthlessly crushed.

Popes (later Protestant sects) and Kings have for centuries continued a mercurial relationship with regard to which institution has the greater authority... Church vs State.

You cannot 'know' the Christian god except via politically sanctioned texts.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 9:20pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:18pm: The church is not god. The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years.

True - The Pope has God's mobile phone number.  ;D

Bobby. wrote on Oct 16^th, 2011 at 3:51pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:20pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:18pm: The church is not god. The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years. True - The Pope has God's mobile phone number.  ;D

Yeah, but God usually let's it go to voicemail..... ;D

gizmo_2655 wrote on Oct 17^th, 2011 at 6:54am:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 16th, 2011 at 3:51pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:20pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:18pm: The church is not god. The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years. True - The Pope has God's mobile phone number.  ;D Yeah, but God usually let's it go to voicemail..... ;D

True... That's the problem with god... He answers all calls,  but sometimes that answer is "Sorry... GOD... Isn't available right now, I can let him know you called..."

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 9:20pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:18pm: The church is not god. The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years.

Or rather, Peter's successor. The pope derives his authority, like ultimately all bishops, from being a successor to Peter.

I thought Jesus was god's representative/incarnation.

Actually, I have a question regarding the Biblical Jesus.  Now we read in Matthew, that Jesus Christ was physically resurrected, in that he spoke with up to 500 people who knew him, showed them his wounds, and actually ate meals.

Now we also read in Luke, that he ascended to heaven in corporeal form 40 days after his resurrection.

I'm not interested in talking about the "mythological" aspects of this or debating how the account was influenced by other religions of the time, but I am interested in the implications of corporeal ascension versus presumably non corporeal ascension of others following death.  There are other Biblical accounts of corporeal ascension of course. Job springs to mind.

So what do Christians actually believe in terms of the significance of corporeal ascension as opposed to non-corporeal? Does it matter? This is not intended to trap anyone. It's a gap in my knowledge that I'd like to fill. I believe that religions serve a purpose and I find their beliefs fascinating. I agree with Karnal's reply 80 in this thread.

I might be wrong, Muso, but I think they'll tell you it doesn't matter. As Sprint and Soren have alluded here, the point of Christianity is the sacrifice the Christ made upon the cross - not his ascention into the sky, bodily or not.

Not, at least, in the protestant forms of Christianity.

Mind you, Jesus himself said that the Kingdom is not in the sky in the gospel of Judas - admittedly, not the most popular of gospels.

The Kingdom is within. But paradoxically, it is also without. Here, we detect a cosmology that relies on consciousness as the driving force of the universe.

There are many observations in the gospels that are taken from 3rd hand accounts. And we know that the gospels could not have possibly been written by the original disciples. "Luke's" observation, I think, is one of those mythical revisions designed to align Jesus with Paul's pagan marketing campaign.

Still, it's a good question. Is the corporeal ascention of Jesus an important - and believed - part of the faith?

Soren wrote on Oct 17^th, 2011 at 9:45am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:20pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:18pm: The church is not god. The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years. Or rather, Peter's successor. The pope derives his authority, like ultimately all bishops, from being a successor to Peter. I thought Jesus was god's representative/incarnation.

Jesus is not god's representative... Jesus is god... Y'know the three persons in one god.

The Pope inherits all that the mythology of Jesus bestowed on him, the Vicar of Christ... Y'know 'Thou art Petrus and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall never prevail against it"

What the Pope binds on earth is bound in heaven what he looses on earth is loosed in heaven...

Cos y'know... that's the core belief of the Christian establishment... Or at least how the Roman heads of state allowed it to be transmitted.

..can be amused by the loopish logic of the churches for many a year. I'd rather be a Trekkie.
It only serves as a diversion to what is really going on.


Jesus never happened. There was never any real life Jesus as is believed by followers of the bible.
Nobody has ever proven me wrong there  ;D
..Nobody ever will.

 Sorry for my late-ncy.


Superman1 wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2011 at 10:38pm:

"If thine eye be single, thy whole body will be filled with light." = means no other than if you focus only on your Spirituality, you will be dIVINE.

Karnal wrote on Oct 6^th, 2011 at 12:47pm:

Means "no other"? Are you saying there can only be one reading of the Bible? Sounds a tad fundamentalist to me.

 I meant it means nothing else than; that it is that simple, and easy to understand.
 I slightly didn't use the right grammar, and looked what happened. Just like in J-Hi's time. Global misintwirpretation. ;D You all became babbling books.
 I didn't mean the Bible or any external guy at all.

 Let that be a lesson to me.

Superman1 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2011 at 5:21pm:

Sorry for my late-ncy. Superman1 wrote on Oct 3rd, 2011 at 10:38pm: "If thine eye be single, thy whole body will be filled with light." = means no other than if you focus only on your Spirituality, you will be dIVINE. Karnal wrote on Oct 6th, 2011 at 12:47pm: Means "no other"? Are you saying there can only be one reading of the Bible? Sounds a tad fundamentalist to me.  I meant it means nothing else than; that it is that simple, and easy to understand.  I slightly didn't use the right grammar, and looked what happened. Just like in J-Hi's time. Global misintwirpretation. ;D You all became babbling books.  I didn't mean the Bible or any external guy at all.  Let that be a lesson to me.

Yep you just have to see a word and the mind starts twirling :-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VIqA3i2zQw

Superman1 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2011 at 5:21pm:

Sorry for my late-ncy. Superman1 wrote on Oct 3rd, 2011 at 10:38pm: "If thine eye be single, thy whole body will be filled with light." = means no other than if you focus only on your Spirituality, you will be dIVINE. Karnal wrote on Oct 6th, 2011 at 12:47pm: Means "no other"? Are you saying there can only be one reading of the Bible? Sounds a tad fundamentalist to me.  I meant it means nothing else than; that it is that simple, and easy to understand.

Do you think the Bible is easy to understand? It's full of examples like the above.

The Bible is not a simple, historical document. It's full of myth, metaphor, and for those who know where to look, instruction.

It's got instructions for everyone. I like your interpretation. It makes sense.

From what I've read of Jesus, he rarely gives one meaning. He chooses words with multiple layers of meaning. He liked puns and metaphors. For a landless, textual people like the Jews, literacy was fundamental to their faith. To an occupied nation like Israel, words were crucial to its resistance. The Jews, like the Irish, are a race of storytellers.

In the beginning was the word.

Many scholars believe Jesus came from the Essene sect. The Essenes had links to the hidden Jewish practices of the Kabbalah and the Talmud. Kabbalists believe that words have spiritual power, that the names of G_d can direct energy in your body and help you achieve higher states of consciousness. Think of Joshua bringing down the walls of Jericho with the power of his army's voice.

The walls of Jericho are within.

Hebrew itself is a densely layered language and written form. Its letters correspond to numbers and symbols. Medieval Christian scholars picked up on this. Some sought to prove the divinity of Jesus through the Hebrew alphabet alone. They believed that a common Hebrew name for G_d, Jehova, was realised in the spirit by adding the Hebrew letter shin, forming the name, Yeheshua.

The Hebrew letter shin, resembles a fire, and means spirit.

It fit nicely with their Greek medical training too. In Hebrew, Jehova had four letters, each representing the four elements, earth, air, fire and water. With the addition of spirit, God was realised in the body of Christ.

All word games, of course, but Medieval monks didn't have crossword puzzles and sodoku.

I'm not sure if studies like the above are helpful, or just wankery. Like most things, I guess, it's probably a bit of both. However, I do think we lost something in the reformation. Paradoxically, by painting over the frescos and putting the focus back on the Bible, the word has become lost - just as it has with the renewed focus on the spirit in the Pentacostal movement. At Hillsong, for example, you'll rarely even hear a Bible quote.

Refreshing, perhaps, but all that singing, speaking in tongues and putting your hands in the air looks like a Wiggles concert to me.

Or a Nuremberg rally.

Give me Martin Luther anyday.

Karnal wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 9:21am:

Superman1 wrote on Oct 18th, 2011 at 5:21pm:  Sorry for my late-ncy. Superman1 wrote on Oct 3rd, 2011 at 10:38pm: "If thine eye be single, thy whole body will be filled with light." = means no other than if you focus only on your Spirituality, you will be dIVINE. Karnal wrote on Oct 6th, 2011 at 12:47pm: Means "no other"? Are you saying there can only be one reading of the Bible? Sounds a tad fundamentalist to me.  I meant it means nothing else than; that it is that simple, and easy to understand. Do you think the Bible is easy to understand? It's full of examples like the above. The Bible is not a simple, historical document. It's full of myth, metaphor, and for those who know where to look, instruction. It's got instructions for everyone. I like your interpretation. It makes sense. From what I've read of Jesus, he rarely gives one meaning. He chooses words with multiple layers of meaning. He liked puns and metaphors. For a landless, textual people like the Jews, literacy was fundamental to their faith. To an occupied nation like Israel, words were crucial to its resistance. The Jews, like the Irish, are a race of storytellers. In the beginning was the word. Many scholars believe Jesus came from the Essene sect. The Essenes had links to the hidden Jewish practices of the Kabbalah and the Talmud. Kabbalists believe that words have spiritual power, that the names of G_d can direct energy in your body and help you achieve higher states of consciousness. Think of Joshua bringing down the walls of Jericho with the power of his army's voice. The walls of Jericho are within. Hebrew itself is a densely layered language and written form. Its letters correspond to numbers and symbols. Medieval Christian scholars picked up on this. Some sought to prove the divinity of Jesus through the Hebrew alphabet alone. They believed that a common Hebrew name for G_d, Jehova, was realised in the spirit by adding the Hebrew letter shin, forming the name, Yeheshua. The Hebrew letter shin, resembles a fire, and means spirit. It fit nicely with their Greek medical training too. In Hebrew, Jehova had four letters, each representing the four elements, earth, air, fire and water. With the addition of spirit, God was realised in the body of Christ. All word games, of course, but Medieval monks didn't have crossword puzzles and sodoku. I'm not sure if studies like the above are helpful, or just wankery. Like most things, I guess, it's probably a bit of both. However, I do think we lost something in the reformation. Paradoxically, by painting over the frescos and putting the focus back on the Bible, the word has become lost - just as it has with the renewed focus on the spirit in the Pentacostal movement. At Hillsong, for example, you'll rarely even hear a Bible quote. Refreshing, perhaps, but all that singing, speaking in tongues and putting your hands in the air looks like a Wiggles concert to me. Or a Nuremberg rally. Give me Martin Luther anyday.

:-) Y'know you ought to straight talk more often Karnal, I enjoyed that. I'm not sure that I wouldn't prefer a Nuremburg rally actually. At least the fascism is open and not being gift wrapped as the word of god.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 17^th, 2011 at 10:00pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 17th, 2011 at 9:45am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:20pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:18pm: The church is not god. The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years. Or rather, Peter's successor. The pope derives his authority, like ultimately all bishops, from being a successor to Peter. I thought Jesus was god's representative/incarnation. Jesus is not god's representative... Jesus is god... Y'know the three persons in one god. The Pope inherits all that the mythology of Jesus bestowed on him, the Vicar of Christ... Y'know 'Thou art Petrus and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall never prevail against it" What the Pope binds on earth is bound in heaven what he looses on earth is loosed in heaven... Cos y'know... that's the core belief of the Christian establishment... Or at least how the Roman heads of state allowed it to be transmitted.

" The Pope is just another bare bum in the shower block " - Chopper Read.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 17^th, 2011 at 10:00pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 17th, 2011 at 9:45am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:20pm: Soren wrote on Oct 15th, 2011 at 9:18pm: The church is not god. The 'Vicar of Christ' is 'god's representative on earth'... Has been for nearly 2000 years. Or rather, Peter's successor. The pope derives his authority, like ultimately all bishops, from being a successor to Peter. I thought Jesus was god's representative/incarnation. Jesus is not god's representative... Jesus is god... Y'know the three persons in one god. The Pope inherits all that the mythology of Jesus bestowed on him, the Vicar of Christ... Y'know 'Thou art Petrus and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall never prevail against it" What the Pope binds on earth is bound in heaven what he looses on earth is loosed in heaven... Cos y'know... that's the core belief of the Christian establishment... Or at least how the Roman heads of state allowed it to be transmitted.

I see your interperetation and have another one.

"When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”
They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”  Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah. ......"

Matthew 16:13,20


the greek word for "peter " was "rock".
jesus was intersted in the declaration that "......“You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” .......
that is the strength, the rock.


It is backed up later by
"........If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. "

Romans 10:9,10

What a lot of bullshit Sprint.

I am Bobbythebat1 & I am the Messiah, the Son of the living God.

Disprove it!

By the way - in those times there were Messiahs everywhere.
It was a way to earn a living.
Messiahs were a dime a dozen.
;D

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 9:34pm:

What a lot of bullshit Sprint. I am Bobbythebat1 & I am the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Disprove it! By the way - in those times there were Messiahs everywhere. It was a way to earn a living. Messiahs were a dime a dozen. ;D

they still are ;)

Sir lastnail wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 9:37pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24th, 2011 at 9:34pm: What a lot of bullshit Sprint. I am Bobbythebat1 & I am the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Disprove it! By the way - in those times there were Messiahs everywhere. It was a way to earn a living. Messiahs were a dime a dozen. ;D they still are ;)

Only they ain't dimes they're pulling by the dozen no more ;)

http://www.trinityfi.org/images/hinn016.jpg

NorthOfNorth wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 9:58pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Oct 24th, 2011 at 9:37pm: Bobby. wrote on Oct 24th, 2011 at 9:34pm: What a lot of bullshit Sprint. I am Bobbythebat1 & I am the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Disprove it! By the way - in those times there were Messiahs everywhere. It was a way to earn a living. Messiahs were a dime a dozen. ;D they still are ;) Only they ain't dimes they're pulling by the dozen no more ;) http://www.trinityfi.org/images/hinn016.jpg

Benny is a Messiah - he performs miracles live on stage.
I saw a woman once who was supposed to have been in a wheelchair for years
not only get up & walk but she was running up & down the stairs to the stage.
I know that even if someone is bed-ridden for a week -
they can't get out of bed without someone to support them
so the running part was a bit hard to swallow. ;D

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 9:34pm:

What a lot of bullshit Sprint. I am Bobbythebat1 & I am the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Disprove it! By the way - in those times there were Messiahs everywhere. It was a way to earn a living. Messiahs were a dime a dozen. ;D

you are entirely justified to say that bobby.
I don't believe you are the messiah.

I know Jesus is The Christ. Because I know Jesus. We met one morning and I ain't been the same since.
Upon that rock, the gates of hades will not prevail.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 11:39pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24th, 2011 at 9:34pm: What a lot of bullshit Sprint. I am Bobbythebat1 & I am the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Disprove it! By the way - in those times there were Messiahs everywhere. It was a way to earn a living. Messiahs were a dime a dozen. ;D you are entirely justified to say that bobby. I don't believe you are the messiah. I know Jesus is The Christ. Because I know Jesus. We met one morning and I ain't been the same since. Upon that rock, the gates of hades will not prevail.

Alright Sprint - that's OK  if you reject me as the Messiah but do you reject Benny?

hahhaah - benny hill ?

benny's about the same creflo dollar.

have a good night  bobby

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 9:02pm:

hahhaah - benny hill ? benny's about the same creflo dollar. have a good night  bobby

Buy Benny Hinn raised a man from the dead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID52FjPWQEc

I'll bet he didn't.

Jesus does, but benny doesn't.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 11:39pm:

Upon that rock, the gates of hades will not prevail.

Hades, brother. It's all Greek to me.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 26^th, 2011 at 12:02am:

I'll bet he didn't. Jesus does, but benny doesn't.

You have denied the Messiah - Benny Hinn - Blasphemy!

Any replies? - bump


Benny Hinn raised a man from the dead & not many comments.  ;D