|
Post by silver on Apr 4, 2015 9:33:41 GMT -5
You're resorting to logical fallacy again. I asked you if you could prove to me that the literal resurrection is fact. You offer scripture as evidence, but to me that's just hearsay -- and inconsistent hearsay at that -- so I'm unconvinced of your proof. I have no burden to prove you wrong in this issue as I'm not asserting a fact, you are. Whether you're convinced of this fact or not, and why, is unimportant to me. Why that's the hearsay? How do you know? Contemporary writers are writing about what has happened. When you do not know something you should not erroneously open a thread like this to talk, when you do not know something you should not form your own story. Do you know historical scholars who writes about Jesus Christ? Have you heard anyone? they usually would not write something without any evidence, How do you know the story of great Alexander if Tacitus who is the second century writer did not write about him? Those historians can't be underestimated. You are not investigating anything carefully, but ready to talk about this more, I don't understand why. This is Religious, when you come to philosophical topic, I asked you how do you know others are real or not, you said to me that I know through my beloved people, Do you know how big mistake or how silly is this reply? You do not know. But you always there to criticize other people like me,andrew,pilgrims,tzu. But unfortunately you do not know how silly your own investigation is!!!. As I've told people here before, gopal, I grew up in the Episcopal (Protestant) church (St. Pauls, btw) and I went to Sunday School and Church every week. All that time, I honored and respected - without even batting an eye - my parents' decision to send us kids to church every week. My thoughts, at times, were busy wondering about the veracity of all the information and stories of the Bible and not in an irreverent way - just wondering all the time when I'd be listening or reading about it. The one basic was that I did - and do - love Christ. As a kid - and now as an adult - I figure how can one not love Jesus? Trouble is - as time goes on things get worse - our minds create mazes of all the information - topped with all the reactions from our emotions - our self-interests - it gets in the way of our ability to look at things from a more rational and realistic perspective. I'm someone who has always loved my mind. I don't even know when the love affair started - seems like it's always been that way for me and I've always been fascinated with the mind and everything to do with it. If you want to read something cool about the mind, read Julian Jaynes' book: The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind - and ahh, I remembered the title without looking for it. That felt good. While I disapprove of Laughter's criticisms of others, I admire his ability to look at important things in a rational reasonable way - that is when he comes down off the ceiling. I think he's right in observing your use of fallacies to try and debate the truth of the Biblical tales.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Apr 4, 2015 9:38:14 GMT -5
I "cut my teeth" on my beginning spiritual journey reading Theosophical literature at 17 (The Theosophical Society bunch). They give a description of five initiations, if I recall correctly the fifth one becomes a Master. One attribute is that the physical body is controlled by one's Will, that is, the body can manifest, or not. Again, if I recall, the birth of Jesus is the first initiation, the Baptism of Jesus is the second initiation. The transfiguration the third initiation . The Crucifixion the fourth. The Resurrection the fifth initiation. I think all that can be found in Leadbeater's The Masters and the Path. (Leadbeater, btw, is the one who found J Krishnamurti and his brother Nitya walking on a beach in India. They were approximately 10-12 at the time. He said Krishnamurti had the clearest aura he had every seen. Their father, who was a member of the Theosophical Society, allowed them both to be cared for and taught and even be sent to England for education, by Annie Besant. It was expected that Krishnamurti would be the "Vehicle" for the "New World Teacher". The Order of the Star in the East was formed for Krishnamurti, as a branch of the Theosophical Society, and who was the head of it, and it eventually had more members than The Theosophical Society itself. But in his 20's J Krishnamurti threw a monkey-wrench into the whole works, and dissolved The Order of the Star in the East, and began doing his own thing. He did this with his famous: Truth is a Pathless Land speech. OK, no charge for that).
The best physical evidence we have for the resurrection is the Shroud of Turin. Scientists today do not know how the image on the cloth was formed. It is a negative image, like a photographic negative. It is a 3D image embedded into the cloth. A bunch of scientists were allowed to study the shroud (1988), and decided it only went back to the 13th century, its own known history. Later, from more study, it was realized that this was in error (pollen screwed up the Carbon dating). Also, from study of the linen itself and the weave of the cloth, it was proven to go back at least to the first century. So I figure there is a good chance it actually is the burial cloth of Jesus (described in the gospels), and that Jesus knew what was going to happen (I will lay this body down for three days and then raise it back up), and so during the resurrection, the physical body was transformed into an immortal body, and the energy released is what formed the image on the Shroud of Turin. That's just what I see as a possibility, it explains the gospel reports, it explains the Shroud of Turin. The resurrected body wasn't physical, the matter of the physical was E=MC-squared into an immortal (energy) body. Alchemy also arises out of this, and even Taoist alchemy. But the point is that something so significant happened that it has effected the whole world for 2,000 years (but sometimes for bad also, for example the Inquisition, that was pretty nasty business). This very same phenomenon is known of as the Rainbow Body in Dzogchen Buddhism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 9:41:21 GMT -5
Why that's the hearsay? How do you know? Contemporary writers are writing about what has happened. When you do not know something you should not erroneously open a thread like this to talk, when you do not know something you should not form your own story. Do you know historical scholars who writes about Jesus Christ? Have you heard anyone? they usually would not write something without any evidence, How do you know the story of great Alexander if Tacitus who is the second century writer did not write about him? Those historians can't be underestimated. You are not investigating anything carefully, but ready to talk about this more, I don't understand why. This is Religious, when you come to philosophical topic, I asked you how do you know others are real or not, you said to me that I know through my beloved people, Do you know how big mistake or how silly is this reply? You do not know. But you always there to criticize other people like me,andrew,pilgrims,tzu. But unfortunately you do not know how silly your own investigation is!!!. As I've told people here before, gopal, I grew up in the Episcopal (Protestant) church (St. Pauls, btw) and I went to Sunday School and Church every week. All that time, I honored and respected - without even batting an eye - my parents' decision to send us kids to church every week. My thoughts, at times, were busy wondering about the veracity of all the information and stories of the Bible and not in an irreverent way - just wondering all the time when I'd be listening or reading about it. The one basic was that I did - and do - love Christ. As a kid - and now as an adult - I figure how can one not love Jesus? Trouble is - as time goes on things get worse - our minds create mazes of all the information - topped with all the reactions from our emotions - our self-interests - it gets in the way of our ability to look at things from a more rational and realistic perspective. I'm someone who has always loved my mind. I don't even know when the love affair started - seems like it's always been that way for me and I've always been fascinated with the mind and everything to do with it. If you want to read something cool about the mind, read Julian Jaynes' book: The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind - and ahh, I remembered the title without looking for it. That felt good. While I disapprove of Laughter's criticisms of others, I admire his ability to look at important things in a rational reasonable way - that is when he comes down off the ceiling. I think he's right in observing your use of fallacies to try and debate the truth of the Biblical tales. No, he doesn't know the truth, he himself is admitting it, but he writes as if he has known the truth, he is saying no resurrection, it's metaphor, but he doesn't know whether resurrection happened or not.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Apr 4, 2015 9:55:36 GMT -5
Those stories are embellished and contradictory accounts of a charismatic guru, written no less than 60 years after his passing.. and, like your description of "normal street walker" and the rest of your beliefs, the words you read are products of the mind.. What? what are you talking here? All paul epistles were written around 50 AD(started at 48 AD). Paul has never seen Jesus, but Paul has met peter immediately after his baptism and first hand information has been transferred to Paul from Peter who was with Jesus. And Mark was written at 70 AD immediately after Jewish war, Mark,Matthew,Acts were written in 80 AD using the reference of Mark. Conclusion is pretty clear. Paul's writing is the first hand information from Peter. Not only that, Paul has written that Jesus has appeared him and he was blinded for three days and subsequently Paul conversion to Christianity happens. Please investigate the truth very carefully, I know the problem of writing which has been written 2000 years ago, but still authenticated writings of Paul is found. Hey gopal, I think this is pretty accurate, except. When Paul first met Peter, Peter pretty-much said, Dude!, these guys are never going to believe you are a Christian, man! just "yesterday" you were trying to kill us, you need to get the hell out of Dodge or they will probably "skin you alive". So Paul listened, and the NT says he went to Arabia for 14 years and there he learned the stuff he later taught (alone, inwardly, by Jesus, as it were). After that Paul went to the church at Jerusalem and patched things up with everybody, IOW he was accepted by Peter and James and the others. Paul obviously taught stuff Jesus didn't teach. It seems peculiar to me that this was the plan all along, that Paul who never knew Jesus would explain what the life and death of Jesus was all about. For this reason I have to put the teaching of Jesus above the teaching of Paul.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Apr 4, 2015 9:59:10 GMT -5
As I've told people here before, gopal, I grew up in the Episcopal (Protestant) church (St. Pauls, btw) and I went to Sunday School and Church every week. All that time, I honored and respected - without even batting an eye - my parents' decision to send us kids to church every week. My thoughts, at times, were busy wondering about the veracity of all the information and stories of the Bible and not in an irreverent way - just wondering all the time when I'd be listening or reading about it. The one basic was that I did - and do - love Christ. As a kid - and now as an adult - I figure how can one not love Jesus? Trouble is - as time goes on things get worse - our minds create mazes of all the information - topped with all the reactions from our emotions - our self-interests - it gets in the way of our ability to look at things from a more rational and realistic perspective. I'm someone who has always loved my mind. I don't even know when the love affair started - seems like it's always been that way for me and I've always been fascinated with the mind and everything to do with it. If you want to read something cool about the mind, read Julian Jaynes' book: The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind - and ahh, I remembered the title without looking for it. That felt good. While I disapprove of Laughter's criticisms of others, I admire his ability to look at important things in a rational reasonable way - that is when he comes down off the ceiling. I think he's right in observing your use of fallacies to try and debate the truth of the Biblical tales. No, he doesn't know the truth, he himself is admitting it, but he writes as if he has known the truth, he is saying no resurrection, it's metaphor, but he doesn't know whether resurrection happened or not. To my recollection he didn't say no it didn't happen - or maybe he meant it didn't happen in the way you believe it did. The truth is that nobody who is alive today would know for sure what exactly all happened. Sure, we can study all the information about it until the cows come home, but we still weren't there to witness what actually happened or didn't happen. [eta: and even then, our senses can deceive us and our minds can misinterpret what we think we experienced.]
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Apr 4, 2015 10:08:53 GMT -5
No, he doesn't know the truth, he himself is admitting it, but he writes as if he has known the truth, he is saying no resurrection, it's metaphor, but he doesn't know whether resurrection happened or not. To my recollection he didn't say no it didn't happen - or maybe he meant it didn't happen in the way you believe it did. The truth is that nobody who is alive today would know for sure what exactly all happened. Sure, we can study all the information about it until the cows come home, but we still weren't there to witness what actually happened or didn't happen. [eta: and even then, our senses can deceive us and our minds can misinterpret what we think we experienced.] The way to prove what happened then is to reproduce it now. This is specifically what Jesus taught, but the church doesn't understand this. That, in a nutshell, has been the whole impetus for my spiritual search. I have always looked for someone who lived what Jesus taught and can reproduce it in their life.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Apr 4, 2015 10:12:09 GMT -5
To my recollection he didn't say no it didn't happen - or maybe he meant it didn't happen in the way you believe it did. The truth is that nobody who is alive today would know for sure what exactly all happened. Sure, we can study all the information about it until the cows come home, but we still weren't there to witness what actually happened or didn't happen. [eta: and even then, our senses can deceive us and our minds can misinterpret what we think we experienced.] The way to prove what happened then is to reproduce it now. This is specifically what Jesus taught, but the church doesn't understand this. That, in a nutshell, has been the whole impetus for my spiritual search. I have always looked for someone who lived what Jesus taught and can reproduce it in their life. Well...as it stands, what exactly is it about Christ's life that you are wanting to replicate now?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Apr 4, 2015 10:18:22 GMT -5
No, he doesn't know the truth, he himself is admitting it, but he writes as if he has known the truth, he is saying no resurrection, it's metaphor, but he doesn't know whether resurrection happened or not. To my recollection he didn't say no it didn't happen - or maybe he meant it didn't happen in the way you believe it did. The truth is that nobody who is alive today would know for sure what exactly all happened. Sure, we can study all the information about it until the cows come home, but we still weren't there to witness what actually happened or didn't happen. [eta: and even then, our senses can deceive us and our minds can misinterpret what we think we experienced.] The best rule of thumb, Socrates, "I know that I know nothing". This is what Suzuki called Beginner's Mind. Better to say I don't know that to later have to tear down all the false illusory knowledge you thought you knew. Demolition is nasty business. I wouldn't put, I can't prove to you that unicorns don't exist in the same category as, I can't prove to you that Jesus was not resurrected. But, of course, I am not laughter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 10:21:00 GMT -5
What? what are you talking here? All paul epistles were written around 50 AD(started at 48 AD). Paul has never seen Jesus, but Paul has met peter immediately after his baptism and first hand information has been transferred to Paul from Peter who was with Jesus. And Mark was written at 70 AD immediately after Jewish war, Mark,Matthew,Acts were written in 80 AD using the reference of Mark. Conclusion is pretty clear. Paul's writing is the first hand information from Peter. Not only that, Paul has written that Jesus has appeared him and he was blinded for three days and subsequently Paul conversion to Christianity happens. Please investigate the truth very carefully, I know the problem of writing which has been written 2000 years ago, but still authenticated writings of Paul is found. Hey gopal, I think this is pretty accurate, except. When Paul first met Peter, Peter pretty-much said, Dude!, these guys are never going to believe you are a Christian, man! just "yesterday" you were trying to kill us, you need to get the hell out of Dodge or they will probably "skin you alive". So Paul listened, and the NT says he went to Arabia for 14 years and there he learned the stuff he later taught (alone, inwardly, by Jesus, as it were). After that Paul went to the church at Jerusalem and patched things up with everybody, IOW he was accepted by Peter and James and the others. Paul obviously taught stuff Jesus didn't teach. It seems peculiar to me that this was the plan all along, that Paul who never knew Jesus would explain what the life and death of Jesus was all about. For this reason I have to put the teaching of Jesus above the teaching of Paul. If you remove the teaching of paul from Bible, then there is no Christianity, Because the meaning of crucifixion and resurrection comes from teaching of paul, I did not say paul was taught by peter about the meaning of Salvation, Paul knows life of Jesus and many things about Jesus by Peter. No paul No Christianity. Paul is the backbone of Christianity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 10:30:20 GMT -5
No, he doesn't know the truth, he himself is admitting it, but he writes as if he has known the truth, he is saying no resurrection, it's metaphor, but he doesn't know whether resurrection happened or not. To my recollection he didn't say no it didn't happen - or maybe he meant it didn't happen in the way you believe it did. The truth is that nobody who is alive today would know for sure what exactly all happened. Sure, we can study all the information about it until the cows come home, but we still weren't there to witness what actually happened or didn't happen. [eta: and even then, our senses can deceive us and our minds can misinterpret what we think we experienced.] I did not say he said 'it did not happen', but he said 'he doesn't know' but he also made the conclusion that no resurrection, it's metaphor. When he doesn't know what is the truth, he unnecessarily opens a thread and speaks as if he knows Jesus did not resurrected.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 4, 2015 10:38:08 GMT -5
To my recollection he didn't say no it didn't happen - or maybe he meant it didn't happen in the way you believe it did. The truth is that nobody who is alive today would know for sure what exactly all happened. Sure, we can study all the information about it until the cows come home, but we still weren't there to witness what actually happened or didn't happen. [eta: and even then, our senses can deceive us and our minds can misinterpret what we think we experienced.] I did not say he said 'it did not happen', but he said 'he doesn't know' but he also made the conclusion that no resurrection, it's metaphor. When he doesn't know what is the truth, he unnecessarily opens a thread and speaks as if he knows Jesus did not resurrected. First off I want to disclaim anything Silver has written to you as having anything to do with any of my opinions, views or sentiments and appologize to you for having attracted her attention by your correspondence with me. What I'd point out to you is that the title of the thread is "Easter for the Rest of Us", and I have offered to explain to you the basis of my viewpoint, but you haven't taken me up on that offer. You're perfectly welcome to start a thread entitled something like "Easter for Peeps Who Believe the Bible" and promote a different view.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Apr 4, 2015 10:41:48 GMT -5
The way to prove what happened then is to reproduce it now. This is specifically what Jesus taught, but the church doesn't understand this. That, in a nutshell, has been the whole impetus for my spiritual search. I have always looked for someone who lived what Jesus taught and can reproduce it in their life. Well...as it stands, what exactly is it about Christ's life that you are wanting to replicate now? It is reported in the gospels that Jesus said: The things I do, you can do.....and you will do if you are a follower of me. For me that's the proof of real Christianity. Thomas Jefferson made his own Bible. He actually cut up the New Testament and cut out all the supernatural stuff and made what's now called the Jefferson Bible. An actual replication of it is pretty expensive, I think around $50.00. I don't thrown out anything. So healing people would be nice. There was a woman with an issue of blood (you women will know about this, something was wrong with her menstrual cycle, it would stop). She decided if she could just touch Jesus, she would be healed. Jesus was charged with energy, and her faith touching him was like plugging into an electrical outlet. Scripture says when she touched Jesus, energy flowed out of him and into her, and healed her. And Jesus, of course, felt the energy flow out and said, who touched me? Jesus had precognition. He knew he had a date with the woman at the well, so he went out of his way and into a land Jews didn't visit. (John 4). Jesus had telepathy. When he met Nathaniel, he told him what he had been doing earlier that day, sitting under a fig tree, and told him what he had been thinking (we aren't told what it was, but from the exchange, we know that Nathaniel knew that Jesus knew). Jesus could see into the hearts of men. The Pharisees were thought to be great and holy men, because they kept the law meticulously, they tithed even from their spice garden. But Jesus knew that it was all for show, he knew that most of the Pharisees were only interested in power. But he also knew two Pharisees who really were interested in spirituality, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. That's off the top of my head, but read everything Jesus did. He said we could do and should do the same, if we were really his followers.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Apr 4, 2015 10:43:49 GMT -5
To my recollection he didn't say no it didn't happen - or maybe he meant it didn't happen in the way you believe it did. The truth is that nobody who is alive today would know for sure what exactly all happened. Sure, we can study all the information about it until the cows come home, but we still weren't there to witness what actually happened or didn't happen. [eta: and even then, our senses can deceive us and our minds can misinterpret what we think we experienced.] I did not say he said 'it did not happen', but he said 'he doesn't know' but he also made the conclusion that no resurrection, it's metaphor. When he doesn't know what is the truth, he unnecessarily opens a thread and speaks as if he knows Jesus did not resurrected. Nothing...not even 'important' - the most important things to us - matter. If X, Y and/or Z is so, it is so without our thoughts and feelings about them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 10:47:20 GMT -5
I did not say he said 'it did not happen', but he said 'he doesn't know' but he also made the conclusion that no resurrection, it's metaphor. When he doesn't know what is the truth, he unnecessarily opens a thread and speaks as if he knows Jesus did not resurrected. First off I want to disclaim anything Silver has written to you as having anything to do with any of my opinions, views or sentiments and appologize to you for having attracted her attention by your correspondence with me. What I'd point out to you is that the title of the thread is "Easter for the Rest of Us", and I have offered to explain to you the basis of my viewpoint, but you haven't taken me up on that offer. You're perfectly welcome to start a thread entitled something like "Easter for Peeps Who Believe the Bible" and promote a different view. I could understand your beautiful heart laughter,please do not forget the fact that 'we are not enemy since we argue about some opposing idea'. So I never stand against your thread creation and expressing your opinion.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 4, 2015 10:49:20 GMT -5
First off I want to disclaim anything Silver has written to you as having anything to do with any of my opinions, views or sentiments and appologize to you for having attracted her attention by your correspondence with me. What I'd point out to you is that the title of the thread is "Easter for the Rest of Us", and I have offered to explain to you the basis of my viewpoint, but you haven't taken me up on that offer. You're perfectly welcome to start a thread entitled something like "Easter for Peeps Who Believe the Bible" and promote a different view. I could understand your beautiful heart laughter,please do not forget the fact that 'we are not enemy since we argue about some opposing idea'. So I never stand against your thread creation and expressing your opinion. Thank you gopal, and please don't take my refusal to accept your proof as disrespect of your beliefs for the sake of disrespecting your personally, it's just an honest opinion, and I'd never lie to you!
|
|