Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 18:28:27 GMT -5
Ok. So you're just outlining that the Bible teaches about a worldly self that can be corrupted by the world and an innate universal self that is restored to wholeness by being honest to itself and everyone else? Essentially. Anybody can access the wholeness. If Christianity taught from what Jesus taught (the red) and not so much from what Paul taught, Christianity would be much different. Well my only explanation for this, without a fuller knowledge of the differences, is that Paul was a convert. And perhaps he never fully understood as the very early Christians did, that Jesus was "a pre-existent celestial being, who chose to take on human form, rather than a human who was later exalted to a divine status."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 19:27:55 GMT -5
Essentially. Anybody can access the wholeness. If Christianity taught from what Jesus taught (the red) and not so much from what Paul taught, Christianity would be much different. Well my only explanation for this, without a fuller knowledge of the differences, is that Paul was a convert. And perhaps he never fully understood as the very early Christians did, that Jesus was "a pre-existent celestial being, who chose to take on human form, rather than a human who was later exalted to a divine status." This is wrong, actually paul's writings are very earliest and infact he is the one who believed in preexisting Jesus. Luke and Matthew doesn't believe in preexisting Jesus. Give me sometime, I will detail this today as to why.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 19:44:13 GMT -5
Well my only explanation for this, without a fuller knowledge of the differences, is that Paul was a convert. And perhaps he never fully understood as the very early Christians did, that Jesus was "a pre-existent celestial being, who chose to take on human form, rather than a human who was later exalted to a divine status." This is wrong, actually paul's writings are very earliest and infact he is the one who believed in preexisting Jesus. Luke and Matthew doesn't believe in preexisting Jesus. Give me sometime, I will detail this today as to why. Ok Gopal Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 29, 2019 21:23:53 GMT -5
Essentially. Anybody can access the wholeness. If Christianity taught from what Jesus taught (the red) and not so much from what Paul taught, Christianity would be much different. Well my only explanation for this, without a fuller knowledge of the differences, is that Paul was a convert. And perhaps he never fully understood as the very early Christians did, that Jesus was "a pre-existent celestial being, who chose to take on human form, rather than a human who was later exalted to a divine status." Gopal will offer an explanation tomorrow. This is a preview. The disciples were not learned men, they were "blue collar" workers. So they were not in a position to create a ~mythology~. Paul was a learned man, he knew the OT scriptures well. The book of Hebrews is a very important NT book. The book of Hebrews is a link between the OT and the NT. The life of Jesus was a kind of living play. The life and death of Jesus explains the OT, especially the escape from Egypt of the Children of Israel. The death angel was the last plague. The Children of Israel were warned and told how to prepare for the death angel which was going to kill every first born in Egypt. They were told how to prepare and sacrifice a lamb and spread its blood over the door of their houses. The death angel would skip over the houses so prepared, that it, it would pass over these houses. This was the first Passover. This became a living image impressed in the minds of Israelites, and celebrated every year afterwards. This was the last supper, the night before Jesus died he celebrated Passover with the 12 disciples. So then Paul comes along later and explains that Jesus was the Passover Lamb that was sacrificed, for everyone. Paul explaining the whole life of Jesus created Christianity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 21:24:54 GMT -5
Old Testament is Jewish Bible more or less where God says since you have sinned you would return to the ground from which you have taken. And death occupies all the men , what else is needed to prove about original sin ? Paul finds the same reason in Roman 5:12. If you want to discuss this you need to start a new thread. It's okay now, Reefs has separated for 'Gopal stuff' so we would not be disturbing others now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 21:26:11 GMT -5
I find it completely disgusting to be honest. In a relative context it's a disgraceful bind on humanity. So the only hope is to switch the context of it, by applying something akin to what Laughter did here.. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/469248Judaism is older than Christianity so I don't actually see why they need to reject anything that Christianisation did. Though I'll read the link. Well, another way to look at this idea of being born into original sin is that, for any given newborn, eventual onset of the existential illusion of the false sense of limited identity is a foregone conclusion. That, in and of itself, doesn't necessarily have to lead to the mass-scale suffering of a rigidly hierarchical, bigoted and morally unforgiving social structure. That's just the worst of human nature playing out in a sort of clockwork. Ironically, it's the sort of clockwork that the notion of inherited original sin is attempting to describe. That's no way related to Bible's fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 21:28:06 GMT -5
I am just finding the reason as to why death occupies other people other than Adam if it is not original sin. I think the same was written by Paul somewhere but I don't know where because it's been long time ever since I read Bible. We inherit the consequences of Adam's sin, but not his guilt. Physical death is one of the consequences. It's complicated and deep, the full story. Mystical Judaism considers there are four different ways to read and interpret scripture. Peshat, Remez, Drash, Sod paulproblem.faithweb.com/pardes.htmWages of sin is death(According to Bible and that's what everybody dies). It doesn't matter whether we are inheriting the guilt from him or not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 21:30:14 GMT -5
I am just finding the reason as to why death occupies other people other than Adam if it is not original sin. I think the same was written by Paul somewhere but I don't know where because it's been long time ever since I read Bible. Ok thanks. So to you, is death a punishment? Yes, Wages of sin is death.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 21:33:10 GMT -5
Ok, so a man has to have faith in his brother Jesus, as the son of a King to be able to know his own wholeness? No, nobody has to know Jesus. When you have some time and wish to, read Matthew 5, 6 & 7, the Sermon on the Mount. That's it in a nutshell. Salvation plan lies on believing Jesus crucifixion has happened to remove the sin of human.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 21:37:11 GMT -5
Ok. So you're just outlining that the Bible teaches about a worldly self that can be corrupted by the world and an innate universal self that is restored to wholeness by being honest to itself and everyone else? Essentially. Anybody can access the wholeness. If Christianity taught from what Jesus taught (the red) and not so much from what Paul taught, Christianity would be much different. Paul has brought the meaning of crucifixion and how Jesus Crucifixion removes the sin of human. Do you know there is no sin now because in Jesus crucifixion all sins are washed away. If so, everybody has to go to heaven regardless of his belief towards Jesus. But still nobody can reach to Father without having the belief in Jesus. Do you know the answer for this question?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 22:52:58 GMT -5
Essentially. Anybody can access the wholeness. If Christianity taught from what Jesus taught (the red) and not so much from what Paul taught, Christianity would be much different. Well my only explanation for this, without a fuller knowledge of the differences, is that Paul was a convert. And perhaps he never fully understood as the very early Christians did, that Jesus was "a pre-existent celestial being, who chose to take on human form, rather than a human who was later exalted to a divine status." Here you go!
Jesus was crucified at 30 AD. All Paul writings were completed around 48AD-52 AD. And these are the earliest writings of Christianity. And Paul's writings are oldest writing. He has written 11 books but 7 among them are authenticated( Romans,First Corinthians,Second Corinthians,Galatians,Philippians,First Thessalonians,Philemon.) and the rest of the 4 are written in the name of Paul.
Why Jesus is son of God according to Paul? Paul believes that Jesus is the son of God because he was created even before all the creations not because he was directly created in the womb of Mary by God himself(Virgin birth). Infact, Paul doesn't even believe in virgin birth, read Romans 1: 3. So for Paul, Jesus is the preexisting son of God.
Now, Let's look at Matthew,Luke,Mark.
Mark is written around 70 AD immediately after the Jewish temple destruction at 68 AD, this is the first gospel written. Jesus is son of God here but he did not preexist.
Matthew and Mark were written at 80 AD but unfortunately both don't know each other.
Why Jesus is the son of God for Matthew and Mark? It's because Jesus was created in the womb of Mary directly by God himself. So for Matthew and Mark Jesus did not preexist.
So all these aforementioned first century authors don't believe Jesus as God! And also the aforementioned three books Matthew,Mark,Luke are anonymous writings. Nobody knows the author name, author name was given later at 110 AD.
And now let's go to the John. John is written in 90-120AD, it's started at very late first century and ended at 2nd century. John certainly believes that Jesus is the preexisting son of God like Paul but whether John believes that Jesus is God or not can't be known, because of the confusion between John 1: 1, John20:28(both of them says he is God) and John 17 : 3(This says Jesus is not God). But for John Jesus is the certainly the preexisting first born son of God.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 0:40:08 GMT -5
Fwiw, the way I think of it, belief and faith are antonyms, and Peace, is an absence. Ok. So faith in Jeshua is being asked for? To be saved from what? Or is this all just primitive psychology again? Faith, in the way I think of it, is the same as Seungsahn's not-knowing. There's no doubt the Christian churches come with centuries of baggage. What I used to think was that the only reason they were still around was just simple cultural momentum, but after having participated for few years my perspective has changed. Whoever that Jesus character was .. well .. he left behind quite a psychic footprint.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 0:54:51 GMT -5
Pick the Aramaic and JPS Tanakh translation. No, sorry. Still doesn't fit. Laughter talks of an eventual onset of a 'false sense of self'. Those translations don't say that. I think that one of the ways to understand that measure of what's going on in Christian churches that isn't the clockwork of the unconscious is the distinction between devotion and insight. For the person on a path of devotion, the false sense of self is a rebellion against God.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 30, 2019 0:56:50 GMT -5
Well, another way to look at this idea of being born into original sin is that, for any given newborn, eventual onset of the existential illusion of the false sense of limited identity is a foregone conclusion. That, in and of itself, doesn't necessarily have to lead to the mass-scale suffering of a rigidly hierarchical, bigoted and morally unforgiving social structure. That's just the worst of human nature playing out in a sort of clockwork. Ironically, it's the sort of clockwork that the notion of inherited original sin is attempting to describe. That's no way related to Bible's fact. This is exactly what can be read between the lines as in scripture. Many of the events of the OT are a kind of parable. Jesus taught by parables, which are a kind of word picture. The language of essence and of the right brain/right hemisphere is symbol and image. In Hebrews it says many of these OT people and stories are types. A Biblical type is a kind of archetype. So, Jacob and Esau represent one man. Esau was the first born so was entitled to the blessing and the birthright. But he was not really interested in either. So Esau represents the "false sense of limited identity". So Jacob set a kind of trap for him. Esau went out hunting, but didn't get anything. Jacob cooked up some beans for him, told Esau, I will give you some beans for your birthright. To show how little Esau valued the birthright, he said OK, the birthright is not going to do me any good if I'm dead. A slight exaggeration. So the false sense of self does not really value anything spiritual, in and of itself. And later Jacob's mother (Rebecca) cooked up a plan for Jacob to steal the blessing from Esau. Esau was harry. His father Isaac couldn't see very well. So Rebecca got Esau to dress up so he would be harry, and ask for the blessing from Isaac. It worked and Isaac blessed Jacob thinking it was Esau. And Esau found out the deception and Jacob had to flee because Esau wanted to kill him. He was gone over 14 years. So the story of Jacob and Esau represents the passage from the false sense of self to true self. It's a rocky road. Karma is a bitch. When Jacob ran away Rebecca told him to run to her family, so he ended up with Laban, who had two daughters. Jacob fell in love with Rachel. he made a pact with Laban, I will work for you for 7 years if I can marry Rachel. The deal was made. But on the wedding night Laban got Leah to decieve Jacob, so Jacob married Leah instead of Rachel. So then, Jacob had to agree to work for Laban another 7 years for Rachel. So Jacob had to learn the lesson not to deceive, by getting deceived. So through the school of hard knocks Esau/Jacob-false self became Jacob-true self. This is described in the two scriptures given earlier, Ephesians 4:22-24 & Colossians 3:9,10. This is described by John 3:3-10. There is really no end to the depth of the Bible.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 0:57:09 GMT -5
The word salvation comes from healing, it means to be made whole. So, when you come to the word salvation, read it: If thou would be made whole... It opens up the meaning. Ok, so a man has to have faith in his brother Jesus, as the son of a King to be able to know his own wholeness? Fwiw, if someone asked me this, I'd say that they're being asked to turn to the inner silence of prayer, and look to any answers to any questions they have there.
|
|