|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 0:58:07 GMT -5
Stumbled onto this series a few months ago. In the lecture including Augustine (of Hippo), Freedman explains that some early Christians waited until the end of their lives before they got baptized. He gives this point context by referring back to Constantine, who wasn't technically a Christian, even as he convened the council of Nicea, because he wasn't baptized until his deathbed. The reason for Constantine's delay, and the fashion of others to wait during their lives was because the standards of Christianity were hard to live by, especially for members of the elite. So, the idea of baptizing infants and allowing for sin during the course of one's life that could be forgiven during that life was a sort of practical innovation. Interesting, thanks. My pleasure.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 30, 2019 0:58:48 GMT -5
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. Yes.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 1:01:09 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. I'm sure you're probably right. That's my interpretation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 1:01:21 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." 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. Where did you get the idea that Hebrews was written by Paul?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 1:06:25 GMT -5
Ok thanks. So to you, is death a punishment? Yes, Wages of sin is death. Doesn't "death", in this case mean "end of the otherwise immortal soul"? .. as in "cast into a lake of fire", as opposed to "joining the Father, Son and Mother in heaven"? Isn't it the difference between resurrection, and no resurrection? And that's not to argue that the material aspects of what lots of Christians call sin, in moral terms, aren't sometimes materially deadly, either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 1:07:42 GMT -5
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 pregnant dog. 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. You can interpret 1000 ways like this, but I always read into the text which is there. Predestination of Bible can be expounded from the story of Esau and Jacob because Jacob was culled even while he was in his mother's womb and Esau was abnegated even while he was in the womb. The consequential of Easu and Jacob lies there and to express the consequential of predestination. But let's not go there. That's plenarily another story.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 1:09:37 GMT -5
That's no way related to Bible's fact. I'm sure you're probably right. That's my interpretation. Yes I am cognizant of that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 1:13:36 GMT -5
Yes, Wages of sin is death. Doesn't "death", in this case mean "end of the otherwise immortal soul"? .. as in "cast into a lake of fire", as opposed to "joining the Father, Son and Mother in heaven"? Isn't it the difference between resurrection, and no resurrection? And that's not to argue that the material aspects of what lots of Christians call sin, in moral terms, aren't sometimes materially deadly, either. Genuinely, I don't recollect Bible considers our soul as immortal because Bible verbalizes it's engendered by God, If something can be engendered, it can be ravaged as well. And withal at one place, Bible verbally expresses Father can eradicate the soul of the human.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 1:20:14 GMT -5
Doesn't "death", in this case mean "end of the otherwise immortal soul"? .. as in "cast into a lake of fire", as opposed to "joining the Father, Son and Mother in heaven"? Isn't it the difference between resurrection, and no resurrection? And that's not to argue that the material aspects of what lots of Christians call sin, in moral terms, aren't sometimes materially deadly, either. Genuinely, I don't recollect Bible considers our soul as immortal because Bible verbalizes it's engendered by God, If something can be engendered, it can be ravaged as well. And withal at one place, Bible verbally expresses Father can eradicate the soul of the human.
Right, and that's what's meant by "death" here: that destruction, not just earthly death. My take is that this is all complete bullsh!t, as, what you are, is infinite, and indestructible. The metaphor of hell as some afterlife punishment is a childish distortion of the fact that most people turn much of their life into a walking hell, and the Buddha was much clearer on all of this. The real "death", in this instance, is the existential illusion. But the good news is that the resurrection is always and ever just one good deep breath away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 2:11:11 GMT -5
Genuinely, I don't recollect Bible considers our soul as immortal because Bible verbalizes it's engendered by God, If something can be engendered, it can be ravaged as well. And withal at one place, Bible verbally expresses Father can eradicate the soul of the human.
Right, and that's what's meant by "death" here: that destruction, not just earthly death. My take is that this is all complete bullsh!t, as, what you are, is infinite, and indestructible. The metaphor of hell as some afterlife punishment is a childish distortion of the fact that most people turn much of their life into a walking hell, and the Buddha was much clearer on all of this. The real "death", in this instance, is the existential illusion. But the good news is that the resurrection is always and ever just one good deep breath away.
Our current spiritual conception can't be brought into Biblical discussion. Because even Jesus himself is not vigilant of the fact that consciousness creates the reality. He kens that everything that's transpiring is transpiring through him(He is witnessing), but he vigorously believes that those miracles are done by God The Father. He has additionally identified himself to be a son of God and additionally the Foretold messaiah, the reason is, a component of the future is reveal to him.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 30, 2019 2:17:39 GMT -5
Right, and that's what's meant by "death" here: that destruction, not just earthly death. My take is that this is all complete bullsh!t, as, what you are, is infinite, and indestructible. The metaphor of hell as some afterlife punishment is a childish distortion of the fact that most people turn much of their life into a walking hell, and the Buddha was much clearer on all of this. The real "death", in this instance, is the existential illusion. But the good news is that the resurrection is always and ever just one good deep breath away. Our current spiritual conception can't be brought into Biblical discussion. Because even Jesus himself is not vigilant of the fact that consciousness creates the reality. He kens that everything that's transpiring is transpiring through him(He is witnessing), but he vigorously believes that those miracles are done by God The Father. He has additionally identified himself to be a son of God and additionally the presaged messaiah, the reason is, a component of the future is reveal to him.
Ok. Please don't mind me if I bable on about it from time to time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 2:18:54 GMT -5
Our current spiritual conception can't be brought into Biblical discussion. Because even Jesus himself is not vigilant of the fact that consciousness creates the reality. He kens that everything that's transpiring is transpiring through him(He is witnessing), but he vigorously believes that those miracles are done by God The Father. He has additionally identified himself to be a son of God and additionally the presaged messaiah, the reason is, a component of the future is reveal to him.
Ok. Please don't mind me if I bable on about it from time to time. Definitely, it's okay.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 30, 2019 4:38:43 GMT -5
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.
Correct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2019 5:46:35 GMT -5
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.God has way too many faces and so some of those faces have to be disregarded. It's inevitable inside such a complex world as it is now. Go back 2000 years and there was much less interference in sensory perception.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 30, 2019 8:26:12 GMT -5
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. Where did you get the idea that Hebrews was written by Paul? I didn't say Paul wrote Hebrews. Nobody knows who wrote Hebrews (I'm sure you know nobody knows who wrote Hebrews). It is just an important link between OT and NT.
|
|