Paul The First Heretic

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by adjensen

 

because there are those who will refuse Christ, even when he's standing right in front of them.

do you think you would recognise him if he were standing in front of you?

Yes, but I was speaking hypothetically, anyway.

Heres a great Karma reference in genesis..

15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

What else could the writer be talking about? Especially if it says specifically "people that find him will kill him"? And by your own admission this is the "inspired word of God"... How would vengeance be taken on him that "kills Cain" or any man for that matter, IF he's dead?

I think that you're misreading that. It says that the Lord said that he would punish anyone who killed Cain and put a mark on him as a warning, but you don't need to die to kill Cain, so I'm not sure where you're getting that. As to the sevenfold thing -- this was before the Law, so who knows what the punishment was?

Christ did not teach reincarnation in any sense, and those who claim evidence in scripture are invariably practicing eisegesis

Again we are at odds, i garentee Christ Taught reincarnation though im sure nothing i say will convince you...either way.

Well, I'm not sure what your guarantee is, as all of these examples are wrong, taken out of context, or teach something quite different (the eisegesis bit.)

Jeremiah 1:4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish in his sight and love." (Ephesians 1:4)

God is eternal, so he knew you before you were born -- not because you existed before you were born, but because God has already experienced all time. To you, tomorrow is the future. To God, it's already happened. This is a standard belief regarding God's eternal nature and omniscience, so reincarnation is neither implied nor needed.

4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
6 The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
7 All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
8 All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.
9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
11 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.

Once again, God's eternal nature. Nothing to do with reincarnation.

And as he was passing by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who has sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?" Jesus answered, 'Neither has this man sinned, nor his parents, but the works of God were to be made manifest in him.'" (John 9:1)

Not sure what connection this has to reincarnation, but Jews in the time of Jesus usually viewed physical deformity and some illnesses as being either the result of demonic possession, or the result of sin -- God made the man blind because he had sinned (if not blind from birth) or his parents had sinned (if born blind.) It wasn't a passive thing -- it was deeply rooted in both culture and faith.

For all the prophets and the law have prophesied until John. And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who was to come." (Matthew 11:13-14)

Want to see something funny? If you enter that passage into google, you get a bunch of sites on reincarnation, which I presume is where you got it from. But it's missing a key word, "the".

For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.
-- Matthew 11:13-14 (NIV)

What's the difference between "he is Elijah" and "he is the Elijah"? Well, if you think that John was Elijah, reincarnated (never mind that Elijah never died, so how he was reincarnated would be another mystery,) then the angel of God is a liar, as he told John's father Zacharias that John would be "in the spirit and power of Elijah" (Luke 1:17) and John himself is a liar, as he directly denied being Elijah (John 1:21).

Saying that he is "the Elijah" is saying that he was a prophet for that age in a manner akin to what Elijah was for his, which is exactly what John was. And going this way, the rest of the text about John now makes sense and no one is a liar. So it seems pretty clear why the NIV says "he is the Elijah".

I can keep going but really my friend, if you say your book is all true, how can you deny the evidence

Because it's not evidence. It's wrong, just like the original article you posted was wrong about Paul, which you realized once you actually read what he was saying and looked at the sources. If you set the reincarnation bias aside and read the passages that they are citing in the original Judaic or Christian context, you'd see that it's not about reincarnation at all.

this is only a portion of what is there, not to mention the gnostic texts and other religious scripture.

I'm not Gnostic, so I'm not sure why I would look to their texts for insights.

Since that didn't always work out, they needed a resolution of what happens if you've the Divine Spark in you and you die without the passwords

Again lack of understanding my friend... I don't believe the writers of the gnostic texts understood the teachings fully either, similar to your bible...

Well then how about explaining it to us? You can start by reconciling the Judaic view of the nature of God, compared to the Gnostic view. Jesus was a Jew and stayed one to the end, there's not much disputing that, so until you can get Hellenistic polytheistic dualism to work within the Jewish milieu, I think that it's you who isn't understanding the issues involved.

reply to post by adjensen


Alright im done with the reincarnation stuff, if you can't see it thats fine..... By the way that passage wasn't missing the word The..

KJV
13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come...

anyways...

Well then how about explaining it to us? You can start by reconciling the Judaic view of the nature of God, compared to the Gnostic view. Jesus was a Jew and stayed one to the end, there's not much disputing that, so until you can get Hellenistic polytheistic dualism to work within the Jewish milieu, I think that it's you who isn't understanding the issues involved.

Theres no passwords, its knowledge of the spirit which "saves" you... this knowledge was given in the scriptures about Christ. If you call it all truth, there is your knowledge... If you read it and understand the lessons... And live as best you can to be like him... you're spirit progresses... It.. or you learn through your incarnations until you get it right... And according to your 10 commandments this involves love. Christ said the same thing, love God, love your neighbour(i prefer love everything), don't judge...

Its actually pretty simple, though saying it and actually living it is different due to your own experiences through your life time. And of course, your Karma, nasty little thing that...

Anyways im rambling..

Either way have your beliefs and i'll have mine...




I think we're a little off topic....

Originally posted by Akragon

Give them money, in turn you're saved.

Oh, vast amounts of money!

Ever heard the saying 'poor as a church mouse'? (Almost certainly not, but that doesn't make it any less true!)
I've yet to come across a church that's rolling in what you'd call 'the green stuff'. I anticpate you'll start banging on about the imaginary riches of the Vatican, which is when I will point out to you that any money they get, is used to support schools, hospitals and social services.
Reincarnation is a bizarre idea, and there's no scriptural evidence for it. Trust me on this, I used to be a believer in it!
Vicky

Originally posted by Akragon
Either way have your beliefs and i'll have mine...

Oh, I agree one hundred percent. That's why I'm an apologist and not an evangelist. To each their own. If God has a problem with my beliefs, that's between he and I, and if he has a problem with yours, same thing.

I do have a question, though, which has always perplexed me.

Why Jesus?

There are plenty of other faiths which support what you seem to believe in, directly, and there are plenty of other "good teachers", both ancient and modern, who pretty much suggest living the same generic "be good" way that you see Christ as teaching. So, given that you need to twist scripture a bit to make your beliefs fit in, and deny the parts of Jesus' story that are truly unique, why bother?

For the Christian, what makes Christ unique is that he is the bridge that reconciles us to God, the path to full communion, which takes but one lifetime. If you dismiss that, I just don't see the allure of it, because Jesus comes part and parcel with Judaic Law, so if you think that following Jesus' teachings and living a good life is what you need, go spend a couple of hours reading Leviticus and Deuteronomy (never mind the latter Talmud inclusions) and see if that seems like a life you can (much the less want to) live.

I see it time and again, and about the only thing that I can come up with is that Christianity is so ingrained in Western thought that some people want to stay attached to it, while actually holding contrary beliefs that would be better suited within the realm of an Eastern religion. So I'm curious if you've thought through the rationale.

Originally posted by Vicky32
Ever heard the saying 'poor as a church mouse'? (Almost certainly not, but that doesn't make it any less true!)

As the Treasurer of a mainstream church, I can concur with that. Nobody's getting rich off the faith around here. Our pastor makes a reasonable wage, but nothing like what he'd make if he used some of his skills in another job, like sales, and the only other paid staff we have are a part time secretary and part time custodian.

In addition, because of my position, I'm aware of financial states of churches, both locally and nationally, and our situation is fairly typical. Sure, there are some "mega churches" that are the exception that proves the rule, but they are absolutely not typical.

Plus, non-Christians don't seem to "get" the fact that a) you don't need to belong to a church to be saved, since it's just between you and God and b) even if you do belong to a church, no one forces you to give anything. About half of our members give zero dollars -- zilch, and nobody knows except for me, and nobody (including me) cares.

I belong to a church because of the sense of community that it gives me, and I support the church because I appreciate that, and I want to contribute to supporting other Christians, as well as non-Christians, who receive help through things like UMCOR (the United Methodist Committee on Relief,) a "first responder" for disasters like the one in Japan, and who go in there to help, not to preach. Are you aware of the violence and upheaval in the west African nation of Cote D'Ivoire? UMCOR is already there.

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by Akragon

Give them money, in turn you're saved.

Oh, vast amounts of money!

Ever heard the saying 'poor as a church mouse'? (Almost certainly not, but that doesn't make it any less true!)
I've yet to come across a church that's rolling in what you'd call 'the green stuff'. I anticpate you'll start banging on about the imaginary riches of the Vatican, which is when I will point out to you that any money they get, is used to support schools, hospitals and social services.
Reincarnation is a bizarre idea, and there's no scriptural evidence for it. Trust me on this, I used to be a believer in it!
Vicky

edit on 5/4/11 by Vicky32 because: To fix distraction error

trust you on this, yet i showed evidence....and you say theres none. No im sorry i don't believe what others say about scripture unlike you church people. I don't need a pastor or a minister or anyone for that matter to tell me what is in the bible. Since a good portion of you read but don't understand what you read. I'll just leave it at that.

As for the Vatican... say what you will i could care less. They're what you'd call a den of thieves, if you like to use biblical terms. 8 straight years of Gains on their stock portfolio... Ya they're not rich... Perhaps some of the money they get is used to support this and that who believe what they tell them to... they're nothing but a bank honestly...little to no spiritual wisdom.

Bankers' best guesses about the Vatican's wealth put it at $10 billion to $15 billion. Of this wealth, Italian stockholdings alone run to $1.6 billion, 15% of the value of listed shares on the Italian market. The Vatican has big investments in banking, insurance, chemicals, steel, construction, real estate. Dividends help pay for Vatican expenses and charities such as assisting 1,500,000 children and providing some measure of food and clothing to 7,000,000 needy Italians. Unlike ordinary stockholders, the Vatican pays no taxes on this income, which led the leftist Rome weekly L'Espresso last week to call it "the biggest tax evader in Italy.

www.cbc.ca...

Unfortunatly hun. your statement is laughable to say the least.

Yet another organization that reads much but knows little about the teachings.

I do have one more interesting observation though...Adjenson

Want to see something funny? If you enter that passage into google, you get a bunch of sites on reincarnation, which I presume is where you got it from. But it's missing a key word, "the".

So i quoted you directly from the KJV of the bible word for word....and you said what is above...

To that your God condems you here...

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book

Perhaps that is taken out of context as well....though i admit i do enjoy when what i say condems people. Lucky for you thats not how it works, but according to you...thats exactly how it works. Dude, did i just get you a one way ticket to hell?

What do you have to say for yourself?

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Akragon
Either way have your beliefs and i'll have mine...

Oh, I agree one hundred percent. That's why I'm an apologist and not an evangelist. To each their own. If God has a problem with my beliefs, that's between he and I, and if he has a problem with yours, same thing.

I do have a question, though, which has always perplexed me.

Why Jesus?

There are plenty of other faiths which support what you seem to believe in, directly, and there are plenty of other "good teachers", both ancient and modern, who pretty much suggest living the same generic "be good" way that you see Christ as teaching. So, given that you need to twist scripture a bit to make your beliefs fit in, and deny the parts of Jesus' story that are truly unique, why bother?

For the Christian, what makes Christ unique is that he is the bridge that reconciles us to God, the path to full communion, which takes but one lifetime. If you dismiss that, I just don't see the allure of it, because Jesus comes part and parcel with Judaic Law, so if you think that following Jesus' teachings and living a good life is what you need, go spend a couple of hours reading Leviticus and Deuteronomy (never mind the latter Talmud inclusions) and see if that seems like a life you can (much the less want to) live.

I see it time and again, and about the only thing that I can come up with is that Christianity is so ingrained in Western thought that some people want to stay attached to it, while actually holding contrary beliefs that would be better suited within the realm of an Eastern religion. So I'm curious if you've thought through the rationale.

Sure... well its simple really, If you read his words you'll find nothing but truth. He loved everyone and everything... He was the life and the way... But you see i don't limit my learning to one book, his teachings are all over the place...including some recent teachings. I don't Follow anyone if you must know... Jesus included, but he did show the path 2000 years ago, and his teachings will hold strong forever... Love is forever, its the strongest vibration of God, hate being the lowest which i have none of...

As i've told you Jesus didn't just come for jews or christians, he came to the world to show the world the way, the Narrow path if you will. It doesn't matter what sect you belong to, if you accept what he said as correct and try to live by the example he said...You're Golden!

Unlike anyone that goes to a church, i see the flaw in that method. Let them preach to you whatever they will, yet they don't teach the real lessons....Yes i know i was a christian, i went to church, and even then i saw it as pointless. How can one teach a book with no understanding of the lessons it holds?

I've read leviticus, and all the rest of them. So please don't tell me to read this or that....i have...and as i've said before i love to read scripture but im quite past that point in my learning.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Vicky32
Ever heard the saying 'poor as a church mouse'? (Almost certainly not, but that doesn't make it any less true!)

As the Treasurer of a mainstream church, I can concur with that. Nobody's getting rich off the faith around here.

Our pastor makes a reasonable wage, but nothing like what he'd make if he used some of his skills in another job, like sales, and the only other paid staff we have are a part time secretary and part time custodian.

In addition, because of my position, I'm aware of financial states of churches, both locally and nationally, and our situation is fairly typical. Sure, there are some "mega churches" that are the exception that proves the rule, but they are absolutely not typical.

Plus, non-Christians don't seem to "get" the fact that a) you don't need to belong to a church to be saved, since it's just between you and God and b) even if you do belong to a church, no one forces you to give anything. About half of our members give zero dollars -- zilch, and nobody knows except for me, and nobody (including me) cares.

I belong to a church because of the sense of community that it gives me, and I support the church because I appreciate that, and I want to contribute to supporting other Christians, as well as non-Christians, who receive help through things like UMCOR (the United Methodist Committee on Relief,) a "first responder" for disasters like the one in Japan, and who go in there to help, not to preach. Are you aware of the violence and upheaval in the west African nation of Cote D'Ivoire? UMCOR is already there.

I will admit not all churches are the same, some do amazing things for their comunity no doubt. But as you've said there are exceptions which end up making the "pastor' very rich... There are some in MY community that insist on 10% of your yearly income... To me thats thievery...

I would never tell a person to abandon their beliefs...if they make that person better in their life theres nothing wrong with that what so ever. Unfortunatly i don't recieve the same attitude from those who do attend churches. They're always looking to convert you.

Even when i show them the error of what they know they hold fast. I've had people come to me trying to get me to join their "club"... i welcome them in to try and teach me....i always welcome knowledge. Unfortunatly every time they leave my house its them that question their beliefs not I. Same thing with Jehova's witnesses.... i love when they come around honestly, they don't even understand their own beliefs, they're given a script to try to convert you, but if you queston them on the bible they're clueless

I have to agree with Akragon Hell is a scare tactic, and it isn't real as the clergy has taught it for century's.
I quick study of the Hebrew & Greek will lead you to the truth of this matter.

Hell is one of the false doctrines that my signature applies to.
The truth about hell does set ones free from scare tactics of the church.

Originally posted by Akragon
It doesn't matter what sect you belong to, if you accept what he said as correct and try to live by the example he said...You're Golden!

See, that, I think, is where the disconnect is. What does it mean to "try"? For the Christian, we all try, and fall short, but Christ steps up and helps us with our deficiency. I think what you're saying is that if you try, and fall short, when you die, you "reboot" into another go round and try again (and fail again, because we all fall short of Christ's example.)

That "round and round" is one of the logical inconsistencies with the notion of reincarnation when there is no accumulated memory, never mind the "bar" being set at Christ's strict interpretation of the Law. If you believe that Christ spoke nothing but the truth, then you honestly need to live by those laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, whether it's not eating shellfish, or inscribing stuff in your doorways or not touching women who are menstruating, in order to "try to live by the example" of Christ.

So do you believe that you need to live by the Law of the Torah and Talmud, as Jesus did? Or just be nice to other people, and that's good enough for having tried?

Finally, when you say that you believe that Christ spoke nothing but the truth, does that mean that you believe the Bible to be an infallible text, as least as regards what he says? And moving beyond the New Testament, what is your criteria for including other texts which purport to include the words of Jesus?

reply to post by adjensen


Good questions actually...

See, that, I think, is where the disconnect is. What does it mean to "try"? For the Christian, we all try, and fall short, but Christ steps up and helps us with our deficiency. I think what you're saying is that if you try, and fall short, when you die, you "reboot" into another go round and try again (and fail again, because we all fall short of Christ's example.)

More or less yes, you and i and everyone else has done this before, your accumulated Karma affects your current incarnation. Or in the words of the bible...Gods work will be made manifest... Not the exact quote but that will have to do, im kinda busy atm...

That "round and round" is one of the logical inconsistencies with the notion of reincarnation when there is no accumulated memory, never mind the "bar" being set at Christ's strict interpretation of the Law. If you believe that Christ spoke nothing but the truth, then you honestly need to live by those laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, whether it's not eating shellfish, or inscribing stuff in your doorways or not touching women who are menstruating, in order to "try to live by the example" of Christ.

There is accumulated memory. Once you die, all will be revealed, again i can find you that quote but im in a hurry atm. A veil is placed over your eyes when you're born so you forget your previous incarnations...i find you these quotes later... All of this is in your bible...

So do you believe that you need to live by the Law of the Torah and Talmud, as Jesus did? Or just be nice to other people, and that's good enough for having tried?

Finally, when you say that you believe that Christ spoke nothing but the truth, does that mean that you believe the Bible to be an infallible text, as least as regards what he says? And moving beyond the New Testament, what is your criteria for including other texts which purport to include the words of Jesus?

I told you before, theres two laws which you must live by, Love God, Love your neighbour which is also loving God because he is a part of all of us, and we are a part of him. (love everything is a better way)

My criteria is simple, read the text....look for love, selflessness, humbleness, empathy and other such attributes in said texts. If his teachings are there thats how you'll know... People get wrapped up in who wrote what, but the fact is many things that arn't in the bible might have been his words passed down through generations. I don't discount anything that have those qualities in them, the gnostics are huge on Love, but theres also some passages that are clearly not Jesus... You can find those qualities in hinduism, islam, buddism and almost every other religion out there as well.... if you limit your knowledge to a single book... you might be missing the whole picture.

Originally posted by Akragon
There is accumulated memory. Once you die, all will be revealed, again i can find you that quote but im in a hurry atm. A veil is placed over your eyes when you're born so you forget your previous incarnations...i find you these quotes later... All of this is in your bible...

Well, I'll await your comments, but what you've said is not accumulated memory, or at least not memory that has any value. If the goal of this life is to do better than the last one, but you gain no insights from previous incarnations, then it's a bit of a crapshoot as to whether you'll succeed or not. It's demonstrable that a large amount of our behaviour (beyond mental illness) is environmental conditioning, which runs contrary to that belief.

Take a random set of people, look at their circumstances -- the things that they were born with (whether resources or intelligence or beauty or whatever) and then try and find some consistency with their actions or how they live their lives. If we, as Americans and Canadians who lead cushy lives, represent some gain from past existences, there's not a lot of correlation to how altruistic, moral or fair we are.

Believe it or not, I'm a pretty nice person (stubborn and cynical, yes, but generally pretty nice.) I am far more empathetic towards other people than most people who, like me, have diagnosed Asperger's Syndrome. But I see that as a result of my having a pretty lonely and crummy childhood, and wanting to prevent that for others, whether they have autism or not. So, the Asperger's Syndrome, maybe a component of karma, but the empathy, that's a result of environment.

Even beyond that, though, is the question of whether I am me if you take away the Asperger's Syndrome. If I get through this existence and find out that you're right, and back to this mortal coil I go, but without the Asperger's, I'm not going to be the same.

I've thought about that in terms of heaven, in fact -- my wife often commented on how she "loved the way your mind works" when I'd do or say something goofy and she'd ask how I arrived at that. If I get to heaven, and all infirmities are washed away, does that mean my brain gets rewired to be "normal"? Because that's normal for you, but not for me.

I told you before, theres two laws which you must live by, Love God, Love your neighbour which is also loving God because he is a part of all of us, and we are a part of him. (love everything is a better way)

Right, but the part that you're missing is that Jesus said "all the Law and the Prophets hang on those two commandments," not "show God you love him by praying and being nice to others."

The Law still exists, and if that's where you think salvation (or right teaching) comes from, you're expected to live by it. It's wrapped up in those two commandments -- after all, you can't kill your neighbour or steal his wallet if you're loving him as yourself (masochism aside ) but all the seemingly odd stuff, like dietary law, rolls into "Love God." If the Law says "No pork", then if you're loving God, bacon's off the menu.

reply to post by adjensen


You wrote:

["Except that it's not simply alternative -- it is an absolute refutation of Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant theology and doctrine, so if one accepts that Christianity is what Christians make it, it cannot be viewed as a Christian perspective."]

I agree with you, that any position/group has the legtimate right to define itself. Personally I have often been in a similar situation, where I've had to 'defend' the self-defining right of science/logic against 'heresies' (e.g.I share your distaste for 'quantum-religion').

But

a/ Different christian subsets have rather freely declared each other heretical

b/ Some bible-god-Jesus constellations can refer to their own interpretations (e.g. christian gnostics) and challenge the groups self-defined as christians from that ground. Thus arriving at the opinion, that Paul was a heretic.

Such Paul-as-heretic positions, claiming another understanding of Jesus' teachings, are not exclusively free-flooting speculations, but do present some evidence for their case.

Quote: ["As regards salvation, yes he is, because if you can be saved by the Law, then what do you need Christ for?"]

As regards 'salvation'. Yes, you righ, if 'salvation' is accepted. But alternatively denying the validity of the 'salvation' concept, considering it a postulated doctrinal point, there's no need of 'salvation'. It's not difficult to speculate on other purposes of Jesus' teachings, e.g. the bhakti-aspect (love) or some social considerations outside 'salvation'.

Quote: ["Well, of course it is. If heresy is defined as teaching which is contrary to church doctrine, then the authority for determining whether something is contrary or not is church doctrine. Since church doctrine is based on Paul, he cannot be viewed as a Christian heretic."]

I can't find anything in the tile or OP, making claims of Paul being described as a heretic from a pauline-christianity perspective. He's described as heretic from a non-pauline perspective.

Quote: ["If one was to make the same argument, as a Gnostic, and say that Paul is a heretic by the Gnostic way of thinking, I'd agree with it. But that's not what is being pitched here."]

I'll agree with you, that the article wasn't very specific on from what perspective Paul is considered heretic. The general non-pauline postion is rather vague.

Quote: ["Well, I'm always open to hearing other perspectives."]

I know, that's why I consider you with a respect, I don't give to monomaniac propagandists. Not being a religionist myself, I can on my own ground answer you in several combinations of methodology and subject. Either a 'reality-check' on an objevtive/subjective basis, or by comparative analysis. Then I could consider Jesus or Paul separately from either method or consider them together. Presenting all options would take a couple of books, so I'll cut it down to my own rejection of the whole extensive salvation-argument, and on Paul specifically my opinion, that he was a fraud through and through.

Quote: [" That is the book which is most often cited as being a potential forgery, though there are, as our friend NOTurTypical points out, reasonable explanations for the criticisms laid by modern scholars. Which is where I get back to my "I'm not quite so concerned about who wrote what, so much as what is being written."]

In my own ruminations on existential questions, I'm using the same principle of not being so concerned about person, but rather about content. It's when personal-authority arguments are brough in positivistic, I object. That there existed a controversy between law and faith seems clear, and Peter's stance appears to be a compromise between the two options. His (Peter's) 'support' of Paul is in my interpretation dubious, and seems more to be for diplomatic reasons than for doctrinal.

And STILL, in spite of the vagueness of the general non-pauline position of the article, reducing the teachings of Jesus as they are presented to us in various forms, to ONLY two options, is a way of framing the debate into pre-arranged selective 'answer'-options.

Quote: ["Second Peter, however, presents a special case, because the nature of the text makes refutation of Peter's authorship of great importance for those who want to deny Christ's supernatural nature. Curiously, the works that tend that way (the Gospels, particularly John, the letters of Peter and James) are the ones that are most often attacked as to the authenticity of the authorship."]

From my opposite direction I can again only agree with you. I consider BOTH positions of: Gnostic atheism and theism (with absolutes) as untenable on a basis of serious methodologies, and I also consider the argumentation from both parts as often invalid and propagandistic. When I actively take part in such disputes, I use social consequences as a platform, not imagined absolutes.

'Supernaturality' can only sensibly be regarded from an agnostic position, if any claims whatsoever of objectivity are implied in methodology.

Quote: Colour me jaded, but I've developed a distrust of the "historical Jesus" movement, because I understand what they were really looking for, as well as modern scholars who find controversy in 2,000 year old texts, because their jobs often hinge on having to find new and unique things to say about books that have been scrutinized and analyzed by millions since they were first issued."]

Include me in your colour-group, though texts, be they 2000 years old or from yesterday, CAN be examined with a pure textual analysis and related to contemporary values. The existence of 'suffering' as related to and 'explained' in both OT and e.g. buddhism is as relevant and important as ever. Most people involved in debates seem unaware of their 'basic' positions (for which an epistemological examination is overdue) and operate with/from second-hand absolute doctrines.

PS Apart from my metaphysical platform (with which you already are familiar) I have recently discovered a 'label' I can use on myself in many contexts: Philosophical scepticism. Maybe making it easier to relate to me.

reply to post by adjensen


Well before i get into this reply, i'd like you to address this...

Want to see something funny? If you enter that passage into google, you get a bunch of sites on reincarnation, which I presume is where you got it from. But it's missing a key word, "the".


So i quoted you directly from the KJV of the bible word for word....and you said what is above...

To that your God condems you here...


And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book


Perhaps that is taken out of context as well....though i admit i do enjoy when what i say condems people. Lucky for you thats not how it works, but according to you...thats exactly how it works. Dude, did i just get you a one way ticket to hell?

Now then for your reply...

Well, I'll await your comments, but what you've said is not accumulated memory, or at least not memory that has any value. If the goal of this life is to do better than the last one, but you gain no insights from previous incarnations, then it's a bit of a crapshoot as to whether you'll succeed or not. It's demonstrable that a large amount of our behaviour (beyond mental illness) is environmental conditioning, which runs contrary to that belief.

As i've said before, All will be revealed when you pass... You will remember all of your incarnations... And if you need "another round" like you said...again like the last time around... A veil is placed over your eyes when you're born to hide your past. You start over, and your build up Karma manifests itself in your current incarnation. That has to do with God, whatever he sees fit at that time will be manifest in your life. This is why i gave you that reference to Karma from Genesis... Theres no other way to see it... sevenfold vengeance can't be taken if you're dead. An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, or even Do onto others as you'd have them do onto you.... Or even Judge not lest you be judged... All references to Karma. But again believe whatever you like. I would quote from the gnostics, but its pointless if you only see the bible as your only source of knowledge.

Take a random set of people, look at their circumstances -- the things that they were born with (whether resources or intelligence or beauty or whatever) and then try and find some consistency with their actions or how they live their lives. If we, as Americans and Canadians who lead cushy lives, represent some gain from past existences, there's not a lot of correlation to how altruistic, moral or fair we are

Unfortunatly for this i do need to quote something your not familiar with... i appoligise ahead of time

Pistis Sophia

A "man who curses" is given a body that will be continually "troubled in heart". A "man who slanders" receives a body that will be "oppressed". A thief receives a "lame, crooked and blind body". A "proud" and "scornful" man receives "a lame and ugly body" that "everyone continually despises." Thus earth, as well as hell, becomes the place of punishment.

...
..
.

Believe it or not, I'm a pretty nice person (stubborn and cynical, yes, but generally pretty nice.) I am far more empathetic towards other people than most people who, like me, have diagnosed Asperger's Syndrome. But I see that as a result of my having a pretty lonely and crummy childhood, and wanting to prevent that for others, whether they have autism or not. So, the Asperger's Syndrome, maybe a component of karma, but the empathy, that's a result of environment.

I believe you, you've been nothing but polite once we cleared the air on the innital page. Let me ask, were you empathetic from a young age? Where would that came from if you were....if not scratch that.

One thing i'll also point out about reincarnation... DO you think TPTB back in the day would have had even half of the control they had over the public IF they knew that this wasn't their only chance? Their doctrine says "live once, so do it right, listen to what we say and you won't be sent to hell" To that i call shenanigans!!

Even beyond that, though, is the question of whether I am me if you take away the Asperger's Syndrome. If I get through this existence and find out that you're right, and back to this mortal coil I go, but without the Asperger's, I'm not going to be the same.

Everything you have in your life is a result of your Karma... Happenings, tragic situations, accidents etc...all results of your Karma...

Theres another question that i tend to answer when people ask about God as well... Why does God let Bad things happen to Good people? The answer of course is....He doesn't...God does not need to interfear in human affairs...ever. Karma is perfect, it corrects and teaches of course being created by the one perfect being. Bad things happen to bad people because of their own Karma, so technically they did it to themselves...

As i've said before about that passage in Genesis....Imagine how much it would humble you if you commited murder and then passed on...Then God told you..."guess what...because you killed that person...Now you have to be killed in that exact same manner....but not just once..."Sevenfold" Do you think you would be a very humble meek person if you soul has went through that 7x... Lesson learned...

Your affliction isn't a curse my friend, its a blessing. It has made you who you are today, and without that affliction you speak of...you would be quite different then who you are now...You had lessons to learn... that afliction was how God taught you whatever those lessons were...and you're still learning from it...as everyone else on this plane of existance.

I've thought about that in terms of heaven, in fact -- my wife often commented on how she "loved the way your mind works" when I'd do or say something goofy and she'd ask how I arrived at that. If I get to heaven, and all infirmities are washed away, does that mean my brain gets rewired to be "normal"? Because that's normal for you, but not for me

Im not God my friend nor do i judge anyone.... If that is what is in store for you only God would know.

Right, but the part that you're missing is that Jesus said "all the Law and the Prophets hang on those two commandments," not "show God you love him by praying and being nice to others."

I didn't say that...

The Law still exists, and if that's where you think salvation (or right teaching) comes from, you're expected to live by it. It's wrapped up in those two commandments -- after all, you can't kill your neighbour or steal his wallet if you're loving him as yourself (masochism aside ) but all the seemingly odd stuff, like dietary law, rolls into "Love God." If the Law says "No pork", then if you're loving God, bacon's off the menu.

Dietary law was abolished when jesus said " its not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, but what comes out of your mouth"

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by adjensen

 

Well before i get into this reply, i'd like you to address this...

Want to see something funny? If you enter that passage into google, you get a bunch of sites on reincarnation, which I presume is where you got it from. But it's missing a key word, "the".

So i quoted you directly from the KJV of the bible word for word....and you said what is above...

To that your God condems you here...


And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book


Perhaps that is taken out of context as well....though i admit i do enjoy when what i say condems people. Lucky for you thats not how it works, but according to you...thats exactly how it works. Dude, did i just get you a one way ticket to hell?

Well, since I didn't write the New International Version, I'm not sure how I'm to blame. I'm also not sure how that sort of threat works with translations, since you're obviously adding and taking away words in the process. And finally, that quote comes out of the Revelation of John, which was written prior to there being a Biblical canon, so I'm guessing that it applies to what he wrote, not the whole thing that didn't even exist yet.

This is why i gave you that reference to Karma from Genesis... Theres no other way to see it... sevenfold vengeance can't be taken if you're dead.

Again, you seem to be stuck on the penalty for killing Cain being death, when that's not stated. The Law didn't exist yet, so forget about that. Maybe the punishment was a spanking, so you'd get seven of those. Or maybe you had to sacrifice a cow or something, so seven cows. You're making an assumption because it fits with what you want to believe, not because it is correct.

Let me ask, were you empathetic from a young age? Where would that came from if you were....if not scratch that.

No, not in the least -- like most Aspies, I related to other people very poorly until I learned how to "act normal" and even then, it was a long time before I felt more connected to people than I did to inanimate objects. The empathy I now have was definitely not something that I was born with.

Imagine how much it would humble you if you commited murder and then passed on...Then God told you..."guess what...because you killed that person...Now you have to be killed in that exact same manner....but not just once..."Sevenfold" Do you think you would be a very humble meek person if you soul has went through that 7x... Lesson learned...

Once again, accumulated memory. If I have to live seven lives and get killed in each of them, what lesson am I learning? After each death, I suddenly recall it all and wipe my brow and say "well, that's one down"? And after dying seven times and getting sent back for the eighth, what's the difference, since I don't remember that I got killed seven times for killing someone?

Learning a lesson but not being able to apply it is a contradiction.

Your affliction isn't a curse my friend, its a blessing. It has made you who you are today, and without that affliction you speak of...you would be quite different then who you are now...

Well, even though I'm the one who has to deal with it, and I can tell you that it hasn't been a whole lot of fun, I would agree, and that was my point. If I live another life, will I have Asperger's? If yes, then it's not supposed to teach me anything. If no, then I'm not the same person, because when you have autism, it is a defining part of who you are.

The Law still exists, and if that's where you think salvation (or right teaching) comes from, you're expected to live by it. It's wrapped up in those two commandments -- after all, you can't kill your neighbour or steal his wallet if you're loving him as yourself (masochism aside ) but all the seemingly odd stuff, like dietary law, rolls into "Love God." If the Law says "No pork", then if you're loving God, bacon's off the menu.

Dietary law was abolished when jesus said " its not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, but what comes out of your mouth"

If you believe Paul, yes, because we are not saved by the Law. Jesus' admonition was not that you were to disregard the Law, but that you weren't to have it get in the way of the relationship between you and God. But as you pointed out earlier (well, I think you did, maybe it was someone else,) taken on his own, and left within his Jewish culture, Jesus did not overturn the smallest letter of the Law. It is still there, and if that's the way a person wants to go, they must live by every single instance.

reply to post by adjensen

Well, since I didn't write the New International Version, I'm not sure how I'm to blame. I'm also not sure how that sort of threat works with translations, since you're obviously adding and taking away words in the process.

what words did i take away? And i didn't blame you for anything i asked you a question...

Once again, accumulated memory. If I have to live seven lives and get killed in each of them, what lesson am I learning? After each death, I suddenly recall it all and wipe my brow and say "well, that's one down"? And after dying seven times and getting sent back for the eighth, what's the difference, since I don't remember that I got killed seven times for killing someone?

Learning a lesson but not being able to apply it is a contradiction

Isn't your ultimate Goal to remain with God? Not be cast back down to earth over and over? Some do consider this hell you know...

Well, even though I'm the one who has to deal with it, and I can tell you that it hasn't been a whole lot of fun, I would agree, and that was my point. If I live another life, will I have Asperger's? If yes, then it's not supposed to teach me anything. If no, then I'm not the same person, because when you have autism, it is a defining part of who you are.

Since when is life fun? Life is painful my friend, thats why you love as much as you can... it makes a happier place for everyone... I don't know if you would return with the same issues... again i don't make the rules nor do i know what lies ahead for anyone. I do know that no matter what you believe, or who you are, we all go to the same place when we're done here...

Dietary law was abolished when jesus said " its not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, but what comes out of your mouth"


If you believe Paul, yes, because we are not saved by the Law. Jesus' admonition was not that you were to disregard the Law, but that you weren't to have it get in the way of the relationship between you and God. But as you pointed out earlier (well, I think you did, maybe it was someone else,) taken on his own, and left within his Jewish culture, Jesus did not overturn the smallest letter of the Law. It is still there, and if that's the way a person wants to go, they must live by every single instance

Did paul write this? Im pretty sure dietary law was abolished..

Matthew 15:11
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by adjensen

 

Well, since I didn't write the New International Version, I'm not sure how I'm to blame. I'm also not sure how that sort of threat works with translations, since you're obviously adding and taking away words in the process.

what words did i take away?

You're being too literal again. "you're" in the sentence "since you're obviously adding and taking away words" isn't referring to you, specifically, just the process of making a translation.

Learning a lesson but not being able to apply it is a contradiction

Isn't your ultimate Goal to remain with God? Not be cast back down to earth over and over? Some do consider this hell you know...

Again, let's sort out the logic of this.

I kill some one. God decides that I should die the same way seven times.

I live life one, not knowing that I killed someone, and I'm eventually killed in the same manner.

I go back to God, now aware that I'm 1/7 through my sentence. This process repeats six more times, and then I'm done.

Now, for the person in heaven with God, who remembers killing someone and then being killed seven times, I guess that would mean something (although the whole "seven times" thing seems pointless -- if someone doesn't "get it" after one time, I kinda doubt that they'll "get it" after seven.)

But then I get sent back, and no longer remember that I killed someone or had to be killed seven times, so how is that supposed to change me? I have no accumulated memory, so I can't apply the lesson.

Matthew 15:11
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

Again, Jesus was speaking practically, but for those under the Law:

I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
-- Matthew 5:18

If you're a Jew, or you don't believe that Christ's death and resurrection are what saves you, pork chops and tasty, tasty lobster... off the menu.

Akragon, when you have the free time would you watch this video series and give me your thoughts?

Here is the first video: The New Age Lie 1/30

Thanks.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Perhaps you'd like to give me a "sum up" of this video series...the first part was just quoting genesis, with animations... doesn't thrill me honestly.

reply to post by adjensen


Sorry i was too tired to respond yesterday...

Again, let's sort out the logic of this.

I kill some one. God decides that I should die the same way seven times.

I live life one, not knowing that I killed someone, and I'm eventually killed in the same manner.

I go back to God, now aware that I'm 1/7 through my sentence. This process repeats six more times, and then I'm done

Now remember one thing...im not God either, this is only logical theory. I suggested the sevenfold idea only because its there in that passage, now my own personal belief is you kill someone, in another life you will be killed in the same mannor. I've never thought about it happening 7 times but again who knows.

Regardless this comes back to the golden rule. In my experiences with Karma it tends to hit you 2x what you've done, but again who knows.

Now, for the person in heaven with God, who remembers killing someone and then being killed seven times, I guess that would mean something (although the whole "seven times" thing seems pointless -- if someone doesn't "get it" after one time, I kinda doubt that they'll "get it" after seven.)

But then I get sent back, and no longer remember that I killed someone or had to be killed seven times, so how is that supposed to change me? I have no accumulated memory, so I can't apply the lesson.

So again, its said once you pass on, all will be revealed. So you die and return home...your teacher whoever that might be(God perhaps) says to you, remember the pain you just went through... this is the pain you causeds others by your death... This is the pain you caused those who mourned for the one you killed...

This would stick with you in your next incarnation though you wouldn't know where it came from... For example...lets say you drown in an incarnation... in the next one you would probably have a fear of water... If you were presented a situation where you "might" kill someone again or walk away....you would probably avoid killing that person because deep inside you know its wrong... But if you knew it was wrong in the past life where you did commit murder, why did you do it? Clearly you either didn't know it was wrong or you chose to ignore your conscience. That feeling of "NOO its wrong" would be stronger then it was before thus making it harder for you to ignore. but of course you do have free will, so if you chose to ignore it again you could. Remember it says God work will manifest in you. So whos to say, instead of you dieing over and over again, perhaps someone close to you with the same Karmic issues will be killed...then you get the lesson from a different perspective... the perspective of the one who lost someone sencelessly. Either way it still aches in your heart.
The pain you caused that person and others is still comming back to you. Perhaps if that Sevenfold thing is true, whos to say.... your whole family might be killed in some way... Thus also explaining why Bad things happen to good people. So again, you experience what you cause... this is also why i tend to expand on "thou shall not kill"..... Thou shall not harm is much more logical.

Again, Jesus was speaking practically, but for those under the Law:


I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
-- Matthew 5:18


If you're a Jew, or you don't believe that Christ's death and resurrection are what saves you, pork chops and tasty, tasty lobster... off the menu.

Do you live by the diet prescribed in the book?