The Christian Thread

dtguitarfan wrote: ^ Interesting - I have put it on my list of books I want to read.  Thank you!  I have another one of his books on my list. Yeah, even that title is provocative.  I had a recent conversation where someone asked what the gospel was and how to preach it.  I went into the history of the word "euangelion" and how Jesus' gospel matched other gospels of Caesar and other "messiah's" in some ways, but contrasted them in others, etc. etc. (I have a blog post on the subject).  So then, the person who started the conversation goes "Geoff, what is truth?"  So I immediately had this back-of-the-neck-hair-raising-suspicious feeling from that question.  So I go into the difference between "truths" and "Truth", which is infinite and thus infinitely unknowable, etc.  So she starts going "is there anything you know is true?"  And I can tell she's heretic hunting here, so I'm taking an avoidant stance.  I'm describing how people often claim to "know" things, but all they know is what they've perceived, and this implies that they've put trust in their methods of perception, but how can we "know" that we don't have faulty perception?  What if my eyes are bad and I've never found out (for example)?  Etc.  She keeps hounding me: "is there anything you know is true?"  Over and over again she's asking, and I'm trying to get her to think deeply and lead her to the inevitable answer.  She's having none of it.  Other people in the thread are even telling her she's being pushy and rude, but she's ignoring them.  Finally, after she repeats the "is there anything you know" line of questioning I give her my answer: "there is only one thing anyone can know with absolute certainty: I am."  Boom, she goes off on a tirade about what a heretic I am and lists of about 30 things she "knows" are true that are requirements for being a "Christian", and therefore I'm not one but a wolf in sheep's clothing in the service of Satan, bla bla bla.  I say "you don't know any of those things.  You hope and trust in them, just as I hope and trust in the things I believe in.  And belief, by the way, is more than thoughts in your head - it's about what you're willing to act on.  If you can't act on it, you don't really believe it."  More heretic calling, etc., and finally I leave.  Eh...well, I thought you might enjoy that story.

It was an interesting story and Watts would say she's 'missing the point' .

^ Interesting - I have put it on my list of books I want to read.  Thank you!  I have another one of his books on my list.

Yeah, even that title is provocative.  I had a recent conversation where someone asked what the gospel was and how to preach it.  I went into the history of the word "euangelion" and how Jesus' gospel matched other gospels of Caesar and other "messiah's" in some ways, but contrasted them in others, etc. etc. (I have a blog post on the subject).  So then, the person who started the conversation goes "Geoff, what is truth?"  So I immediately had this back-of-the-neck-hair-raising-suspicious feeling from that question.  So I go into the difference between "truths" and "Truth", which is infinite and thus infinitely unknowable, etc.  So she starts going "is there anything you know is true?"  And I can tell she's heretic hunting here, so I'm taking an avoidant stance.  I'm describing how people often claim to "know" things, but all they know is what they've perceived, and this implies that they've put trust in their methods of perception, but how can we "know" that we don't have faulty perception?  What if my eyes are bad and I've never found out (for example)?  Etc.  She keeps hounding me: "is there anything you know is true?"  Over and over again she's asking, and I'm trying to get her to think deeply and lead her to the inevitable answer.  She's having none of it.  Other people in the thread are even telling her she's being pushy and rude, but she's ignoring them.  Finally, after she repeats the "is there anything you know" line of questioning I give her my answer: "there is only one thing anyone can know with absolute certainty: I am."  Boom, she goes off on a tirade about what a heretic I am and lists of about 30 things she "knows" are true that are requirements for being a "Christian", and therefore I'm not one but a wolf in sheep's clothing in the service of Satan, bla bla bla.  I say "you don't know any of those things.  You hope and trust in them, just as I hope and trust in the things I believe in.  And belief, by the way, is more than thoughts in your head - it's about what you're willing to act on.  If you can't act on it, you don't really believe it."  More heretic calling, etc., and finally I leave.  Eh...well, I thought you might enjoy that story.

dtguitarfan wrote: Dr. Wu - we are totally thinking along the same lines.  And it's so sad that so many people from the background I came from are stuck in this kind of thinking that says that anyone who doesn't come from the same religion or thought patterns is the enemy.  This is the opposite force to unity - the separation; the non-love; as the Bible would put it: the accuser ("ha-satan").  But they go around saying that everyone who isn't just like them is influenced by an entity named "Satan".  It's ironic, in a very sad way.  I've become very aware during the last year that there is SO MUCH in common between writings in the Bible (and the apochryphal works) and other sacred texts.  Too much to be mere coincidence.  It led me to the conclusion that "God" is at work in all religions.  But people from the background I came from would try to lead me to believe that this is "Satan" trying to trick me, and he's oh-so-clever so I have to really watch out for him!  So I am deeply rooted in Christianity, and the language of Christianity and the Bible are what I know best.  So I focus on trying to explain these concepts to people who came from similar backgrounds as myself using the Biblical/Christian language.  But I love it when I meet people like you who have arrived at the point of transcendence - I can't start talking along those lines with most Christians I know or they'd start yelling "heretic!" in my face.

I don't have any problem with people being 'rooted' in a specific religious path but imho they should come to the realization that it's not the only way to be 'free' and One With God/Tao/Atman/ ..whatever one wishes to call That Which Has No Name which as you mentioned is at work in all 'religions'. I've been around for a few years and met many people on different paths including many Christians- some Fundamentalists others more open minded - and for the most part they are well meaning but sadly they have no desire to look at this from any other perspective and fail to see the bigger picture.

Epignosis wrote: Cool to put a face with a name.  You have a beautiful family, and you ain't bad looking yourself.

Was that to me?  Thank you, if so.  I do think my family is beautiful. 

Dr. Wu - we are totally thinking along the same lines.  And it's so sad that so many people from the background I came from are stuck in this kind of thinking that says that anyone who doesn't come from the same religion or thought patterns is the enemy.  This is the opposite force to unity - the separation; the non-love; as the Bible would put it: the accuser ("ha-satan").  But they go around saying that everyone who isn't just like them is influenced by an entity named "Satan".  It's ironic, in a very sad way.  I've become very aware during the last year that there is SO MUCH in common between writings in the Bible (and the apochryphal works) and other sacred texts.  Too much to be mere coincidence.  It led me to the conclusion that "God" is at work in all religions.  But people from the background I came from would try to lead me to believe that this is "Satan" trying to trick me, and he's oh-so-clever so I have to really watch out for him!  So I am deeply rooted in Christianity, and the language of Christianity and the Bible are what I know best.  So I focus on trying to explain these concepts to people who came from similar backgrounds as myself using the Biblical/Christian language.  But I love it when I meet people like you who have arrived at the point of transcendence - I can't start talking along those lines with most Christians I know or they'd start yelling "heretic!" in my face. 

Cool to put a face with a name.  You have a beautiful family, and you ain't bad looking yourself.

dtguitarfan wrote: dr wu23 wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: dr wu23 wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: It's been a while since I've participated on this forum at all - I've found myself less and less enthusiastic about arguing over music, then less and less enthusiastic about arguing over politics, and more and more focused on "heart issues".  I have a love for theology I've never had before!  So I have put a lot of work into a document that ended up being 80 pages long (and this was only because I wanted to - imagine that...I used to hate doing reports in school), and split that into sections which I've posted on my blog (note: the entire thing is split into 19 parts, and I've only "published" 17 so far).  So I wanted to share this on here for anyone who cares: Checkmate For Hell Hello dt, I read your first part and found it very interesting. I attended a Unitarian church for 10 years until they folded in my area and I have always been agnostic with a leaning towards eastern philosophy and spirituality. Read up on those ideas for many years and even practiced some Vipassana and Zen sitting for several years. I see things in a similar manner in that All is connected and no one is excluded whether they kneel or not to a 'god or God'. I'll try to read your other parts when I get time.   btw....I haven't posted here often because it seemed that the 'Christians' here ignored new posters, myself included,  and ideas that didn't align with their beliefs. Just saying. Thank you for reading!  I have 19 parts in this series, as I said.  The last 2 are sitting in draft mode, and I've been publishing one a day.  Once that is done with, I wrote a short story to illustrate what I'm trying to get at in this series, and I also have written a short post showing an alternate logical route to "checkmate".  THEN, I have something you might be interested in which I will publish - a post exploring the idea of "All" or "Oneness" or "Christ-mind", or whatever you'd like to call it.  I wanted to post this after everything else, because you have to cut through the crap of people's bad logic before they'd be ready for such ideas, I think.  Otherwise it just sounds like nonsense to them.   I think  the basic ideas you present ,at least in what I read so far, are well known by those who have studied theology in relation to western society . And the idea of Oneness or Christmind is a well known concept with those who have read eastern ideas and has been postulated for over 3000 years originally stemming from Hindu traditions and then Buddhist traditions. It's also present in Taoism. Nothing nonsensical about it and imho makes far more sense on multiple levels than traditional Christian ideology and doctrine. One has to throw out/reject many basic ideas and ignore uncomfortable questions if one accepts mainstream Christian beliefs. But then an atheist would say the same thing about all religious ideology.   That's what's so crazy!  People over here in America act like the things I'm talking about are insane - like NO ONE believes them, and I'm a crazy loon!  When I first started thinking like this, I had this sort of "dare I even think?" kind of question hanging over my head.  But I am a rebel, and I will challenge anything that doesn't make sense to me, so I pressed on.  But it kind of scares me that so many people who are trapped in these oppressive views are so afraid to even challenge them!

Well....maybe the problem is where you live..? Some areas of the country are just not that literate and tend to follow that old time religion. 

dtguitarfan wrote: dr wu23 wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: It's been a while since I've participated on this forum at all - I've found myself less and less enthusiastic about arguing over music, then less and less enthusiastic about arguing over politics, and more and more focused on "heart issues".  I have a love for theology I've never had before!  So I have put a lot of work into a document that ended up being 80 pages long (and this was only because I wanted to - imagine that...I used to hate doing reports in school), and split that into sections which I've posted on my blog (note: the entire thing is split into 19 parts, and I've only "published" 17 so far).  So I wanted to share this on here for anyone who cares: Checkmate For Hell Hello dt, I read your first part and found it very interesting. I attended a Unitarian church for 10 years until they folded in my area and I have always been agnostic with a leaning towards eastern philosophy and spirituality. Read up on those ideas for many years and even practiced some Vipassana and Zen sitting for several years. I see things in a similar manner in that All is connected and no one is excluded whether they kneel or not to a 'god or God'. I'll try to read your other parts when I get time.   btw....I haven't posted here often because it seemed that the 'Christians' here ignored new posters, myself included,  and ideas that didn't align with their beliefs. Just saying. Thank you for reading!  I have 19 parts in this series, as I said.  The last 2 are sitting in draft mode, and I've been publishing one a day.  Once that is done with, I wrote a short story to illustrate what I'm trying to get at in this series, and I also have written a short post showing an alternate logical route to "checkmate".  THEN, I have something you might be interested in which I will publish - a post exploring the idea of "All" or "Oneness" or "Christ-mind", or whatever you'd like to call it.  I wanted to post this after everything else, because you have to cut through the crap of people's bad logic before they'd be ready for such ideas, I think.  Otherwise it just sounds like nonsense to them.

dtguitarfan wrote: It's been a while since I've participated on this forum at all - I've found myself less and less enthusiastic about arguing over music, then less and less enthusiastic about arguing over politics, and more and more focused on "heart issues".  I have a love for theology I've never had before!  So I have put a lot of work into a document that ended up being 80 pages long (and this was only because I wanted to - imagine that...I used to hate doing reports in school), and split that into sections which I've posted on my blog (note: the entire thing is split into 19 parts, and I've only "published" 17 so far).  So I wanted to share this on here for anyone who cares: Checkmate For Hell

Hello dt,

Polymorphia wrote: Epignosis wrote: Jacob, I cannot find the book I read about the sheep and goats in.  I know it will turn up eventually.  When it does, I'll revisit the subject. I made what I felt was an interesting observation regarding the crucifixion and resurrection yesterday.  Before I go into though, I'll just say that I thought The Passion of the Christ was a good (if exhausting) film to watch, even if it still reflects Western values rather than an Ancient Near Eastern mindset.  The worst element of the crucifixion for Mediterranean people would have been the shame, not the pain.  Note that the Bible mentions little or nothing regarding the pain- it emphasizes the shame of the degradation ritual (Hebrews 12:2, for instance).  Crucified persons had no way of defending their honor except through sheer andeia ("manliness"), such as by not crying out, but still, this loss of honor was most excruciating to the ancient Mediterranean man. The connection I made yesterday was that the resurrection of Jesus was not in and of itself significant.  Ancient Jews looked forward to the eventual resurrection.  In John 11, for instance, Martha tells Jesus, "“I know [Lazarus] will rise again in the resurrection at the last day."  The ancient rabbinical teaching, however, was that men would die and their flesh would rot to atone for their sins.  That indicates the significance of families performing a second burial, gathering the bones of the deceased and placing them in an ossuary to await the resurrection. Hence, it was not the resurrection of Christ that was astonishing- it was the timing (kairos).  That Jesus had come back before the ritualistic onset of decomposition was a proclamation that there was no corruption in the Word made flesh, and therefore, there was no reason for the flesh to decay.  I'd advise to be careful in saying that Jesus' resurrection in and of itself was not significant, because not all Jews believed in the resurrection, and the Gentiles certainly didn't. I agree with your conclusions, though. God is not just going to throw away the body on the last day.

Right- poor wording on my part.

Jacob, I cannot find the book I read about the sheep and goats in.  I know it will turn up eventually.  When it does, I'll revisit the subject.

I made what I felt was an interesting observation regarding the crucifixion and resurrection yesterday.  Before I go into though, I'll just say that I thought The Passion of the Christ was a good (if exhausting) film to watch, even if it still reflects Western values rather than an Ancient Near Eastern mindset.  The worst element of the crucifixion for Mediterranean people would have been the shame, not the pain.  Note that the Bible mentions little or nothing regarding the pain- it emphasizes the shame of the degradation ritual (Hebrews 12:2, for instance).  Crucified persons had no way of defending their honor except through sheer andeia ("manliness"), such as by not crying out, but still, this loss of honor was most excruciating to the ancient Mediterranean man.

The connection I made yesterday was that the resurrection of Jesus was not in and of itself significant.  Ancient Jews looked forward to the eventual resurrection.  In John 11, for instance, Martha tells Jesus, "“I know [Lazarus] will rise again in the resurrection at the last day."  The ancient rabbinical teaching, however, was that men would die and their flesh would rot to atone for their sins.  That indicates the significance of families performing a second burial, gathering the bones of the deceased and placing them in an ossuary to await the resurrection.

Hence, it was not the resurrection of Christ that was astonishing- it was the timing (kairos).  That Jesus had come back before the ritualistic onset of decomposition was a proclamation that there was no corruption in the Word made flesh, and therefore, there was no reason for the flesh to decay.