Albert-

Page 122

R

Thank you, and Roger that Roger. I'll try to remember to read it tonight when I arrive home.

rondele wrote on Mar 29^th, 2011 at 4:48pm:

Hi Usetawuz,

You may have misunderstood my posts.  I did not say trust your intellect over your "gut,"  rather, I said that when you have people debating their own versions of history, and you do not use your intellect along with your gut, you get either absurdity, or you are left with nothing at all.

My take was not that people should follow the Bible in a literaral sense word for word, but use it as a text of stories, allegories and illustrative cases to illuminate the human condition (and learn from). 

The notion that your gut should win out every time over reason, and that truth is always relative will always lead to an emotional response and may lead one astray.

As an example, I am a physician and constantly hear about fringe patient advocacy groups recommending diagnoses and treatments that are off the beaten path.  Some of these websites and recommendations, are in fact dangerous.  There are patient groups on the web, with seemly scholarly references which state, for example that Lyme disease is never cured, and that more than one year's worth of antibiotics are required to treat and cure most patients.   

The CDC and many organizations have proven through controlled studies that current antibiotic regimens have over a 98% complete cure rate for the Lyme organism.   These studies were presented in peer-reviewed journals, so that data could be analyzed and statistics could show the cure rate with different regimens.  In contrast, the patient advocacy groups make claims based on anecdotes, and there is little true science behind their published opinions.

If truth is relative, you can have a Seraphis - equivalent on the Lyme forum swearing that the "evidence" has proven that 2 years of home intravenous antibiotics are required to treat Lyme disease.  On the other hand, it is a "known" to me and most physicians that rigorous studies have disproven that statement.  A 30 day course of antibiotics cures Lyme disease for 98% of patients. 

If you read the patient advocacy web page, your "gut" might tell you to get yourself a home intravenous antibiotic, even though it is not indicated.  You might receive unnecessary antibiotics for over a year which could damage your liver, gastrointestinal system and cause serious side effects.

I believe that the highest state of our being is pure perception, but it appears that this state of clarity is difficult to achieve on the earth plane.  Our discernment then depends on a combination of our intellect and our "gut" or emotions. 

M

Our intellect is a tool designed to work with our emotions.  Discernment or "right perception" in the physical world involves the seemless application of both our emotions and our intellect.  Perhaps in other mental planes,

Rondelle:
I just read what Bruce wrote, and it seems as if you left out some key words.  Below is the entire discussion. The last paragraph is key.

When Bruce wrote “even good Christians” I don’t believe he was putting them down. Rather, he was saying even some good people such as good Christians will hate homosexuals.

I know “hate” is a strong word, and some Christians will say that they do things such as try to convert homosexuals because love motivates them to do so. However, I believe if such people truly understood about unconditional love, they wouldn’t judge homosexuals as if they are doing something sinful just because a few words in the Bible erroneously say that homosexuality is a sin. If they allow themselves to questions what such words say, their souls will open up to love to an extent that exceeds the degree they have already opened.

Perhaps if a few people didn’t make the poor decision to include those words as a part of the Bible, and perhaps if some people weren’t afraid to doubt some of the words that are in the Bible, then perhaps the drastic measures Bruce wrote about wouldn’t be necessary.

From Bruce's book:

“We’ve got some special projects, like AIDs,” he said matter-of-factly.

“AIDS? You guys are responsible for AIDS?” I asked incredulously.

“AIDs is just a new form of the disease process spawned by overpopulation. Earth has seen it before in things like the Black Plague and other types of diseases. Many who decided to enter during this time saw AIDS as an incredible opportunity.”

“An opportunity?”

“Certainly!  Look at the factors involved. Detection of the virus is possible many years before any symptoms show up, so the certainty of death is there long before the actual event. Many who decided on the AIDs route understood the value of facing certain death. Facing it for years gives lots of opportunities to break through the fear. And it has embedded within it the opportunity for those not facing the certain death of AIDS to advance their ability to experience and express unconditional love.”

“What do you mean?” I asked.

“Look at the population segment where AIDS first showed up—in homosexuals. Now there’s a group even good Christians can hate. That’s a real incongruity in a religion based on a God who said you must love your neighbor as yourself. Such incongruities can cause Christians to question their beliefs. And such questioning can lead to changes in beliefs that are more consistent with ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’ That incongruity is an opportunity to incarnate into a lifetime as a Christian to learn about Love.”

[Seraphis:] "ask the 40,000 murdered Kathar's how they feel about religiocide... in the name of a lie..."

Your comment demonstrates the essence of bigottry and racism, i. e. the stereotyping of a movement or race on the basis of its worst examplars.

[Seraphis:] "we now know that the only reference to Jesus to surface in the literature of the ancient world was in Josephus and it is now well known to be a FORGERY.  Enough said."

Yes, "enough said" to establish that you don't know what you are talking about.  First, there are 2 references to Jssus in Josephus, not one.  The one in Antiquities 20.9.1 refers to the high priest Ananus [= Annas] and his execution of "James, the brother of Jesus the one called Christ." The authenticity of this reference is almost universally accepted and, by itself, refutes your claim.

The 2nd is a rather comprehensive summary of Jesus' ministry (Antiquities18.3.3).  Two brief phrases create the impression that Josephus was a Christian and are clearly later Christian interpolations.  So the question arises as to whether the whole passage is an interpolation or just these 2 brief phrases.  In 1971 new Arabic and Syriac translations of this passage were published and both lack the 2 phrases in question.  This indicates that most of the Josephus text is authentic. More improtantly, the rest of the Josephus passage has a style that is vintage Josephus.  Ancient forgers lacks computers and thus lacked the sophistication to imitate an author's style in significant detail.  For this reason alone, the scholarly consensus is that the passage is aunthentic apart from the two interpolated phrases.

Furthermore, in his book 'Jesus the Magician," Morton Smith (an athest) discusses the version of Jesus' life circulated by his Jewish detractors. These anti-Christian traditions acknowledge that Jesus appeared to be a miracle worker and healer but insist that the miracles were in fact either magically induced hallucinations or demonically powered healings.  Elements of this anti-Gospel are traceable to Rabbi Eliezer (70 AD).  Thus, Jesus' existence as an alleged miracle worker finds other first centuryJewish testimony beyond Josephus.

Then there is the Nazareth inscrption from the time of Tiberius or Claudius warning the Jews of the penalties against future grave robbing, an obvious reference to Roman belief that Jesus' disciples stole his body to justify their claim that he rose from the dead.

Also significant, are the allusions in ancient Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius to "Chrestus" and "Chrestians," the Roman terms for Christ and Christians.  "Chrestus was a common Roman name, but Christus was unprecedented.  But these historians have a poor grasp of Christian practice and claims about Jesus.

Berserk2 wrote on Mar 30^th, 2011 at 4:16pm:


Rebuttal: First, I don't think I said there was not Jesus... and I guess I left out an important point... what is not in any ancient record or sources outside of the Christian mythology is the Crucifixion which I personally don't think happened... it is an allegory (the crucifixion) of the last struggle of the Soul... it's dark night... before self-realization which requires in these particular systems of unfoldment the 'destruction' of the person ego...

As far as a man called Jesus, I am sure he existed but, he was one of the leaders of the Essene community which was destroied in the Roman retaliation for the Jewish revolt that ended in Massada... the Essenes reconstituted as and became the underpinning of the evolution of Christianity.

The truth is as Evemerist scholar Shaye Cohen, professor of Judaic and Religion Studies at Brown University, admits the desparate situation of trying to fine the 'historical' reformer/rebel under accreted layers of miracles:

Modern scholars have routinely reinvented Jesus or ave routinely rediscovered in Jesus that which they want to find....

S.

Regarding the crucifixion, going by the messages I received, Jesus was crucified.

Also, the spirit contact sources that seem most credible to me say that Jesus was crucified. When channeled sources say it didn't happen, they contradict each other (and themselves) about what happened in key ways.

The experiences I had weren't Jungian archetypes.

Ok, so we go from Bible bashing to UFOs at the Royal wedding?  Odd bedfellows, this conversation.

  Seraphis, might it not be that you are operating from a set of belief systems that is "anti-Bible," even judging by the title of your thread?  Your premise at the start appears to be that those who revere the good book only due so literally, reading word for word as if there is no other truth, believing that the scriptures were written by the hand of God himself, instead of men.

Yet Judeo-Christian scholars who study the two testaments and the communities who investigate biblical thought do not promulgate or agree with your basic premises.  So from the get go, most sources believe that the two testaments were synthesized works written and compiled by men, which contained great truths within them (along with a chronicle of man's covenant with God). 

In many circles, Jews and Christians gather to debate the meaning of the passages, constantly reinterpreting the ancient texts to gain further insight into the human spirit.  In Judaism this has taken the form of Talmudic study and debate.  If all believed as your premise stated (that the Bible was the word of God alone), then surely Talmudic scholars would not get together over the years to debate and interpret these texts.

But debate and reinterpretation is exactly what is occuring over the centuries.  The Vatican and other religious christian organizations have their equivlent to Talmudic Judaism.  This makes the followers of both testaments not a stagnant group of people, but a vibrant and ever evolving group - not tied to the dictates of the Bible with chains, but able to learn from the allegories in it and continually debate the significance of these stories. 

I hope you can see why even the title of your thread might thus be seen by Jews and Christians as offensive.  You start with an assumption that all followers are fundamentalists (a gross misrepresentation), and then you proceed to cast doubt on the very existence of the Bible as a text of stories, and the reality of Jesus and the crucifixation itself.

While the flaws in your arguments are obvious to anyone who hears both sides, one must also ask  "what exactly are you trying to accomplish?"  To prove that Jesus never existed and was not crucified? - This is surely going to offend more than settle anything.

The premise behind the two testaments; to love thy neighbor as thyself, and to love God, are synonymous with the basic underpinnings of every peace loving religion or ideology, including New Age thought, and ideas brought back from experiences from Robert Monroe, Bruce Moen and TMI.  Are you not clearly aware of that?

Matthew