Religion III

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by hcap

Earlier I tried to present a rebuttal to boxcar's exclusivity that Jesus was the only way to the divine. Brought up as a Jew with later extensive first-hand experiences with many ways and traditions, I categorically reject that notion.

I attempted to contrast the antisemitism of his Martin Luther's worn out jalopy, versus Jesus' Cadillac. There are obvious differences.

I did a week long retreat with Catholic brothers 50 years ago. None of them pranced around chanting "I am Holier-than -Thou. And condemning their fellow beings to hell. Or objecting a non-Catholic learn from them lovingly and humbly. Their braggadocio was in check. That was part of the goal

You objectYet you have not objected to the misunderstanding of THE METAPHOR, NOT FACT, that the Jews murdered Jesus, entrenching Christianity in a 2,000 year dark shadow of antisemitism and ignorance cast by the likes of Luther.

There is no comparison in Actors evident objection to boxcar's insult leveled at me, and psychiatry, and to boxcar's jalopy rambling around, running out of gas, and running people over.

I have not engaged here in a long time, being allergic to the ad hominem attacks and regurgitated arguments being recycled for the nth time. I caught a glance of Boxcar's car dealer lot and laughed as mentioned. Checking later for any elaboration, I caught some fragments of the argument for syncretism vs. the exclusivity of Christ. I'm not reading posts laced with my allergies already mentioned, but scanning for something relevant to me. That leaves out any context such as antisemitism, etc., and I am seriously uninterested in the bulk of arguments that I would answer differently than Boxcar in most cases (e.g., [Christ] the embrace of suffering vs. [Eastern mysticism] meditative release from suffering, remember? Why should I jump in and revive our conversation?).

Actor is interesting because though there are countless adherents to empiricism, I've experienced few who exhibit it so consistently in their internet personality when it serves (requests for exacting definitions, examination of metaphor vis-à-vis science texts, etc., all while encircled within one's own bubble). In any event, it was of hardly any consequence to me, coming across it after the last race at Lone Star late at night.

However, this sequence was very consequential to me, about a poster since banned I think. I simply don't read paragraphs or grasp contexts here anymore here unless I'm personally engaged, as in this instance, when the individual had more difficulty with ethnicity than messiahship in the person of Jesus...

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...3&postcount=30

[Actor]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

Actor is interesting because though there are countless adherents to empiricism, I've experienced few who exhibit it so consistently in their internet personality when it serves (requests for exacting definitions, examination of metaphor vis-à-vis science texts, etc., all while encircled within one's own bubble).

Define "bubble."

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Well...we'll have to agree to disagree on the major elements of salvation. I just don't have the time debate soteriology with you.

Love is also what God does because its his sacrificial love for his elect in the first place that moves Him to save those who are at enmity at Him.

P.S. Good to see you back. I wonder where SMTW is?

I think he wearied of the same recycled arguments, coming from the same presuppositions we all have, as I did. At least I hope so, and that he is fine.

I have many varied sites + twitter, of theological, cultural, financial, sporting, and of course of a racing milieu to dive into. Seems like a lot of individuals come here for easy pickings, who would get devoured on a larger stage. I know I would lack the perseverance to engage with the fellows at Triablogue, and would need to call for reinforcements. Daily controversial argumentation cannot be good for the soul (Titus 3). You ought to consider some sort of personal change or reevaluate how much time is invested here vs. anything gained by you or others. Like any good bettor, right?

I don't know what changed, but I'm saying discreetly that Twinspires opened up to Missouri residents, or maybe just me, and I've been fortunate with my initial month of investing. Can prove that if somebody would show me how to screenshot. Gonna spend much time with those grand thoroughbreds, win or lose.

If you agree with this:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/597.htm

...you must avoid any possibility in your posts that you do not.

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by Actor

Define "bubble."

Actor, this is a self-parody, right? Because I'm going to give you points for being funny.

If somehow you are serious, you are embodying my point.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bubble

Under "noun"...definition #7.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

I think he wearied of the same recycled arguments, coming from the same presuppositions we all have, as I did. At least I hope so, and that he is fine.

I have many varied sites + twitter, of theological, cultural, financial, sporting, and of course of a racing milieu to dive into. Seems like a lot of individuals come here for easy pickings, who would get devoured on a larger stage. I know I would lack the perseverance to engage with the fellows at Triablogue, and would need to call for reinforcements. Daily controversial argumentation cannot be good for the soul (Titus 3). You ought to consider some sort of personal change or reevaluate how much time is invested here vs. anything gained by you or others. Like any good bettor, right?

I don't know what changed, but I'm saying discreetly that Twinspires opened up to Missouri residents, or maybe just me, and I've been fortunate with my initial month of investing. Can prove that if somebody would show me how to screenshot. Gonna spend much time with those grand thoroughbreds, win or lose.

If you agree with this:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/597.htm

...you must avoid any possibility in your posts that you do not.

Actually, in recent years I have spent considerably less time on this forum "debating". I have taken Rev 22:10-11 to heart, along with other passages of similar genre.

Regarding the link above, the statement does not comport at all with the testimony of scripture. The inspired writers laid the blame of Jesus' death primarily on the Jews -- but not solely upon them. Obviously, the gentiles (represented by Rome that in turn was represented by Pilate) was complicit in his death. After all -- the Messiah came to his own, but his own received him not! (Jn 1:11) Jesus wasn't born in Asia Minor, or Rome, or in Asia but in Bethlehem in the city of David.

Secondly, according to the testimony of the early chapters of Acts, we should hold Jesus' prayer for the forgiveness of the sin of his murderers in balance with the judgment of God on the Jews in 70 A.D. due to their act of blasphemy, apostasy, idolatry and rebellious covenant-breaking, as all these found their ultimate expression in their greatest crime ever against their covenant God -- the rejection and murder of His only Begotten Son whom he sent to offer the Kingdom of God. Acts tells us that that shortly after Pentecost the Father did indeed answer Jesus' prayer for forgiveness as thousands repented and believed the gospel at the preaching of Peter and others. But again, we must not forget Jesus' ominous words to the women as he was carrying his cross:

Luke 23:27-31
27 A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. 28 Jesus turned and said to them, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me ; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the time will come when you will say, 'Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!' 30 Then

"'they will say to the mountains, "Fall on us!"
and to the hills, "Cover us!" '

31 For if men do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?"
NIV

Jesus was clearly alluding to the coming judgment on that generation who was guilty of his murder! The righteous judgment of God upon the Jews, administered through Rome, was so severe that it literally put and end to the Mosaic Covenant! And without this covenant, the Judaism of the Mosaic Covenant also died with that generation of Jews!

And if you still doubt the severity of the Jews' crime against their covenant God, I would also remind you of Jesus' sober words to the elite religious establishment of his day when he told them in no uncertain terms that the Kingdom of God would be taken away from them and given to a "nation" that would produce the fruit if it (Mat 21:43-46), and the religious leaders understood him perfectly! They understood that he was speaking about them!

So...the bottom line to your misleading link: Many Jews shortly after Pentecost were forgiven by God when he graciously granted them repentance and faith; but most were not which is why the nation and and the Mosaic Covenant perished in 70 A.D., as Jesus predicted it would.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Actually, in recent years I have spent considerably less time on this forum "debating". I have taken Rev 22:10-11 to heart, along with other passages of similar genre.

Regarding the link above, the statement does not comport at all with the testimony of scripture. The inspired writers laid the blame of Jesus' death primarily on the Jews -- but not solely upon them. Obviously, the gentiles (represented by Rome that in turn was represented by Pilate) was complicit in his death. After all -- the Messiah came to his own, but his own received him not! (Jn 1:11) Jesus wasn't born in Asia Minor, or Rome, or in Asia but in Bethlehem in the city of David.

I think you should rethink the historical consequences of ignoring the more accurate and more in line with Christ's teaching, of that CATECHISM posted by dnlgfnk

"Neither all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his Passion. . . [T]he Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture."

With Luther's antisemitism......

Several months after publishing On the Jews and Their Lies, Luther wrote the 125-page Vom Schem Hamphoras und vom Geschlecht Christi (Of the Unknowable Name and the Generations of Christ), in which he equated Jews with the Devil:

Here in Wittenburg, in our parish church, there is a sow carved into the stone under which lie young pigs and Jews who are sucking; behind the sow stands a rabbi who is lifting up the right leg of the sow, raises behind the sow, bows down and looks with great effort into the Talmud under the sow, as if he wanted to read and see something most difficult and exceptional; no doubt they gained their Shem Hamphoras from that place.

.................................................. .................................
I gave you ample opportunity to confront how Hitler's antisemitic motivations snared the bigotry of the German people to help launch WWII, killing hundreds of thousands and how 2,000 years of your misunderstanding of Jews as "Christ killers" brought about pogroms and propped up dictators like Stalin.

You called documented history drivel.

I would add the Passion is a spiritual metaphor for one individual's struggle to reach the "Father". Jews representing how we all forget the ultimate goal, and get caught up in ones VEHICLE, instead of REMEMBERING where that worn out vehicle is meant to take us.

The Jews represent the confusion of the map for the territory. THEY FORGOT the inner meaning of Judaism. Christ's goal was to remind them.

Jews were not "Christ Killers" literally, for rejecting a wake up call.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I think you should rethink the historical consequences of ignoring the more accurate and more in line with Christ's teaching, of that CATECHISM posted by dnlgfnk

"Neither all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his Passion. . . [T]he Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture."

With Luther's antisemitism......

Several months after publishing On the Jews and Their Lies, Luther wrote the 125-page Vom Schem Hamphoras und vom Geschlecht Christi (Of the Unknowable Name and the Generations of Christ), in which he equated Jews with the Devil:

Here in Wittenburg, in our parish church, there is a sow carved into the stone under which lie young pigs and Jews who are sucking; behind the sow stands a rabbi who is lifting up the right leg of the sow, raises behind the sow, bows down and looks with great effort into the Talmud under the sow, as if he wanted to read and see something most difficult and exceptional; no doubt they gained their Shem Hamphoras from that place.

.................................................. .................................
I gave you ample opportunity to confront how Hitler's antisemitic motivations snared the bigotry of the German people to help launch WWII, killing hundreds of thousands and how 2,000 years of your misunderstanding of Jews as "Christ killers" brought about pogroms and propped up dictators like Stalin.

You called documented history drivel.

I would add the Passion is a spiritual metaphor for one individual's struggle to reach the "Father". Jews representing how we all forget the ultimate goal, and get caught up in ones VEHICLE, instead of REMEMBERING where that worn out vehicle is meant to take us.

The Jews represent the confusion of the map for the territory. THEY FORGOT the inner meaning of Judaism. Christ's goal was to remind them.

Jews were not "Christ Killers" literally, for rejecting a wake up call.

I think you should read the scriptures to see what they have to say. Catechisms are not divinely inspired.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

I have not engaged here in a long time, being allergic to the ad hominem attacks and regurgitated arguments being recycled for the nth time. I caught a glance of Boxcar's car dealer lot and laughed as mentioned. Checking later for any elaboration, I caught some fragments of the argument for syncretism vs. the exclusivity of Christ. I'm not reading posts laced with my allergies already mentioned, but scanning for something relevant to me. That leaves out any context such as antisemitism, etc., and I am seriously uninterested in the bulk of arguments that I would answer differently than Boxcar in most cases (e.g., [Christ] the embrace of suffering vs. [Eastern mysticism] meditative release from suffering, remember? Why should I jump in and revive our conversation?).

Too bad you are allergic to comparative studies. You misunderstand the original definition of "understand"

https://www.etymonline.com/word/understand

understand (v.)

Old English understandan "comprehend, grasp the idea of," probably literally "stand in the midst of," from under + standan "to stand" (see stand (v.)). If this is the meaning, the under is not the usual word meaning "beneath," but from Old English under, from PIE *nter- "between, among" (source also of Sanskrit antar "among, between," Latin inter "between, among," Greek entera "intestines;" see inter-). Related: Understood; understanding.

When one stands "under", one attempts to see the foundation of things. Where they originate.
Typically complex ideas are not stand alone.
There are always connections.

Standing beneath, or under different religious beliefs is not necessarily your "syncretism". Which right off the bat assumes....an artificial merging or assimilation of several originally discrete traditions and religions. Without a thorough proper study of those others ways, you and boxcar are at a disadvantage, and can not assume that there are no commonalities that are the more fundamental reasons for religious and spiritual beliefs.

Originally a lain term, mostly a Christian concept, "syncretism", I think was A term to cast doubt on the value of eclecticism.

Whereas.....

Comparative religion is the branch of the study of religions concerned with the systematic comparison of the doctrines and practices, themes, and impacts (including migration) of the world's religions

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I think you should read the scriptures to see what they have to say. Catechisms are not divinely inspired.

Neither is Martin Luther.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Neither is Martin Luther.

Wow! Really? You're truly a paragon of wisdom today.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Wow! Really? You're truly a paragon of wisdom today.

And you are still ducking how Luther's antisemitism and your literal biblical misinterpretation of Jews as "Christ killers", contributed to 2,000 years the historical DOCUMENTED horrendous treatment of Jews, leading to murderous antisemites like Hitler and Stalin.

FYI, history it is not "drivel"

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

And you are still ducking how Luther's antisemitism and your literal biblical misinterpretation of Jews as "Christ killers", contributed to 2,000 years the historical DOCUMENTED horrendous treatment of Jews, leading to murderous antisemites like Hitler and Stalin.

FYI, history it is not "drivel"

Neither are the historical facts recorded in scripture! And I'm not responsible for Luther's actions.

The hard, cold, irrefutable fact that God, through the instrumentality of Rome, utterly destroyed the Judaism of the Mosaic Covenant as punishment for their apostasy, which they ultimately expressed when they delivered up Christ to Rome on bogus charges. No temple -- no Judaism!

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Neither are the historical facts recorded in scripture!

There are very few "historical facts" in scripture. What you deem to be "historical facts" are either pure fiction, legend (i.e., cannot be confirmed), or taken from other sources.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

There are very few "historical facts" in scripture. What you deem to be "historical facts" are either pure fiction, legend (i.e., cannot be confirmed), or taken from other sources.

Thanks for your fictional input.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Thanks for your fictional input.

Name just one "historical fact" in scripture.