Religion II

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Floods were historical events in Mesopotamia. A gigantic global flood as in Noah and the ark, was not.

Nothing personal...but I'll take my chances with Jesus and what he taught and believed.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Major Difference Number One: The bible doesn't teach any such cycle. It teaches that after this life comes the Judgment.

More biblical Christian jargon. The Christian "bible" is only one scripture.

Originally Posted by boxcar

I know enough about the world's religions to know that none of them, save for God's revealed religion in the bible, teach that man is saved solely by God's grace alone through faith.

You know nothing. Certainly not enough to have an intelligent discussion. Pretty much like your clams about history, science, mathematics and philosophy. I just told you their was no one gigantic global flood, but you prefer a non-historically and non-archeologically accurate distorted bible. And what "Jesus says"

How can anyone have any reasonable intelligent discussion with you.about anything?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

More biblical Christian jargon. The Christian "bible" is only one scripture.
You know nothing. Certainly not enough to have an intelligent discussion. Pretty much like your clams about history, science, mathematics and philosophy. I just told you their was no one gigantic global flood, but you prefer a non-historically and non-archeologically accurate distorted bible. And what "Jesus says"

How can anyone have any reasonable intelligent discussion with you.about anything?

Actually...if you do the math on the books, there were far more Jewish writers of the bible than Gentiles. The bible is actually "tastes" pretty Jewish. After all, at the end of the day, all Christianity is Fulfilled Judaism -- Judaism Perfected.

The scriptures are not distorted. You're the one who is distorted. And, yeah, Jesus is infinitely more knowledgeable and wiser on spiritual matters than you are or ever will be, so I'll stick with him.

And by the way, there is actually quite a bit of natural evidence for the Flood. Just sayin'....

[hcap]

And by the way, there is actually quite a bit of natural evidence for the Flood. Just sayin'....

Prove it. Using non apologetic sources.

Btw, some of my rabbis were almost as literal minded as you.
Until I met those with a broader understanding of religion, my initial exposure to my religion was also as distorted as Christian biblical literalists. Only difference being Jewish biblical literalists.**

They confused the maps they were handed, never trying for an understanding of the territory those maps pointed to.

One of the things Jesus message was about.

**I remember a rabbi chasing my around the room to "discipline" me for telling him the dinosaurs were proof the Earth was older than 6,000 or so years.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Prove it. Using non apologetic sources.

Btw, some of my rabbis were almost as literal minded as you.
Until I met those with a broader understanding of religion, my initial exposure to my religion was also as distorted as Christian biblical literalists. Only difference being Jewish biblical literalists.**

They confused the maps they were handed, never trying for an understanding of the territory those maps pointed to.

One of the things Jesus message was about.

**I remember a rabbi chasing my around the room to "discipline" me for telling him the dinosaurs were proof the Earth was older than 6,000 or so years.

Why can't I use apologetic sources? Where am I supposed get my data from -- the ungodly, worldly, blind scientists who bring their uniformitarian biases to the "science"?

And I'm not a literalist. You have no idea what a real literalist is. I interpret scripture in its sensible sense.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

And I'm not a literalist. You have no idea what a real literalist is. I interpret scripture in its sensible sense

Like the Earth is millions of times younger than it really is.

Like Noah literally saved the Earth's species in a large boat.

Original sin may be inherited genetically

Save it. Over the last 10 years or so, you have posted much nonsense on the record.

[thaskalos]

There was no flood that exterminated mankind...there was no mass-murder of babies orchestrated by king Herod...and there were no murderous angels who killed all the Egyptian firstborn children. These were figments of the ancient bible-authors' imaginations. But, hey...if these imaginings play a useful role in the "rebirth" and 'saving' of billions of people, so they could attain the "heavenly life"...then I am all for their preservation.

As the saying goes..."the truth hurts". So...why not hold on to the lies.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Like the Earth is millions of times younger than it really is.

Like Noah literally saved the Earth's species in a large boat.

Original sin may be inherited genetically

Save it. Over the last 10 years or so, you have posted much nonsense on the record.

I posted according to the sensible sense of the passagte, which includes the context of the full counsel of God.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

There was no flood that exterminated mankind...there was no mass-murder of babies orchestrated by king Herod...and there were no murderous angels who killed all the Egyptian firstborn children. These were figments of the ancient bible-authors' imaginations. But, hey...if these imaginings play a useful role in the "rebirth" and 'saving' of billions of people, so they could attain the "heavenly life"...then I am all for their preservation.

As the saying goes..."the truth hurts". So...why not hold on to the lies.

And that is precisely what you and all other believers do. You reject the plain truth of the scripture because it's hurtful to you, so then you go to plan B: Embrace the Lies -- allegorize, allegorize, allegorize...and if that doesn't work, allegorize some more.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

There was no flood that exterminated mankind...there was no mass-murder of babies orchestrated by king Herod...and there were no murderous angels who killed all the Egyptian firstborn children. These were figments of the ancient bible-authors' imaginations. But, hey...if these imaginings play a useful role in the "rebirth" and 'saving' of billions of people, so they could attain the "heavenly life"...then I am all for their preservation.

As the saying goes..."the truth hurts". So...why not hold on to the lies.

I prefer digging beneath the obvious absurdities..

Maurice Nicoll From "The Mark"

Many parables are used in the Gospels. As they stand, taken in the literal meaning of the words, they refer apparently to vineyards, to householders, to stewards, to spendthrift sons, to oil, to water, to wine, to seeds, to sowers, to soil, and many other things. This is their literal level of meaning. The language of parables is difficult to understand just as is, in general, the language of all sacred writings. Taken on the level of literal understanding, both the Old and New Testaments are full not only of contradictions but of cruel and repulsive meaning."
..................................................

The lies do not play a "useful role in the "rebirth" and 'saving' of billions of people". They may piss off enough to spur a second look, but as presented by the biblical literalists who claim they are not literalists at all , these ridiculous babblings only confuse most.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I prefer digging beneath the obvious absurdities..

Maurice Nicoll From "The Mark"

Many parables are used in the Gospels. As they stand, taken in the literal meaning of the words, they refer apparently to vineyards, to householders, to stewards, to spendthrift sons, to oil, to water, to wine, to seeds, to sowers, to soil, and many other things. This is their literal level of meaning. The language of parables is difficult to understand just as is, in general, the language of all sacred writings. Taken on the level of literal understanding, both the Old and New Testaments are full not only of contradictions but of cruel and repulsive meaning."
..................................................

The lies do not play a "useful role in the "rebirth" and 'saving' of billions of people". They may piss off enough to spur a second look, but as presented by the biblical literalists who claim they are not literalists at all , these ridiculous babblings only confuse most.

I'm not confused. I'm not one incessantly spouting your incomprehensible psycho-babble.

By the way, the Flood narrative is not a parable. And the account does not contradict other parts of scripture, nor is it cruel and repulsive.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by hcap

I prefer digging beneath the obvious absurdities..

Maurice Nicoll From "The Mark"

Many parables are used in the Gospels. As they stand, taken in the literal meaning of the words, they refer apparently to vineyards, to householders, to stewards, to spendthrift sons, to oil, to water, to wine, to seeds, to sowers, to soil, and many other things. This is their literal level of meaning. The language of parables is difficult to understand just as is, in general, the language of all sacred writings. Taken on the level of literal understanding, both the Old and New Testaments are full not only of contradictions but of cruel and repulsive meaning."
..................................................

The lies do not play a "useful role in the "rebirth" and 'saving' of billions of people". They may piss off enough to spur a second look, but as presented by the biblical literalists who claim they are not literalists at all , these ridiculous babblings only confuse most.

The teacher uses parables in his teaching because he knows that his students learn at their own pace, when it comes to spiritual matters. Spiritual development can't be rushed, so the teacher puts out the parable...and the students get out of it whatever their particular spiritual level allows them to understand. Some students need a rigid, inflexible teaching...while other students can tolerate the fluid, dynamic teaching. And other, more advanced students, need no teaching at all...and get all that they require from the teacher's silence.

Yes...most of us are confused as we travel our spiritual paths, but it can't be otherwise...because we must all learn at our own pace. And...since we have all eternity to figure things out...our "confusion" only ends up hurting ourselves. But then again...pain too must be considered a necessary component of the "enlightenment" process. As Gurdjieff said..."the person must first realize that he is asleep...before he seeks to awake".

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

As Gurdjieff said..."the person must first realize that he is asleep...before he seeks to awake".

If this little ditty was meant to be analogous to physical sleep, it is an epic fail.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by boxcar

If this little ditty was meant to be analogous to physical sleep, it is an epic fail.

As I already said...we comprehend things in accordance with our spiritual level.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

As I already said...we comprehend things in accordance with our spiritual level.

I also comprehend things with my God-given brain. It's a horrible analogy.

Funny...how we'll never find Jesus making such mental blunders!