The LORD then gave these further instructions to Moses: 'Tell the people of Israel to keep my Sabbath day, for the Sabbath is a sign of the covenant between me and you forever. It helps you to remember that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. Yes, keep the Sabbath day, for it is holy. Anyone who desecrates it must die; anyone who works on that day will be cut off from the community. Work six days only, but the seventh day must be a day of total rest. I repeat: Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.' (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT Christian Communism Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand persons were added that day. They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers. Awe came upon everyone, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their property and possessions and divide them among all according to each one's need. (Acts 2:41-45 NAB) The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common. With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all. There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale, and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need. (Acts 4:32-35 NAB) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All I'm saying is that what you (the "human") generally consider to be real, isn't. I have not said that there isn't (a) reality. I have always equated reality to a Being, and have sometimes called that Being "Christ". I'm saying that Jesus didn't believe in the reality of Jesus, and probably believed less than you (in the alledged reality of humanhood). That doesn't mean that Jesus didn't believe in, and eventually come to know himself as Christ...reality itself. Likewise, we are all welcome to come to the same conclusion. I'm saying that all will come to this same conclusion (about Self) given enough time. And then time will end as the Eternal resumes it's nature as reality. P.S. You still haven't explained the logic of making all NT words alledgedly coming from Jesus to be his actual words...or not his words at all. Where is this black/white, either/or logic coming from? Christ!
âAll I'm saying â¦â¦â All you're saying, representss an excursion into self-indulgent fantasizing about reality. In reality, a flamboyant imaginary pseudo reality. But about your ps. Contrary to those flights of fancy of yours, there are actually words written down in the New Testament. There are also , people like jem, drowned by their own unrestrained delusions, who will say those words don't mean what they mean, and don't say what they say. In going to the most absurd degrees to foster Messiah images , the bad things Jesus says , magically become good things. Achieved by (supposedly) an adult employing any amount of infantile imaginations and weird distortions in reasoning, just to insist that night is day . Also, whatever gave you the idea I would suppose the NT has anything to do with âlogicallyâ ? The words logically and New Testament are contradictory terms in any sensible representation of reality, other than within the realms of make-believe. Whether the words in the NT were ever said, are true or false, or even the fact that there is no real evidence Jesus existed any more than other fictional characters like Hans Grubelnickle who cried "The Emperor Has No Clothes" , are separate issues. If you don't mind me pointing out, your confusion is in the idea that I am someone even suggesting there is any logic connected to the Bible at all. The argument here is about âbelieversâ of it trying to assert the nasty remarks and threats Jesus makes within the story book, are not nasty and are not threats. Or are being taken out of context. As valid as suggesting it's out of context to say things said in Main Kampf are bad. The words are there in the book and Jesus said bad things. Christians will tell you they are good. Muhammad said bad things too, but Muslims will tell you they are good. Christians will tell you they are bad. Muslims will tell you Christians are taking them out of context. I point out only that I think some people might be a bit more honest in regard to what belief or faith it is they are really subscribing to in the many loathsome Biblical OT tales and in some distasteful NT Jesus theo-fiction stories along with the Koran and Hadith twaddle , and maybe recognize what Hans Grubelnickle did. But in reality.
While this is true, it's also true that the leaders of Islam, hundreds of years ago, decreed that there is to be no more interpretation of what the words in the Koran means. It's also true that there ARE a few that have said that there needs to be new studies and interpretations of the Koran, but they are in the VAST minority. And since to try a new interpretation the meaning of those words of Mohammed is an affront to Islam, I expect that anyone that undertakes this in devout Muslim areas will be killed, and thus will end that step towards modernization.
"That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." AMEN
So beware, for the time is coming, says the LORD, when this place will no longer be called Topheth or the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter. For I will upset the battle plans of Judah and Jerusalem and let invading armies slaughter them. The enemy will leave the dead bodies as food for the vultures and wild animals. I will wipe Jerusalem from the face of the earth, making it a monument to their stupidity. All who pass by will be appalled and will gasp at the destruction they see there. I will see to it that your enemies lay siege to the city until all the food is gone. Then those trapped inside will have to eat their own sons and daughters and friends. They will be driven to utter despair.' (Jeremiah 19:6-9 NLT) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reformations don't start with the majority... Yes, a reformist may be killed, and their martyrdom is exactly the type of event that can bring change. Any reasonable review of world religions will demonstrate that most religions began with a charismatic spiritual leader. Over time, the true message was lost, and those with political goals (not genuine spiritual goals) saw the opportunity to profit from the message of the prophets. It can, and eventually will happen in Islam. Some prophet will come to correct the wrong thinking of the current leadership in Islam, and set the ship on the right course...at least for a while until the cycle repeats...
Suppose two guys get a little too high on mushrooms. They start trippin. Their hallucinations seem real. At some point, the effects start to wear off. One begins to remember there was a "reality" before he started trippin, and starts to come down off his high. The other mocks him for thinking there is anything more real than their high. Your comments are like that. I do not fancy that there aren't (words in the NT). I simply question whether very many of the words represent what a great teacher (Jesus) actually said/taught/meant. I don't think that's what I'm about. Again, that's not what I'm about. There are some nasty things said in the name of Jesus. The question is, did Jesus say those things, or, was he framed/used to further the agenda of neo-Jews? No. I'm questioning your logic. I have already questioned the logic of the NT and found it to be irrational. I am also finding your logic to be irrational when you insist that all the words in the NT must be those of Jesus...or none at all. There isn't a lot of evidence that a lot of folk existed. Neither am I arguing for the existence of Jesus, whose teaching questions the very existence of the world in the first place! What I am questioning is why you think that all the words in the NT are his...or not his at all. You are ruling out the possibility of "spin"...a fallacious account built up around some ( a very few) sound-bytes that echo the authentic teachings of an authentic teacher (Jesus). Why do you rule out the possibility of "spin"? You are not being logical. When is "spin" ever logical? I'm not proposing that the spin of the Bible is logical. I'm questioning the logic of one (you) (who prides himself on being logical) about his (your) Christian-zealot-like all-or-nothing approach to textual analysis. Good point. But you are skirting the issue. How many of the words said to have come out of Jesus mouth actually came out of his mouth? It's fairly well known that Hitler burned books. How fair would it be to German's if, after being unable to find any other viewpoints among their libraries, we accepted "Mein Kampf" as the viewpoint of all German's? That's what you are doing when you insist that the victor in an ideological war (the NT) represents the authentic teachings of Jesus, a war that was not without it's share of book burnings in the name of right/truth/God. He did (say bad things)? How do you know that? How do you know he said those things? How do you know what he said, if he said anything at all? Why do you keep insisting that that book (NT) represents the teachings of Jesus? That's not what I'm about. There are some very misleading sayings attributed to Jesus, some of them downright nasty...as if coming from a neo-Jewish zealot. On the other hand, you are telling me that everything some book says he said is everything he said. Where is the logic in your thinking? I don't subscribe to the bible or the koran. I do subscribe to reason, however. And I'm questioning why it is you are joining with NT scribes to discredit a great teacher (Jesus). It would only make sense if your agenda, and the agenda of NT scribes were the same. :eek: Christ!
Iam, I'd reply to your detailed parsing of my comments , including the false analogy in your ' parable of the tripping shrooms' ...... (dude, according to you, there is no reality in the first place to even "Suppose two guys get a little too high on mushrooms" ) ..... but I think this sums up the position from my point of view. You might be better informed asking that of the millions in the world calling themselves Christians, who accept that book as what they call the Word of God and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Don't shoot the messenger for simply pointing out what Christians insist they generally accept. More pertinent then to wonder why you are trying to infer the NT Bible does not represent the teachings of Jesus. You do subscribe to reason? Are you sure? You're the guy who is going about stating in not so few words that in reality , reality does not exist ! That's not reasonable. A great teacher is (was) Jesus? A great teacher why exactly ? If not for the bad things in NT, equally then, not for the good things in it either. If not for the Bible at all, then a good teacher by what standards exactly? Apparently it's all about brainwashing bad into good and a self-contradictory abnegation of reality. Within your own personal religious delusion, is there some more of your non-reality type reality, where Jesus teaches outside of the NT? Come on Iam, you can't reasonably blame me for what the Bible says. You have no more idea scribes were neo-jewish conspirators anymore than you can sensibly demonstrate Jesus actually existed. You're trying to avoid that reality and indeed absurdly, all reality itself, because your great teacher said some malicious things in the one source accepted by those who like to label themselves Christian. It just doesn't wash.