thormas

Good lord, this guy does go on and skews thing just so he can rant. 

To say black lives matter is not to say that all lives don't matter, it is simply to put a focus on black live that are endangered or ended too often and too easily.

And not all who go to (3 year is it?) public university are what this guy describes. Plus, didn't Churchil stand up against the foreign and existential threat of Nazism? This guy seems to suggest he stood up against some civil unrest or protests. 

And I haven't heard calls for toppling the Roman coliseum or the Egyptian pyramids - especially in the US as the concerns are a bit closer to home.

Finally, this guy seems to not understand the use of the word systematic in the phrase systematic racism - but that of course fits into his imagined bogey man that he can  then......rant against.

3 hours ago, Pipiripi said:

I never has take the book of Revelation literally completely. It is a literal and symbolic and prophetic book. 

Why do you don't go to see in here? Don't be afraid. 

end-times-prophecy.org 

I see you haven't responded to the conspiracy theories on that site.

If you don't take Revelation literally then you must agree it has nothing to do with prophecy or the end time - for such a position would be taking it literally. Don't be afraid, just admit it.

7 hours ago, PaulS said:

Pipiripi,

It might benefit you to learn a bit about the Book of Revelation - such as who wrote it, where it came from, in what context it was written, etc.  I think reading it literally is a total misunderstanding of what the author was getting at.  Here's a brief article on some of what Elaine Pagels has to say, but there is plenty more available (both within this forum and also external resources).  

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/12/revelations-on-revelation/

Cheers

Paul

Good find Paul, I like Pagels and have not read this one. Thanks!

1 hour ago, Pipiripi said:

Which one is closer to God? Revelation 12:17 and 14:12, or the others?

Remember, Jesus has spoken. 

I don't take Revelation literally and Jesus didn't speak it - so neither speaks for God and neither is close to him.

1 hour ago, Pipiripi said:

Don't mix covid with christianity, the devil don't let you go and see, because he knows that you eyes shall open my friend. 

Your website mixed the two: one conspiracy theory on top of the end-time conspiracy theory that has oft been predicted but has never arrived.............and there is no devil, there is only God. 

1 hour ago, Pipiripi said:

The word of God is: "Keep His 10 Commandments and have the faith of Jesus. Revelation 12:17 and Revelation 14:12.

Well, some of us were having a more nuanced discussion. Plus your comment can still be summed up by the two great commandments or simply the one commandment of Love - which is, btw, the faith response of Jesus. 

I have never been that 'into' (or even aware of) bookies' odds on elections. It does seem to be a rather 'interesting' pastime.

From what I have been seeing there is some tightening but then other reports indicate things are basically the same as before the conversions. However it still baffles many people that others (supporters) buy the trumpster's lies, continually (even at the expense of the country) give him a pass on them and/or they buy into his view of the country, the constitution, the law and its people.

I actually have no problem considering or voting for a true Republican, as I have in the past...........but this guy is not a Republican.

What is interesting of late is the poll indicating that the military is not behind the trumpster and now there is even more news (in addition to what we already have seen and heard from him on McCain and others) that he disparages fallen soldiers (in all wars). Additionally and because of this, former military supporters and vets are turning away from him and being very vocal about it. I certainly hope he is not relying on the military if he decides to ignore the election results (if not in his favor).

It is the reality that soldiers and vets 'know' something about service and sacrifice -  and their family members and friends (or simply the rest of the entire country) respect it - and none consider those killed or captured losers and suckers. That this 'commander in chief' does (use those terms toward fallen and captured soldiers) is evidence that he neither knows about true service nor respects the sacrifice of soldiers: his semi-private real belief shows that his public lip service is a lie . Sad! Tragic!

On 9/2/2020 at 3:46 AM, Pipiripi said:

Go here and learn something. end-times-prophecy.org 

Good try Pip but the first line about Covid-19 shows that the site and its founders simply buy into conspiracy nonsense - and the end-time bit is more of the same.

It seems the trumpster is a fan of the late 60s soap opera, Dark Shadows.

What a disastrous interview with a Fox fan trying to make sure he didn't 'step in it' - which of course he did........... repeatedly. How can anybody not wince when this narcissist spews his prejudice and hatred??

That the president of the US is a conspiracy buffoon is sad and tragic for the country. 

Welcome............

3 hours ago, Pipiripi said:

You don't understand the scriptures very well my friend. Jesus was showing the pharisees what to do on Sabbath..............

The Commandments are 10, not 8 or 9. So 10 including the Seventh day Sabbath, the Saturday. If you cannot keep them now, then you cannot keep them in the New World. Isaiah 66:22-23.

There are, in truth, only the two great commandments and in them all the others are fulfilled. Actually there is only one commandment for to love God is to love your neighbor and vice versa. The one is  in the other. 

It is the keeping of this one that creates the New World which is God's.

So sum it up Dimitryet, what are you trying to say?

9 hours ago, Pipiripi said:

Not only focus on grace. Don't do nothing that we regularly do. But talk about God and help others in their weakness. 

REMEMBER! Keep my Sabbath Holy. Are you remembering!!

If you are focused on others and thus God/Love...........that is grace. 

Welcome Dimitryet.

Following is something I found on Ehrman's blog, which is also in one of his books. It is entitled: How Jesus' Apocalyptic Teachings Were Changed (even in the NT).

https://ehrmanblog.org/how-jesus-apocalyptic-teachings-were-changed-even-in-the-nt/

2 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

Don't want to get back into the conversation,... but just happened to run into this verse. - since we were discussing whether Jesus could read and write earlier, this verse at least states that he could read:

Luke 4: 16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:...

Just thought I'd mention and share it.

However the question is do we take Luke, writing 50+ years after the death of Jesus, literally. I have read studies that indicated how very few read in 1st C Palestine. I lean to the probability that Jesus and his disciples could not write and the high likelihood that they couldn't read. Who knows??

35 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

I myself hope to keep putting God, the HS & JC first, and people and myself second in line after these. I used to do things the other way around and it didn't work out well for me at all. If you call this "theism", that's fine. I rather like the word theism, myself. Where people like Spong and other PCs use the word theism or theistic, I tend to rather use the words deity or deists or deisms. To me it means something like a man in the sky in a robe with a long white beard. As much as I love one of the pictures on the Sistine Chapel, that depicts god like this, I really don't think that's God.  It might be and 'indicator' of god or a small pointer to God, put it really doesn't amount to much more than god's fingernail or something like that.

--------------------

I think it's just common sense to assume that all people or a certain group, whether Jews or Christians, are not apocalyptic in their thinking.

Well I thought we ended the conversation but...........

For me, unless we're differentiating the God who is love from self-centeredness, there is no first or second concerning putting God or people first. The 2 great commandments are one: to love God or to put God first is to love others and to loves others is to love God or simply to put Love first. It is all one act.

Desim, the watchmaker idea of God, wherein he creates and leaves us 'ticking' on our own, conceives of a very different God than theism (or better panentheism). Panentheism conceives of  God immanent and active in creation (not removed from it). 

I have already made the case for apocalyptic thinking in the 1st C Judaism and with Jesus.

And let's not forget trumpster Jr's girlfriend - why was she yelling? 

And yet another black person is shot by police - how many cops, how many shots? And then there is the RNC - I wonder if any mention will be made. 

1 hour ago, Elen1107 said:

Read JS Spong's book, 'The Sins of the Scriptures". there's a whole book full of what can be considered "bile", and one could even add to it a bit.

I'm not really interested in having this/these conversations, & don't really have the time.

You believe that Jesus was an apocalyptic Jew and that he was wrong.... I don't. - - For one thing I think that apocalyptic thinking like this is kind of dumb. To think that one day God is going to blow down this whole wide world and then build it up again in a day or a year or whatever, ta-da, just like that, is just kind of stupid. I don't think that Jesus was or is that dumb. I also don't think that all 1st C. Jews or a whole lot of other people were that dumb either. Apparently some of them were or they wouldn't have be writing letters about it and putting words into JC's mouth that said that was what he thought. - -

You believe that books and texts and writings are of primary importance. I believe faith and spirituality and being "in" Christ and God and "in" their love and insight is primary and most important, and experiencing God and Christ is real and open to everyone. This is what gives us the insight to know how to live and get through our days and to know what to do.

We are different. Lets just agree to be different and move on.

I've read Spong and don't always agree with him. I was simply interested in what you found that is worthy of the term bile. 

I believe Jesus was wrong on his apocalyptic view of the timing and kind of Kingdom as seems obvious given that time and history have moved on. I do not believe he was only an apocalyptic prophet. And, I also do not believe he was wrong in his knowing and living God - which is the more important matter. I do agree with a different understanding that the Kingdom is both present or begun and 'yet to be.' I don't agree with apocalyptic thinking (our worldview and religious thinking has evolved), I'm simply saying that this is what Jesus preached and there is considerable 'evidence' for this position. I never said he was dumb, nor do I think in those terms about Jesus or others - he was a man of his time, a Jew of his time and he was in agreement with this thinking which was prevalent in his time and prophesied in his scriptures.

I was waiting for examples of "Jews or a whole lot of other people" and what they believed. You say someone is putting words into Jesus' mouth and I was waiting for some basis for that. But I understand issues of time and interest for such discussions. So all is fine.

____________________

I actually believe - as I have said previously - that people are of primary importance and it is people who...........write books. To read a book is to engage another human being in dialogue. Some discussions are with people who are still alive, some with people long past (including the writers of the gospels who were faithful to Christ and did their best).  I have no issue with faith and spirituality or being in Christ or in God......however I find that some opinions on these topics border on theism which I simply no longer accept.

So over and out and we move on 🤐

1 hour ago, Elen1107 said:

If people just accept the Spirit of Christ within them, they/we can better discern what is and are Jesus's true messages and wisdom. Perhaps if people just had that, or just went with that, or gave more credence and importance to just that, then we wouldn't be in the awful, confusing muddle we are in now about what is and what isn't the real and true word and ways of God.

The spirit of Christ was not in the Jews that the disciples preached to who eventually accepted Jesus as the Christ. Nor was that spirit in the many Gentiles. If it was then they would have accepted Jesus without one word form the disciples. But they didn't.- as did the Jews with Jesus in his lifetime, they first had to hear and then they responded to the word and thus accepted Jesus n his lifetime or, later, the Christ of Faith preached by the disciples. 

The disciples went out to them and announced the good news of Jesus the Christ. Many, not all, accepted the witness of the disciples and they learned of this Jesus and how he 'fulfilled the Jewish scriptures' and thereby brought salvation to them all. Then the spirit of Christ began to 'manifest' in them, in their actions, in their lives. And the rest is history.

Even with Jesus himself in his lifetime, people were 'in the confusing muddle' with some simply rejecting him, some just unable to accept. So too his disciples were rejected and/or misunderstood, so too it continues today. There is no easy way.

1 hour ago, Elen1107 said:

Well, perhaps it's not ALL the same word. Perhaps some of it IS and some of it isn't. Perhaps some of it has been edited and insertions have been made, to reflect what ever these editors and inserters wanted to add or take away from Jesus's message.

If people just accept the Spirit of Christ within them, they/we can better discern what is and are Jesus's true messages and wisdom. Perhaps if people just had that, or just went with that, or gave more credence and importance to just that, then we wouldn't be in the awful, confusing muddle we are in now about what is and what isn't the real and true word and ways of God.

We were talking about the specific words, "Jesus is the Christ" and I said those words alone were not sufficient.

However, what other words are you now talking about? Which words are and are not 'all the same word' and on what do you base what the real same word is?

I conclude by quoting Allison from his previously mentioned book:

"As for eschatology in particular, my contention is that either a decent number of the entries in my catalogue (which I eluded to earlier in a post) fairly characterize what Jesus was about, or the tradition is so full of mnemonic holes and fictional accretions that the quest is a vain aspiration and we should find some other pastime with which to amuse ourselves. Opting, as I do, for the former alternative entails that Jesus had firm eschatological expectations, to which he gave frequent expression. More precisely, he envisaged, as did many in his time and place, the advent, after suffering and persecution, of a great judgment, and after that a supernatural utopia, the kingdom of God, inhabited by the dead come back to life, to enjoy a world forever rid of evil and wholly ruled by God. Further, he thought that the night was far gone, the day at hand."

21 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

Apparently a number of people who wrote about Jesus were apocalyptic or at least partially  apocalyptic in their thinking. This does not mean that Jesus was. It just means that the people who wrote about him after his ministry were.

The 'people' that we're talking about are some of the gospel writers. And they are presenting Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet as 'evidenced' in his sayings, parables, teachings. As Allison said, if we cannot trust them on this (again given the overwhelming number of texts previously mentioned) then we have to toss the whole gospel enterprise (my words since I don't have his exact words in front of me). Simply the gospels cannot be relied upon and that is all we have of Jesus except a few letters, some of which we know are not authentic. 

I have talked about scholars who believe and show the apocalyptic Jesus and also speak of the later gospel - when the Kingdom did not arrive in the lifetime of the disciples of Jesus - having to 'change their tune' and downplaying or ignoring the apocalyptic message of Jesus. 

If you have a way to show that Jesus was not such a prophet, what are they? On what do you base your statement?  

40 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

People with true faith and belief in Christ.

That is all people who are truly Christian so you have not really answered the question. 

41 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

Or, it could have been just based in their faith in Christ 

No, their faith was dashed wth the execution of Jesus as a criminal. However, with the resurrection experience, they turned to and found support and explanation with reference to the Jewish scriptures and their oral preachings began an oral tradition that eventually found its way into the written gospels. 

1 hour ago, Elen1107 said:

What we are focusing on is was Jesus apocalyptic and was this the way and the only way that he and the Jews of the 1st C. saw and understood the coming of the Kingdom.

I'm saying that it is quite possible that Jesus was not apocalyptic. I'm also saying that it is quite possible that there were Jews and Gentiles who were not apocalyptic, and that they saw the coming of the Kingdom in a different way and form, rather than the apocalyptic one. 

You presented an author and I am asking a question. That question was, "...is he saying that there are radically different views specifically of the expected Messiah and the Kingdom to be established by God on earth?" And that pertains to your assertion or belief.

If you are saying that about Jesus, on what do you base it? As to Jews and Gentiles of the early 1st C - to whom are you referring, specifically? 

If it is just speculation on your part, fine. However if you have some basis for your statements, I am interested.

1 hour ago, Elen1107 said:

The problem with these books is that they are a mixture of truth and fiction and outright bile. Some parts a truth and worth quoting and are good messages. Other parts are vile and mean and even down right evil.  The fact that they are mixed and presented as "the word of God" creates a kind of mindbender that really can mess people up and can even create a kind of psychological illness.

The books I have been talking about are the gospels (the NT) and you have been quoting them in your posts.Unless one is a literalist, we know they are a mix of 'truth' and fiction but you'll have to give examples of the bile and explain why you think some are bile and mean???

Thus the need for scholars to help with the mind bender parts. Paul and I had a discussion a good while back about the Temple incident and I did a good bit of research on it which cast it in a very different light. 

1 hour ago, Elen1107 said:

Those who are into hierarchical thinking and hierarchical ways of living. Those with control trips and who are into controlling others. Governments, religious leaderships, parents, gender dominance, people who are bent on the leader-follower mentality, instead of recognizing and getting along with other people as equals.

If we are talking about the original writing of the gospels and the entirety of the NT, I assume they were good people trying their best. As for later generations, there were good people and not so good people, some of the latter did try to bend the religion to their wills or use it for their own purposes (power, control, wealth). However, also throughout the history of Christianity there have been magnificent men and women for whom the good news was just that and they felt a responsibility to understand it, comment on it and explain it for the benefit of others. 

Especially when talking about a progressive Christianity, I simply don't see control trips and such sites can provide a means to counter the misuse or control attempted by others.