12 Mar 12
Originally posted by Bosse de NageJesus, while in the likeness of a man, did not discourage those who worshipped
Why would you have him make Jesus his Lord, rather than meditate on the mythos of the Trinity? Worshipping a man is a senseless activity.
Him because He knew they were worshipping Him as God. They were not just
worshipping another man, but God in the likeness of a man; for Jesus was the
Son of God and equal in divinity with His Father. For He said if you have seen
Me, you have seen the Father. Although, being equal to God, the Father, He
humbled Himself to appear in the likeness of a man to come to His chosen
people as a witness to God the Father and to pay the penalty for sin for all who
will accept Him. He did this by obeying His Father, even to death on a cross.
And His Father exalted Him above all, just as the Son had exalted the Father
above all.
12 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI think you've read something into my post that isn't there.
Why would you have him make Jesus his Lord, rather than meditate on the mythos of the Trinity? Worshipping a man is a senseless activity.
I wasn't speaking of "worship", but in how the retired pastor sees the teachings of Jesus. He doesn't accept the words of Jesus on the face of it. Instead he sometimes removes words, inserts additional words, removes words, dismisses sentences altogether, etc. in his attempts to make it conform to other teachings that appear in the NT. In doing so, he essentially does not follow Jesus, but instead follows NT. As such, Jesus is not the retired pastor's "Lord" which he acknowledged.
12 Mar 12
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneSounds like double talk to me.
I know I'm the only person that you've responded to.
What I said was:
"This is the second straight post of yours where you have responded to responses I've written to other people."
I'll try to explain it another way since you don't seem to understand the above.
Look at your previous two posts to me. In the "Originally posted by ToO" box, the tex ...[text shortened]... had addressed to you. As such, I don't know if you've read them.
Understand now?
12 Mar 12
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneAs Paul's writings are the oldest existing Christian texts, and the gospels postdate them by decades, I would not treat the words of Jesus as gospel truth myself. What did he say that Hillel didn't say in any case? The Christian mythos does not rely on the texts: it relies on spiritual exercises (good works being one, much as bakhti yoga is the doing of good works) that statistically few Christians seem capable of discerning, let alone performing, to the utter discredit of vulgar Christianity.
I think you've read something into my post that isn't there.
I wasn't speaking of "worship", but in how the retired pastor sees the teachings of Jesus. He doesn't accept the words of Jesus on the face of it. Instead he sometimes removes words, inserts additional words, removes words, dismisses sentences altogether, etc. in his attempts to make it confo ...[text shortened]... not follow Jesus, but instead follows Paul and others. As such, Jesus is not his "Lord".
As far as the 'words of Jesus' are concerned: Once you've got the Golden Rule, what else do you need?
12 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHindsThat is why it would be a mistake to 'worship Jesus'.
Jesus, while in the likeness of a man, did not discourage those who worshipped
Him because He knew they were worshipping Him as God. They were not just
worshipping another man, but God in the likeness of a man; for Jesus was the
Son of God and equal in divinity with His Father. For He said if you have seen
Me, you have seen the Father. Although, being ...[text shortened]... cross.
And His Father exalted Him above all, just as the Son had exalted the Father
above all.
12 Mar 12
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI've reponded to you, bottom line. You have a hard time making yourself
I know I'm the only person that you've responded to.
What I said was:
"This is the second straight post of yours where you have responded to responses I've written to other people."
I'll try to explain it another way since you don't seem to understand the above.
Look at your previous two posts to me. In the "Originally posted by ToO" box, the tex ...[text shortened]... had addressed to you. As such, I don't know if you've read them.
Understand now?
clear.
I've responded to you as you responded to me, I've responded to you as you
respond to others since it seems you have an equally hard time getting others
to understand you too.
Kelly
12 Mar 12
Originally posted by KellyJayThinkOfOne is not a skilful conversationalist.
I've reponded to you, bottom line. You have a hard time making yourself
clear.
I've responded to you as you responded to me, I've responded to you as you
respond to others since it seems you have an equally hard time getting others
to understand you too.
Kelly
12 Mar 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Bosse de NageYou certainly seem to have gone off on a tangent- a rather disjointed one at that. I'n not at all sure about what you're driving at, but I'll take a stab at it.
As Paul's writings are the oldest existing Christian texts, and the gospels postdate them by decades, I would not treat the words of Jesus as gospel truth myself. What did he say that Hillel didn't say in any case? The Christian mythos does not rely on the texts: it relies on spiritual exercises (good works being one, much as bakhti yoga is the ...[text shortened]... the 'words of Jesus' are concerned: Once you've got the Golden Rule, what else do you need?
As Paul's writings are the oldest existing Christian texts, and the gospels postdate them by decades, I would not treat the words of Jesus as gospel truth myself.
Jesus repeatedly emphasized following HIS word, HIS commandments, etc. The fact that Paul's words were written down earlier is neither here nor there.
The Christian mythos does not rely on the texts: it relies on spiritual exercises (good works being one, much as bakhti yoga is the doing of good works) that statistically few Christians seem capable of discerning, let alone performing, to the utter discredit of vulgar Christianity.
As far as the 'words of Jesus' are concerned: Once you've got the Golden Rule, what else do you need?
Since you bring up Bhakti Yoga, I'll couch this in terms of what I remember of the one school of vedanta that I'm somewhat familiar. The four yogas are mere stepping stones toward the ultimate goal of becoming one with Brahman. Of the four, it seemed to me that the only path that could lead directly to this is that of Jnana Yoga (the path of knowledge). I asked a swami about that and he shared that belief. One could only go so far with the other three. One would eventually reach a dead end and have to abandon it for Jnana Yoga to continue. The journey is one of inner transformation. The teachings of Jesus similarly indicate inner transformation as the ultimate goal: in this case of becoming one with God.
12 Mar 12
Originally posted by KellyJayIf you aren't reading my posts, there isn't much point in trying to have a discussion.
I've reponded to you, bottom line. You have a hard time making yourself
clear.
I've responded to you as you responded to me, I've responded to you as you
respond to others since it seems you have an equally hard time getting others
to understand you too.
Kelly
Sorry if you can't undertand that.
12 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneCaught your words before you edited them out. Says it all, really. Skilful, you ain't. ('Skilful' in the sense that Gautama B. used it.)
Just taking a guess, but English isn't your primary language is it? That said, I acknowledge that one needs to have a certain level of command of the English language [with me].
12 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayListen KJ, you're not one that should be talking about "making [oneself] better understood".
If you'd work on making yourself better understood that would help.
Kelly
Plus, if you can set your pride aside, you have to admit you have trouble comprehending the written word.