The Council of Nicea

@moonbus said
Love God, love yourself, love your neighbor, forgive everyone including those who torment you. If people had actually followed his example, instead of propagating doctrines and dogmas, there would have been a whole lot less horror these last two millennia. No pogroms, no witch burning, no crusades, no heresy trials.

Churches have gone to great lengths to remove the teachings of Christ from their doctrine. From my own experience the people who actually follow the example of Christ are those who do not align themselves with Christianity or to any church.

@kellyjay said
I've answered your question

LOL, here we go!

Avoid the question several times, hope all the obfuscation buries it and then write three paragraphs of blurb attacking me for asking the question in the first place.

A question which only requires a “yes” or a “no”.

@kellyjay said
I've answered your question, you said you wanted something that would convince
you, I don't believe anything can convince you since you don't want to be convinced
so the only thing you are doing here by continuing to ask what was already given
you are that you see this as a means to harass me, so you can take cheap shots.

If you were interested in that question you wou ...[text shortened]... ason you are asking, just to harass and belittle, it is a game with you
that I'm not going to play.

So is that a yes or a no kellyjay?

Why can’t you give a straight answer.

@rajk999 said
Churches have gone to great lengths to remove the teachings of Christ from their doctrine. From my own experience the people who actually follow the example of Christ are those who do not align themselves with Christianity or to any church.

We agree to a large extent about two things: what I would call churchianity, and what Jesus's 'message' was.

For my money, the parables which best exemplify what Jesus was on about are the Good Samaritan, a non-Jew who helps an injured man after two other people (Jews) had refused to. And the Centurion who asks of Jesus a favor, to heal his servant. Incredibly, Jesus says to the Centurion (we may assume he was a Roman pagan), 'go, your faith has healed him.' Not, note, that I, Jesus, have healed him by a miracle, but you, the Centurion, have healed him. The message is so clear, as plain as day, yet millenniums of Church-Christians and Bible worshippers don't see it. It's not about what you believe. It's not about belonging to this or that religion. It's not about propagating doctrines or dogmas or spouting off vapid platitudes such as "truth is truth and cannot contradict itself." The message is clear as day, but it is not conveyed in words. The instruction to his disciples to go forth and make disciples of all men cannot possibly have been meant that he intended that they build whacking great basilicas, acquire vast tracts of land and fortunes more than kings and queens, to raise armies, to wage holy wars, to draw lines on maps and 'give' half of So. America to the Portuguese, etc. etc. Jesus washed his disciple's feet--that action was the message. The same message as in the parables of the Good Samaritan and the Roman Centurion: to serve people in need with humbleness. Just as Jesus had served his own servants by washing their feet, literally (people wore sandals so their feet got dusty) and metaphorically (spiritually, by showing them the path of humbleness and forgiveness). Those who serve with humbleness have already entered into God's kingdom, here, now, in this life. That's it. If there is a Last Judgment, it won't be a quiz about what anybody believed or which religion he allied himself to. It'll be about having served with humbleness.

I do earnestly hope that Dive and others find their way past the snare of doctrines and dogmas and vapid but pointless truths.

@moonbus said
We agree to a large extent about two things: what I would call churchianity, and what Jesus's 'message' was.

For my money, the parables which best exemplify what Jesus was on about are the Good Samaritan, a non-Jew who helps an injured man after two other people (Jews) had refused to. And the Centurion who asks of Jesus a favor, to heal his servant. Incredibly, Jesus says ...[text shortened]... ive and others find their way past the snare of doctrines and dogmas and vapid but pointless truths.

Well said.

@moonbus said
We agree to a large extent about two things: what I would call churchianity, and what Jesus's 'message' was.

For my money, the parables which best exemplify what Jesus was on about are the Good Samaritan, a non-Jew who helps an injured man after two other people (Jews) had refused to. And the Centurion who asks of Jesus a favor, to heal his servant. Incredibly, Jesus says ...[text shortened]... ive and others find their way past the snare of doctrines and dogmas and vapid but pointless truths.

"Incredibly, Jesus says to the Centurion (we may assume he was a Roman pagan), 'go, your faith has healed him.' Not, note, that I, Jesus, have healed him by a miracle, but you, the Centurion, have healed him."

Unassisted? Really?

@divegeester said
LOL, here we go!

Avoid the question several times, hope all the obfuscation buries it and then write three paragraphs of blurb attacking me for asking the question in the first place.

A question which only requires a “yes” or a “no”.

You do seem to ask what you think are yes or no questions.

@kellyjay said
You do seem to ask what you think are yes or no questions.

Oh the irony.

@kellyjay said
The letters and gospels were written way before the Council of Nicea, what you don't
get is that even without Nicea they were already written and passed down to other
Christians, just not what you call, "authorized". God doesn't require a man-made
blessing, but uses man to do His work. Your point the church could not have
survived sounds reasonable if you take God out of ...[text shortened]... God in play, are not sources I'm concerned about, as some disagree with
them, pick your historian.

My suggestion is that you do some historical research and find out what the other writings contained which were not accepted into the canon and look into what the alternative Christian communities believed. If you look only at Paul’s chastising letters to a couple of those communities, you getting a very biased and one-dimensional view of a very complex phenomenon, the history of which the church does not want you to know. It requires considerable digging to get at what really happened, because the church was not and still is not interested in its own early history; the bishops at Nicea were not documenting what happened, they were consolidating power and propagating a specific narrative in pursuit of power.

@bigdogg said
"Incredibly, Jesus says to the Centurion (we may assume he was a Roman pagan), 'go, your faith has healed him.' Not, note, that I, Jesus, have healed him by a miracle, but you, the Centurion, have healed him."

Unassisted? Really?

I am highly skeptical of all so-called medical miracle stories in the Bible. Because there are no clear diagnoses what was troubling people in the first place; many so-called ailments, such as demonic possession, may have been entirely imaginary or psychosomatic, for which no divine intervention is required to explain a spontaneous remission, and second because the meanings of words have changed since biblical times. The original word which we now know as “leprosy” for example did not refer to Hansen’s Disease (caused by bacteria Mycobacterium leprae or Mycobacterium lepromatosis), it meant a skin rash (due to any cause). It did not require divine intervention to ‘cure’ someone of a rash.

So what was troubling the Centurion’s servant? Maybe just conversion-hysterical fear of his master, which spontaneously got better because the Centurion himself was humbled by his encounter with Jesus.

@kellyjay said
You do seem to ask what you think are yes or no questions.

And you do seem to avoid them.

It’s obvious why 😉

@moonbus said
I am highly skeptical of all so-called medical miracle stories in the Bible. Because there are no clear diagnoses what was troubling people in the first place; many so-called ailments, such as demonic possession, may have been entirely imaginary or psychosomatic, for which no divine intervention is required to explain a spontaneous remission, and second because the meanings o ...[text shortened]... hich spontaneously got better because the Centurion himself was humbled by his encounter with Jesus.

I, too, am skeptical about 'miracles', but that wasn't my point.

I'm focused on interpreting the story itself - what is the author trying to convey?

NIV gives this:
5 When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6 “Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed, suffering terribly.”

This doesn't sound like mere fear, although it is certainly vague on the actual ailment.

If the Centurion was a 'bad master' such that he instilled great fear in his servants, I can't imagine he would care enough about them to mention them to Jesus. Maybe if he was losing productivity, perhaps.

It's not a huge point; I just found your interpretation of the story a bit bizarre.

@moonbus said
My suggestion is that you do some historical research and find out what the other writings contained which were not accepted into the canon and look into what the alternative Christian communities believed. If you look only at Paul’s chastising letters to a couple of those communities, you getting a very biased and one-dimensional view of a very complex phenomenon, the histor ...[text shortened]... at happened, they were consolidating power and propagating a specific narrative in pursuit of power.

If you have something to add to the conversation add it, I been studying this for years. You think I have missed something highlight what I am lacking!

@kellyjay said
If you have something to add to the conversation add it, I been studying this for years.

I doubt you have studied any books that challenge your beliefs your whole adult life long. You certainly never post anything that suggests you have.

@divegeester said
LOL, here we go!

Avoid the question several times, hope all the obfuscation buries it and then write three paragraphs of blurb attacking me for asking the question in the first place.

A question which only requires a “yes” or a “no”.

Maybe he fears that if he answers a simple “yes” you’ll pounce on him with some non-trivial contradiction you’ve discovered somewhere in the sacred scrolls.