The self-confidence of thiests

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Of what importance is "esoteric tradition"? What is important is truth. It seems to me that those who "recognise each other, respect each other and know where each is coming from" recognize, respect and know the truth in others.

I believe Jesus recognized this also.
John 8:32
So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, "If you continue in ...[text shortened]... ", "Christian fundamentalists", "monopoly" and "fundamentalists" in general.

Unfortunately "Christianity", as a whole, does not have the teachings of Jesus at it's core. ---ToO------



What you really mean is that you have one interpretation of Jesus and Christianity has another and you disagree. That would be fine if you said that , but you don't . You continue to pretend that Jesus teaches this and that based on a selective reading of what he said. That's why you can't and won't explore any of his other teachings.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Unfortunately "Christianity", as a whole, does not have the teachings of Jesus at it's core. ---ToO------



What you really mean is that you have one interpretation of Jesus and Christianity has another and you disagree. That would be fine if you said that , but you don't . You continue to pretend that Jesus teaches this and that based on a select ...[text shortened]... ading of what he said. That's why you can't and won't explore any of his other teachings.

What I meant is what I said.

Why do you follow me around from thread to thread? Is it to inform others that I have "one interpretation of Jesus and Christianity has another"? That's not what you said when you declared your personal vendatta against me. You continue to talk out both sides of your mouth.

You're the one who reads Jesus selectively. You can't see Jesus for Paul. Your delusions continue.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
What I meant is what I said.

Why do you follow me around from thread to thread? Is it to inform others that I have "one interpretation of Jesus and Christianity has another"? That's not what you said when you declared your personal vendatta against me. You continue to talk out both sides of your mouth.

You're the one who reads Jesus selectively. You can't see Jesus for Paul. Your delusions continue.

I'm not following you and it's no vendetta. I have an obligation to counter your fake jesus and expose the flimsiness of your position.

Your position is supported by a selective reading of the entire range of what Jesus actually taught and yet you pretend that your position is based on Jesus's teachings. At the same time you refuse to explore anything Jesus said or did if it doesn't fit your fake jesus.

So in simple terms you are claiming something which you know is not true. Until you explore or evidence the WHOLE of what jesus taught then you have no right to make the claims that you do. This makes you disingenuous. The moment you sit down and take a good hard look at everything he did , said and taught then I'll get off your back , but the problem is you can't support your position without being selective.

You also claim I am following Paul or something even when I exclusively use only the words of jesus to counter you. My recent argument has been met with a deafening slience. You have no answer or coherent ideas about "when he the comforter comes he will guide you into all truth". If you had a psotion on these words and teachings of jesus you would have shot me down by now. I can only assume you just pretend to yourself that jesus didn't say half of the things he did say. Maybe a few pages have actually fallen out of your copy of the NT?

Your fake jesus is a lie and I stand opposed to you in the name of the real and living Christ who is alive in the Holy Spirit today. If you want to know the real Jesus just ask him , he's standing right next to you.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I'm not following you and it's no vendetta. I have an obligation to counter your fake jesus and expose the flimsiness of your position.

Your position is supported by a selective reading of the entire range of what Jesus actually taught and yet you pretend that your position is based on Jesus's teachings. At the same time you refuse to explore anyth ...[text shortened]... ay. If you want to know the real Jesus just ask him , he's standing right next to you.

For someone who isn't following me, you sure seem to find a way to spew your venom pretty much wherever I post.

Your "arguments" are met with silence because as I have told you many times, you have shown time and again that your delusions render you incapable of having a rational discussion.

Evidently Clearlight has drawn the same conclusion for those of your ilk:
"They can't even begin to grasp how deluded they are so talking to them is a waste of time in my opinion."

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
For someone who isn't following me, you sure seem to find a way to spew your venom pretty much wherever I post.

Your "arguments" are met with silence because as I have told you many times, you have shown time and again that your delusions render you incapable of having a rational discussion.

Evidently Clearlight has drawn the same conclusion for t begin to grasp how deluded they are so talking to them is a waste of time in my opinion."

However , what I have posted is not venom , it is a robust challenge to your position. I'm past feeling angry , I feel more a sense of pity that you don't know who the living Jesus really is. To you he is just a series of teachings in a book but not alive. You seem to have no interest in the living Jesus who is present via the Spirit NOR do you ever seem to want to explore his words on this. I fail to see what's irrational about this.


I have shown you time and time again that my argument against you is grounded in you logic and your rules (the teachings of Jesus). You keep bringing up the omniscience thing but that was a thread away from the one we were having anyway.

The simple fact is that you seem happy to "waste time" slagging me off when you could easily just engage with a discussion. Your "waste of time" argument is pure BS and we both know it. The fact is you dare not leave your comfort zones but take a presumptious , arrogant position with everyone. You only cheat yourself in the end because you will know in your heart of hearts that there's a whole area of Jesus's teachings you dare not explore. It wouldn't matter if I gave up pointing this out tommorrow , the knowledge will still be there. The Holy Spirit will always remind you of what Jesus taught about himself. You can supress it or pretend it's not there but he did say those things and you have no answer for them.

"I can only assume that you haven't answered my question because you don't have an answer." ---ToO-----

Originally posted by knightmeister
However , what I have posted is not venom , it is a robust challenge to your position. I'm past feeling angry , I feel more a sense of pity that you don't know who the living Jesus really is. To you he is just a series of teachings in a book but not alive. You seem to have no interest in the living Jesus who is present via the Spirit NOR do you ever se ...[text shortened]... ou haven't answered my question because you don't have an answer." ---ToO-----

If you want to see BS, just look at your post. You can't even make an honest post. How could you have an honest discussion?

YOU are irrational.

Every once in a while, I'll come across a co-worker who is incompetent, but doesn't know he's incompetent. Invariably he's so confident in his abilities that he can't see reality. You exhibit all the same traits. You should seek professional help.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
If you want to see BS, just look at your post. You can't even make an honest post. How could you have an honest discussion?

YOU are irrational.

Every once in a while, I'll come across a co-worker who is incompetent, but doesn't know he's incompetent. Invariably he's so confident in his abilities that he can't see reality. You exhibit all the same traits. You should seek professional help.

What was dishonest about my post? Your posts have become so vague and unsubstantiated I don't really know.

For some time now I have been pursuing a consistent line with you regarding your selectiveness when it comes to Jesus's teachings and words. From the very start (and this goes back months) I have made the point that you selectively emphasize only one aspect of Jesus's teachings and have little or nothing to say about EVERYTHING he teaches.

You and I both know that journalists who are selective are dishonest . It's completely rational to assume that Jesus and what he taught should be looked at in a way that encompasses evrything he taught , said and did. Nowhere does it say in the NT that some verses are to be stressed above others. At the very least one should have an interpretation of all his teachings together rather than just ignoring the ones that you don't like. I apply this logic to myself as well as you. This is why I have never dismissed the verses you quote , how can I? Jesus said them and meant them. I have never said that it's easy either , but rationally I have to look at everything he said and did as well.

I have no idea why you think this is irrational? Can you make a reasoned case as to why it's irrational to think this way?

Originally posted by knightmeister
What was dishonest about my post? Your posts have become so vague and unsubstantiated I don't really know.

For some time now I have been pursuing a consistent line with you regarding your selectiveness when it comes to Jesus's teachings and words. From the very start (and this goes back months) I have made the point that you selectively emphasize is irrational? Can you make a reasoned case as to why it's irrational to think this way?

Time Warner Cable has a commercial with a guy who reminds me of you. It goes something like this:

"Satellite hates puppies."

"FACT: Satellite costs more than cable."

"FACT: You can buy a lot of dog food with the extra money."

"FACT: Puppies love dog food."

"THEREFORE: Satellite hates puppies."

You two have similar "logic" systems. Like I keep trying to tell you: Logic and rational thought are not your strengths.

What's particularly sad is that if you could bring yourself to admit that they aren't strengths, there's probably no other reason that they couldn't be.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Time Warner Cable has a commercial with a guy who reminds me of you. It goes something like this:

"Satellite hates puppies."

"FACT: Satellite costs more than cable."

"FACT: You can buy a lot of dog food with the extra money."

"FACT: Puppies love dog food."

"THEREFORE: Satellite hates puppies."

You two have similar "logic" systems. Like I ...[text shortened]... t they aren't strengths, there's probably no other reason that they couldn't be.

If you stopped waffling on about puppies and satellites and stuck to the topic in hand we might get somewhere.

Your logic is that the teachings of Jesus should be taken very seriously and so my logic has been to use this position of yours and reverse it on to you by quoting Jesus's clear teachings on how we are to be guided into all truth (When he the Comforter comes....)

So if my logic is irrational then you are only hammering yourself really because I borrowed it from you in the first place. And what do you say to counter my argument? ...very little that's relevant or on topic. Do you not realise how silly you make yourself look?

Originally posted by knightmeister
If you stopped waffling on about puppies and satellites and stuck to the topic in hand we might get somewhere.

Your logic is that the teachings of Jesus should be taken very seriously and so my logic has been to use this position of yours and reverse it on to you by quoting Jesus's clear teachings on how we are to be guided into all truth (When he ...[text shortened]... .very little that's relevant or on topic. Do you not realise how silly you make yourself look?

Since you keep missing the message, I'll repeat it. There's no point in trying to have a meaningful discussion with a person who has shown time and again that he is incapable of doing so.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]Of what importance is "esoteric tradition"?

Hi ThinkOfOne,

The esoteric traditions are traditionally taught to advanced practitioners only - the practices require a good deal of study, understanding and commitment rather than blind faith in simplistic dogma.

Originally posted by clearlight
Hi ThinkOfOne,

The esoteric traditions are traditionally taught to advanced practitioners only - the practices require a good deal of study, understanding and commitment rather than blind faith in simplistic dogma.

Hi clearlight,

I understand what an esoteric tradition is. What I don't understand is why it isn't an "open tradition". The teaching of "blind faith in simplistic dogma" seems counterproductive. If anything, it keeps many away from truth. It seems to me that ultimately the realization of truth is borne of love. One can be committed to study, but without love the realizations will never come. Even realization that comes from repentance is borne of love.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Hi clearlight,

I understand what an esoteric tradition is. What I don't understand is why it isn't an "open tradition". The teaching of "blind faith in simplistic dogma" seems counterproductive. If anything, it keeps many away from truth. It seems to me that ultimately the realization of truth is borne of love. One can be committed to study, but withou ...[text shortened]... ealizations will never come. Even realization that comes from repentance is borne of love.

I think the reason why many esoteric traditions are not open is because they are very powerful and therefore one's motivation for practice is crucial. I agree with your comments re. blind faith but simplistic dogma Does attract millions as well as put off millions. As for your comment about Love I can only agree. Universal compassion and the desire to become a Buddha for the benefit of all is considered to be the only real qualification for initition into the esoteric branch of Buddhism for example.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Hi clearlight,

I understand what an esoteric tradition is. What I don't understand is why it isn't an "open tradition".

Because it can be dangerous. You can mess your mind up badly with, eg., Kabbalah or Tibetan buddhism. Also practitioners in some countries would keep things secret so as not to furnish public entertainment at an auto da fe. But now you can read about the secret traditions in any well stocked bookshop.

Originally posted by clearlight
I think the reason why many esoteric traditions are not open is because they are very powerful and therefore one's motivation for practice is crucial. I agree with your comments re. blind faith but simplistic dogma Does attract millions as well as put off millions. As for your comment about Love I can only agree. Universal compassion and the desire to be ...[text shortened]... be the only real qualification for initition into the esoteric branch of Buddhism for example.

For my comments regarding "blind faith but simplistic dogma", I was thinking of those who believe it to be truth. This seems quite harmful.