• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

most people on this forum probably agree religion is BS...but

TheDeceased said:
re: Hades,

Tartarus is the Greek hell, below/within the larger Hades underworld. It is also the word for the Christian hell in early Greek New Testament editions.



Jesus refers to hell recurringly throughout the gospel of Matthew.
Click to expand...

Is that so? I guess it depends on your interpretation. Also, it says the place reserved for satan and his followers. It doesn't say your average non-believers. That is all religious dogma to scare people into acting "correctly."
 
You may interpret the references to mean an allegorical hell but they are references to hell nonetheless. What is it exactly that you think is so great about the teachings of Christ? Personally I think his message is highly over-rated. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that he is the most over-rated philosopher and one of the most over-rated figures generally throughout history.
 
are you certain Jesus Christ is as whom others have taught you to be?

~ 3-Christo's

Edit:
heh, no?
the Logo' of our- mind body and spiritus.?

im not challenging, or fronting, just curious...
~ its interesting.
;-)
 
Last edited:
TheDeceased said:
What is it exactly that you think is so great about the teachings of Christ? Personally I think his message is highly over-rated. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that he is the most over-rated philosopher and one of the most over-rated figures generally throughout history.
Click to expand...

What's not to like about standing up to oppression, practicing forgiveness, and treating other people with loving compassion? What's amiss about criticizing those who invest too much in worldly fortunes and fleeting glories that just don't last, rather than developing one's inner light?

Is Jesus the first and only person to preach these values? Definitely not. These teachings are perennial, and are reiterated over and over again by wise people throughout human history. If someone lives by these precepts and is a quality person for living by them, I don't think it really matters whether they heard them from Jesus or from anyone else.

TheDeceased, if you find Jesus' messages objectionable, would you mind sharing with us a spiritual vision you do find acceptable, and explaining why you prefer it?
 
discountsnow said:
I have a hard time accepting anything simply on blind faith
Click to expand...
And yet...
There is today mounting physical evidence "the Tell el-Amarna Tablets"the importance is the description of Jerusalem as the capital city.
Click to expand...
What is this "mounting physical evidence"?

I have in my hands a translation of the Amarna Letters (Alfbright & Mendhall), which is one of the more widely-used scholarly (ie. accepting nothing on blind faith), that is if we were trust Canadian Universities at any rate. Understandable, as the translator puts biblical refs in the margins to let the reader compare, but makes it absolutely clear that nothing in the body of letters themselves (written in "vulgar Akkadian full of canaanitisms" according to the editor) constitutes as "evidence" for anything biblical if translated without poltico-religious agenda.

As for Jerusalem, are you refering to Letter EA-287, written by a "Prince* of Jerusalem"?

* As anyone who studies the Ancient Near east will tell you, "prince" in Semitic languages is a generic title for someone with authority - in and of itself, it says nothing of the magnitude of said authority. The new standard American lexicon of Biblical Hebrew tells us that the root (Root SRR, in Bib. Heb.: שׂרר) vaguely signifies "chieftain, chief, ruler, official, captain, prince" (cf. Brown-Driver-Briggs), then goes on for 2 pages in fine-print listing all the different uses of this word in Semitic languages.

But why should we even need to get into the semantics of titles? The Amarna letters are dated from the early 14th century B.C.E., specifically from the reign of Akhen-Aton (hence, Amarna). That was some half a millennium before Judea, back when Jerusalem was still a Canaanite city.

Blind faith? Sadly, another Christian westerner falls prey to the modern Israeli weapon of Politicized Archeology. I don't even need to search to be absolutely certain that a thousand and one "scholars" from Israel (and from Bumfuck, America) who "found conclusive evidence" in the Letters that validates Biblical historicity.


Anyway, Enki is right: you are proselytizing. People in this thread are sharing their opinions respectfully. You, on the other hand, barge in and talk everyone down. Please be more respectful of others and recognize that, on this forum, your opinion is no more (or less) important than any other, but only if you present as such.
 
Last edited:
MyDoorsAreOpen said:
What's not to like about standing up to oppression, practicing forgiveness, and treating other people with loving compassion? What's amiss about criticizing those who invest too much in worldly fortunes and fleeting glories that just don't last, rather than developing one's inner light?

Is Jesus the first and only person to preach these values? Definitely not. These teachings are perennial, and are reiterated over and over again by wise people throughout human history. If someone lives by these precepts and is a quality person for living by them, I don't think it really matters whether they heard them from Jesus or from anyone else.

TheDeceased, if you find Jesus' messages objectionable, would you mind sharing with us a spiritual vision you do find acceptable, and explaining why you prefer it?
Click to expand...

Thank you! You took the words out of my mouth. I couldn't have said it better.
 
TheDeceased, if you find Jesus' messages objectionable
Click to expand...

Um, when did I say that?

I asked what is so great about Christ and I said that I thought his message was over-rated. When did I say I found it objectionable? You're totally misinterpreting what I said.

I just think most of what he teaches is obvious, and as you've said, it has been preached by many people throughout history.

The point I'm making is the one you agreed with. He is not the only person to have said these basic messages. They have been repeated as you said throughout history. So why is he so great? My point still stands, in fact you've helped me confirm it.

Jesus is plastered all over my society. There are crosses everywhere. People are amazed by the man. He is so incredible. I don't get it. He's just one of the many holy men throughout history preaching pretty much the exact same message, isn't he?

That's all I was saying.

Not that I don't think his message is a "good" one but that it is not really his message, yet he gets an extraordinary amount of credit for it for some reason in a lot of western societies, as if no-one else who has ever existed has said the same thing.

me said:
what's left when you strip away the bullshit from the story of Christ? Almost everything in the story is clearly untrue. If you take all that out, what you're left with is a travelling philosopher. And although the general tone of his message is positive, it is not particularly profound or well articulated. It certainly doesn't warrant the sort of attention that he is given to this day. A lot of it is derivative of the Old Testament and various other unrelated holy texts and ancient philosophies.
Click to expand...

Pythagoras said:
As for being derivative of the Old Testament I couldn't agree more
Click to expand...

It seems that Pythagoras agrees also.
 
TheDeceased said:
Um, when did I say that?

I asked what is so great about Christ and I said that I thought his message was over-rated. When did I say I found it objectionable? You're totally misinterpreting what I said.

I just think most of what he teaches is obvious, and as you've said, it has been preached by many people throughout history.

The point I'm making is the one you agreed with. He is not the only person to have said these basic messages. They have been repeated as you said throughout history. So why is he so great? My point still stands, in fact you've helped me confirm it.

Jesus is plastered all over my society. There are crosses everywhere. People are amazed by the man. He is so incredible. I don't get it. He's just one of the many holy men throughout history preaching pretty much the exact same message, isn't he?

That's all I was saying.

Not that I don't think his message is a "good" one but that it is not really his message, yet he gets an extraordinary amount of credit for it for some reason in a lot of western societies, as if no-one else who has ever existed has said the same thing.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. You're saying it's not the spiritual message that's overrated, so much as Jesus as the best or only example of it. I think we're in basic agreement -- the fundamentalists really miss the whole point of Jesus' message with their 'my way or the highway' attitude.

I think it's a good thing that in this day and age, young people in the West are reaching out to a variety of different wisdom teachers and traditions from all across the globe and from all throughout time. You could say it's a freer spiritual marketplace than in generations gone by, and Jesus and the institutions that follow him don't have a monopoly anymore. Hopefully this competitive situation will be conducive to religious groups staying abreast with the real needs of the lives of followers.
 
All your replies to wrote stuff himself, does not mean the written word thast has come down to us is the same as that which was written.

Philo mentions the Thereputate, but gives little detail, hence the theory that they were an early X sect.

Or you reply that someone else wrote about them in detail...isn't that what the Gospel writers did with Jesus?

And you are missing the wider point that evidence of absence is not absence of evidence, as with the Troy example.

As for Arius (you don't need to tell me about the Arian Controversy), his writings are lost to us. In fact much of the writings of the period are lost to us.

As for the Church Fathers prior to Eusebius cannot be'said' to have done anything, as Eusebius was writing long after they were dead, using various sources...remind you of another character - namely Jesus.

The writer of the Gnostic Gospels created either non-epigrapha or nullepigrapha. We do not even know their names so the claim we know their writings points to their existence is weaker by degree than that of Jesus. Are you contending that they knew Ialdaboath, Adam, Eve...personally???
Their writings are heavily mythological.

I would be most excited to hear of the eye-witness accounts of Simon Magus (that would be a rare find indeed).

Again, your responses belie you misunderstanding of Ancient History (who wern't paty to the Hegelian Dialectic), and evidence for whom is second hand, lies awaiting discovery within the earth.

I believe you are placing increasingly impossible tests to meet your hypothesis. I think I've indulged you so far as I'm prepared to. Research the topic yourself (that means more than reading one book), then come back with detailed, cogent analysis.
 
Derivative vs Midrash

TheDeceased said:
Originally Posted by Pythagoras
As for being derivative of the Old Testament I couldn't agree more
Click to expand...


It seems that Pythagoras agrees also.
Click to expand...

This taken out of context. The Gospels are Midrash on the OT. Understand what midrash is then you will understand that it is not simple derivative.
 
You should rad a book called "Living Buddha, Living Christ" by Thich Nhat Hanh. He is a Vietnamese Buddhist who compares the lives and work of Christ and Buddha. It is a very informative book on a spiritual level, and it helps you to clip the chains of your religious bondage.
 
An open apology, clearly I was out of le

It is not my intention to offend nor proselytize anyone.

From my own personal experience, in my own life, my own experience, not brainwashed, not tricked, nor mislead, my decision to accept God was the greatest single decision I have ever made. All the cash I have had made, all the narcotics, and alcohol I used, nothing can come close to what I have today.

I do not believe in proselytizing anyone it does more harm than good.

In my experience, my own research, there is more than enough evidence that there is a God and the Bible is true. This is what I believe.
I realize that there are many who hold a differing view and I respect that. However some of the statements that religion is bs, and Christianity is a cult
from my own experience are just disheartening to read and do not have a basis in fact.

In my own experience I use to wonder what would happen to me when I died.
Now today I have that answered.
I believe that there is a Heaven and a Hell. This is my own belief.

Another important truth that really struck me was (my own belief) that God, who created people, created people with a free will. He did not create a people to worship Him. He gave them choice.

It is my opinion that in the old testament there are numerous predictions that proclaim Jesus Christ will be born.
It is my opinion that Jesus did come, and died, and rose again. This only what I believe.
In my opinion the bible does predict that Israel would be restored, just like it was in 1948.
In my opinion I believe the bible to predict that the ancient European Countries as in the old testament would also be restored and have a common currency.
In my opinion I also believe the bible predicts that one day we would have a system of government that would be one based a world or Global Government.
That we would have a global ID which would be required that all must have.
To see that these have been fulfilled or on nearing fulfillment strengthen my belief.
Let me be clear this what I believe, it is shared not to disrespect how anyone else see things.
As I stated before my personal decision about religion was the most important decision I ever made.
 
girlygrrl said:
The religion that makes the most sense is Taoism. I'm a simulist though.
Click to expand...

Interesting, a self-declared simulist. Perhaps for the other posters you would succinctly outline simulist beliefs for us.

Understand if you can't be arsed :)
 
*Re-opened* I've cleaned up this thread some. It broke in my opinion with members arguing personality stuff and not moving forward with the topic.

If it gets right back into expressions of problems with each other instead of discussion of ideas will be closed again.

If anyone feels that I didn't clear enough out or should have cleared more please PM rather than doing it in the thread. Thanks.
 
dogma based religions only confine the soul to the said religion's "certain truths". philosophies,however,bend like branches in a light breeze.adapting to the current climate or atmosphere,if you will. I admit that my dedication to the philosophy I feel closest to is not enough to say.."I am a _____". But of all the Eastern philosophies,I identify most with The Tao. I am not a Taoist in the most definitive sense,but I strive to follow The Way that is my life,in this-my time. The Tao is deeply personal to each who chooses to follow The Way, whereas religions are etched in ancient absolutes with no room to explore this life in a way that acclimates to the ever changing world that surrounds us,that is us-as individuals and also as the human race.
This is simply my opinion and I hope that semantics do not take away from my point.

This is also my 1st post here-although I have been dying to join in. I was an English/Philosophy double major for over 2 years before I changed Universities(bc my current university has the best English Dept. in the state,but sadly this institution does not offer Philosophy as a major). To be honest I am 34 and have not yet finished my BA. I am close,however,and I have been chipping away at this base degree whenever time,money and state of mind,body and soul have allowed me to over the years. I am a loner,a seeker. I am thirsty for knowledge and am always cramming my brain full of as much information as I can.
I feel silly justifying my "credentials". at least that is what is feel like I am doing. But i have lurked these threads for years and it is out of respect for all of you who so fearlessly engage in debate they way I did in my youth and before a near fatal accident in 2006 changed the outline that I had mapped out for my life. I know my reply to the topic was weak at best,but I assure you my anxiety is very much to blame.
Sorry to turn this into a "social thread" or "introduce yourself" post. I just want very much to be a contributor here and these are the words that have made their way to this post,as a starting place to interact with the lot of you.
Thanks for letting me be awkward and afraid. It is a huge roadblock on my current path.
peace and love...................skillz
 
Welcome skillz-4-thrillz

Glad you've been enjoying the show. This thread was getting messay and was about to be closed but thankfuly the mods pruned it and reminded us of the civility required for engagement in P&S.

Read the MyDoorsAreOpen and Jamshyd's excellent guide to how we should play fair with each other. Its a great resource and can be found HERE

Welcome to the digital Academy:):)

PS- I have learnt more here (followed up by research) than I think I ever did in my undergraduate degree.
 
^^
0oo0??


Is that meant to be sarcastic,

'DAWKINSISM"

What on earth is that?
 
"
Welcome to the digital Academy

PS- I have learnt more here (followed up by research) than I think I ever did in my undergraduate degree.
Click to expand...
"

- Pythagoras

... i can see how you are not joking -- a place where religions and aspects of religion are discussed, and debated openly and civilly is far more then educational... its one of the greatest signs of civil-coexistence, a right and threat to many, something to take note of (and many notes on!)


*but what ever that comment is above, is not good enough i dont think, to derail this discussion.
- a demanding/commanding lurker*
;-p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top