Announcement

Collapse

Unorthodox Theology 201 Guidelines

Theists only.

This forum area is primarily for persons who would identify themselves as Christians whether or not their theology is recognized within the mainstream or as orthodox though other theists may participate with moderator permission. Therefore those that would be restricted from posting in Christianity 201 due to a disagreement with the enumerated doctrines, ie the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment may freely post here on any theological subject matter. In this case "unorthodox" is used in the strict sense of a person who denies what has been declared as universal essentials of the historic Christian faith. Examples would be adherents to Oneness, Full Preterists, Unitarian Universalist Christians, Gnostics, Liberal Christianity, Christian Science to name a few.

The second purpose will be for threads on subjects, which although the thread starter has no issue with the above doctrines, the subject matter is so very outside the bounds of normative Christian doctrine totally within the leadership's discretion that it is placed here. In so doing, no judgment or offense is intended to be placed on the belief of said person in the above-doctrines. In this case "unorthodox" is used in a much looser sense of "outside the norms" - Examples of such threads would be pro-polygamy, pro-drug use, proponents of gay Christian churches, proponents of abortion.

The third purpose is for persons who wish to have input from any and all who would claim the title of Christian even on subjects that would be considered "orthodox."

The philosophy behind this area was to recognize that there are persons who would identify themselves as Christian and thus seem out of place in the Comparative Religions Forum, but yet in keeping with our committment here to certain basic core Christian doctrines. Also, it allows threads to be started by those who would want to still be identified as Christian with a particular belief that while not denying an essential is of such a nature that the discussion on that issue belongs in this section or for threads by persons who wish such a non-restricted discussion.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

What Jesus Really Meant (IMO)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
    This may seem radical, but what if Jesus meant exactly what He said?
    Exactly! The thing of it is that he spoke using metaphors - as, if and when I say "I am doing 'great'" it doesn't mean I am doing 'big' things! Hence the need for intelligence to be capable of more than 'simple' literal interpretations. Of course, if you think that, "they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" for instance really means that Jesus himself will appear in the sky and orbit the earth," that's your choice. Towards the end of the chapter, which I haven't yet gotten around to sharing, I say: "Jesus’ prescient depiction of the next such ‘coming’ event, wherein those who are prepared to do so soulfully ‘wake up’ to the Whole Truth and therefore enter into and thereafter continue to consciously live in communion with the Totality of Life while others ‘fall’ by the wayside and get recyled (so to speak), to wit: “As the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. … they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” (Matthew 24:27-30) [IMO] does not mean that he will then literally flash across the sky and be seen everywhere as he ‘gloriously’ orbits the planet in person. People who are emotionally invested in worshiping Jesus himself as a super-magical genie kind of God will undoubtedly regard the explanation that follows as being unacceptably heretical, but assuming you are not one such – why would you still be engaged in exploring this thesis otherwise? –let me submit that the above-quoted statement only makes real sense [u]if[/i] one interprets it metaphorically, with “heaven” being understood as referencing the realm of consciousness and (so) “the clouds” as referencing the particularities of ideological constellations, or philosophies, within it." I go on to discuss everything referenced in the quote from there.

    Stay tuned: Beside this, there are plenty of other similar examples in this regard which I discuss in the chapter.
    Last edited by davidsun; 07-17-2017, 11:23 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
      Deh. Were the quote [about "This my blood" etc.] to be considered in its entirety, there would be no way to make the claim. Considering half a quote (which is to say, taking it out of context), this and a host of other quotes can be wrested.
      Please do present and discuss your interpretation of "the quote" in its entirety, so I may know what you are talking about.

      I register the rest of your claims to understand the reality pertaining to Jesus, prophets, etc. I appreciate your sharing your contrasting views here. I obviously do not agree with them, however, as I present alternate views which I personally believe are more reality-oriented.
      Last edited by davidsun; 07-17-2017, 11:34 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by tabibito View Post
        there'd be no money in that.
        You seem to be implying that people who think differently than you do are 'in it' for the 'money'? What if they aren't ? I certainly am not! Have you considered the implications of that?

        Comment


        • #19
          You reply to "This may seem radical, but what if Jesus meant exactly what He said?" Sparko, to wit:

          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          unpossible!! He has to have secret meanings that only the specially blessed can understand!!! That way they can know they are the chosen ones and God likes them better than everyone else. duh.
          Reminded me of parable I rephrased on the books I wrote, to wit:

          "There is an excellent Hindu parable about a great seer who, out of the goodness of his heart, informed birds of all species about a terrible bird-catcher and warned them to beware because, sooner or later, the bird-catcher was bound to try and catch them. Not really up to the task of keeping close track of and publicly declaring the many clever ways in which the bird-catcher dis*guised himself, fooling themselves and others that they were adequately doing their duty, the parrots in the group diligently ‘served’ to pass on the warning, “Watch out for the bird-catcher,” from generation to generation. The wily bird-catcher found this quite to his liking since all he had to do was set up his nets and yell “I see the bird-catcher coming!” while pointing away from them. Birds galore would then fly right into his trap. Needless to say, instead of preying upon the parrots themselves, the bird-catcher would place those he caught in prominence positions to make sure that other birds would hear their ‘message’."

          The 'news', presenting supposed facts, sure gets convoluted!

          Comment


          • #20
            Thanking everyone for their responses, and picking up at the bottom of and continuing the text of my treatise (from post #8):

            What anyone thinks Jesus really meant when he used such and related phrases and why he or she imagines he chose to speak of God as ‘the Father’ and himself as ‘the Son’ (of said Father) will, of course, depend on his or her personal apprehension and understanding of metaphysical realities and ‘sense’ of what the mind-and-heart sets of the people around Jesus were like at the time. My own conclusions in this regard, which I proffer for consideration and contemplation, are that he used ‘the Father’ to reference the progenitive Source (hence, ‘the Creator’) of all existential being, and ‘the Son’ to reference the totality of said Creator’s Creation (d/b/a Creativity), in other words the Entity of Life as It exists and continues to express Itself in Being.

            Why did he choose to do so? I think because the people around him were much more likely to meaningfully and emotionally relate to what such Father and Son ‘figures’ symbolically represented and, consequently, pragmatically understand the nature of the relationship between said existential realities to functionally be as a result of having personally experienced parents and the blessings as well as the vicissitudes of being familial offspring themselves, more so at least than if he had referenced and spoken about such realities in abstract philosophical terms.

            Just imagine the silently questioning, “What the heck is this guy talking about?” blank stares that would be on the faces of people in a (hypothetical) movie crowd-scene wherein Deepak Chopra (one of today’s preeminent metaphysicians), after being science-fictionally transported back to Jesus’ time and setting, verbalized the same sorts of things that folks presently throng around him to hear: “Pure consciousness is your ground state and it is a field of infinite possibilities!” and “The field is organizing everything in creation: the movement of galaxies, the movement of stars, the rotation of the earth, the cycles of the seasons, the biological rhythms of our bodies, birds migrating at the right season to the right place, fish returning to their spawning grounds, the biological rhythms of nature as found in flowers, vegetation, and animals. It is literally a field of infinite organizing power. It can do an infinite number of things all at the same time and then correlate them with each other;” for instance.

            And contrast this with what you imagine the people who were actually there (around Jesus) then must have thought and felt on hearing him preach things like: “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?” (Matthew 7:7-11)

            Even in today’s world, I submit, those who haven’t intelligently grasped the implications of the postulates and research findings of Quantum Physics to the degree necessary to meaningfully comprehend the way in which such particle-wave, vibrating matter-energy concept based reality-paradigm ‘explains’ why and how and things ‘manifest’ – and, because only a small fraction of our population is capable of appreciating such abstractions, this references most folks on the planet at present – are much more likely to mentally and emotionally ‘groove’ with and consequently behaviorally operate in a positively functional, holistically co-relative manner using Jesus’ archetypal parent↔offspring schemata.

            Holistically co-relative insofar as they may personally be so oriented and inclined, that is. As I’m sure you know, the choices people make tend to be unsalutary and counterproductive to whatever degree their thoughts and emotions continue, as a result of conditioning and habituation, to stem from immediate personal-gratification seeking selfishness. This applies, to one degree or another, to every soul that is still in the process of maturing (spiritually speaking), which pretty much references everyone born on the planet, while still biologically young at least, because souls that have already matured, or ‘ripened’, to the point of becoming ‘perfectly’ (so to speak) holistic really have nothing more to learn and developmentally accomplish by way of incarnating as a personal-self locus in the context of a world comprised of sensorially separate nodes of Life, such as ours – except perhaps in exceptional cases, to munificently articulate the range of choices at hand and alert audiences to the consequences thereof as well as, by leading exemplary lives in said regards themselves, to catalytically spark the maturational ‘fruition’ of others at critical, ‘make or break’ junctures in history wherein those involved must either participatorily move ‘forward’ (in the context of Life’s dynamically evolutionary stream) by choosing to transcending selfish instincts and becoming more integrally related to others or spiritually regress and possibly even disintegrate (i.e. completely lose soulful coherency in relation to Life) if they ‘fail’ to do so.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by davidsun View Post
              You reply to "This may seem radical, but what if Jesus meant exactly what He said?" Sparko, to wit:



              Reminded me of parable I rephrased on the books I wrote, to wit:

              "There is an excellent Hindu parable about a great seer who, out of the goodness of his heart, informed birds of all species about a terrible bird-catcher and warned them to beware because, sooner or later, the bird-catcher was bound to try and catch them. Not really up to the task of keeping close track of and publicly declaring the many clever ways in which the bird-catcher dis*guised himself, fooling themselves and others that they were adequately doing their duty, the parrots in the group diligently ‘served’ to pass on the warning, “Watch out for the bird-catcher,” from generation to generation. The wily bird-catcher found this quite to his liking since all he had to do was set up his nets and yell “I see the bird-catcher coming!” while pointing away from them. Birds galore would then fly right into his trap. Needless to say, instead of preying upon the parrots themselves, the bird-catcher would place those he caught in prominence positions to make sure that other birds would hear their ‘message’."

              The 'news', presenting supposed facts, sure gets convoluted!
              so you are saying that you are twisting the words of Jesus to catch more birds?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                so you are saying that you are twisting the words of Jesus to catch more birds?
                No. Following the parable in question, I said: "(Note: even this parable, but of course minus the gist of the last sentence, has been used to ‘catch’ flocks gullible enough to think that a person telling such a wise story must necessarily be doing so to ‘save’ them.)
                P.S. I am presenting my interpretation (and claiming it to be no more and no less) of the words of Jesus as presented in the King James translation. Methinks, the notion that I am 'twisting' them is your ('twisted'? ) idea.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by davidsun View Post
                  No. Following the parable in question, I said: "(Note: even this parable, but of course minus the gist of the last sentence, has been used to ‘catch’ flocks gullible enough to think that a person telling such a wise story must necessarily be doing so to ‘save’ them.)
                  P.S. I am presenting my interpretation (and claiming it to be no more and no less) of the words of Jesus as presented in the King James translation. Methinks, the notion that I am 'twisting' them is your ('twisted'? )

                  idea.
                  oh. so you are saying that JESUS was the bird catcher who was tricking people then?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by davidsun View Post
                    Thanking everyone for their responses, and picking up at the bottom of and continuing the text of my treatise (from post #8):

                    What anyone thinks Jesus really meant when he used such and related phrases and why he or she imagines he chose to speak of God as ‘the Father’ and himself as ‘the Son’ (of said Father) will, of course, depend on his or her personal apprehension and understanding of metaphysical realities and ‘sense’ of what the mind-and-heart sets of the people around Jesus were like at the time. My own conclusions in this regard, which I proffer for consideration and contemplation, are that he used ‘the Father’ to reference the progenitive Source (hence, ‘the Creator’) of all existential being, and ‘the Son’ to reference the totality of said Creator’s Creation (d/b/a Creativity), in other words the Entity of Life as It exists and continues to express Itself in Being.

                    Why did he choose to do so? I think because the people around him were much more likely to meaningfully and emotionally relate to what such Father and Son ‘figures’ symbolically represented and, consequently, pragmatically understand the nature of the relationship between said existential realities to functionally be as a result of having personally experienced parents and the blessings as well as the vicissitudes of being familial offspring themselves, more so at least than if he had referenced and spoken about such realities in abstract philosophical terms.

                    Just imagine the silently questioning, “What the heck is this guy talking about?” blank stares that would be on the faces of people in a (hypothetical) movie crowd-scene wherein Deepak Chopra (one of today’s preeminent metaphysicians), after being science-fictionally transported back to Jesus’ time and setting, verbalized the same sorts of things that folks presently throng around him to hear: “Pure consciousness is your ground state and it is a field of infinite possibilities!” and “The field is organizing everything in creation: the movement of galaxies, the movement of stars, the rotation of the earth, the cycles of the seasons, the biological rhythms of our bodies, birds migrating at the right season to the right place, fish returning to their spawning grounds, the biological rhythms of nature as found in flowers, vegetation, and animals. It is literally a field of infinite organizing power. It can do an infinite number of things all at the same time and then correlate them with each other;” for instance.

                    And contrast this with what you imagine the people who were actually there (around Jesus) then must have thought and felt on hearing him preach things like: “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?” (Matthew 7:7-11)

                    Even in today’s world, I submit, those who haven’t intelligently grasped the implications of the postulates and research findings of Quantum Physics to the degree necessary to meaningfully comprehend the way in which such particle-wave, vibrating matter-energy concept based reality-paradigm ‘explains’ why and how and things ‘manifest’ – and, because only a small fraction of our population is capable of appreciating such abstractions, this references most folks on the planet at present – are much more likely to mentally and emotionally ‘groove’ with and consequently behaviorally operate in a positively functional, holistically co-relative manner using Jesus’ archetypal parent↔offspring schemata.

                    Holistically co-relative insofar as they may personally be so oriented and inclined, that is. As I’m sure you know, the choices people make tend to be unsalutary and counterproductive to whatever degree their thoughts and emotions continue, as a result of conditioning and habituation, to stem from immediate personal-gratification seeking selfishness. This applies, to one degree or another, to every soul that is still in the process of maturing (spiritually speaking), which pretty much references everyone born on the planet, while still biologically young at least, because souls that have already matured, or ‘ripened’, to the point of becoming ‘perfectly’ (so to speak) holistic really have nothing more to learn and developmentally accomplish by way of incarnating as a personal-self locus in the context of a world comprised of sensorially separate nodes of Life, such as ours – except perhaps in exceptional cases, to munificently articulate the range of choices at hand and alert audiences to the consequences thereof as well as, by leading exemplary lives in said regards themselves, to catalytically spark the maturational ‘fruition’ of others at critical, ‘make or break’ junctures in history wherein those involved must either participatorily move ‘forward’ (in the context of Life’s dynamically evolutionary stream) by choosing to transcending selfish instincts and becoming more integrally related to others or spiritually regress and possibly even disintegrate (i.e. completely lose soulful coherency in relation to Life) if they ‘fail’ to do so.
                    Oh! So you are ? Why didn't you just say so?

                    You fit right in.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                      oh. so you are saying that JESUS was the bird catcher who was tricking people then?
                      No. The people who interpret his teachings literally, without really undertstanding them, are the 'parrots' - who enlist more 'parrots' and catch and exploit even 'dumber' 'birds' with their help - are the ones doing that 'tricking'. In my book, Godspeak 2000 (available as a free download from my website), I referenced the same kind of phenomenon in relation to astrology/astrologers, by saying "Many who misguidedly follow traces of truth into the labyrinths of such speculation therefore get wrapped up in webs of self-sustaining illusion and become part of a circle of followers following followers, wherein the blind mislead the blind, unknowingly. And they then lose sight of vital sources of influence and overlook truly germane relationships—those involving parents, partners, progeny, fellow species members and members of fellow species."

                      Stay tuned for additional aspects of my ex-plain-ation re what historically became 'Christianity' as a phenomenon.
                      Last edited by davidsun; 07-17-2017, 08:52 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by davidsun View Post
                        No. The people who interpret his teachings literally, without really undertstanding them, are the 'parrots' - who enlist more 'parrots' and catch and exploit even 'dumber' 'birds' with their help - are the ones doing that 'tricking'. In my book, Godspeak 2000 (available as a free download from my website), I referenced the same kind of phenomenon in relation to astrology/astrologers, by saying "Many who misguidedly follow traces of truth into the labyrinths of such speculation therefore get wrapped up in webs of self-sustaining illusion and become part of a circle of followers following followers, wherein the blind mislead the blind, unknowingly. And they then lose sight of vital sources of influence and overlook truly germane relationships—those involving parents, partners, progeny, fellow species members and members of fellow species."

                        Stay tuned for additional aspects of my ex-plain-ation re what historically became 'Christianity' as a phenomenon.
                        Nobody thinks Jesus was speaking literally when he was telling parables. But his meaning was pretty clear, not some esoteric nonsense that took 2000 years until someone like you to come along and figure it out. You are not that special Dave. You are nuts.

                        Let's discuss one and see. Bring forth a parable of Jesus that you claim you know what he was really saying and let's see. Post the parable and your interpretation.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                          Nobody thinks Jesus was speaking literally when he was telling parables. But his meaning was pretty clear, not some esoteric nonsense that took 2000 years until someone like you to come along and figure it out. You are not that special Dave. You are nuts.

                          Let's discuss one and see. Bring forth a parable of Jesus that you claim you know what he was really saying and let's see. Post the parable and your interpretation.
                          Yes, I agree that there have been a fair number of folks who have IMO 'correctly' (metaphorically) interpreted and understood) what he meant to communicate by way of his parabolic' sayings, including his speaking of 'God' as being 'his' Father. I don't think I am 'special' in this regard. But relatively few (as far as I know) have attempted to 'set 'the record' straight, so to speak, by speaking of and to 'followers' who accept and buy into 'narrow-minded' 'self-serving' (letter of 'the word', instead of spirit of 'the word') interpretations thereof, just as there are relatively few 'Muslims' who expose and stand up to 'narrow-minded' 'self-serving' interpretations of the thangs Mohammad said - the same being true in my opinion 'in' every 'group' (category) of people in the world, I think - presumably because it suited them to not do so, the result being that people hewing to 'narrow-minded' 'self-serving' interpretations have been 'allowed' to spew and do dastardly 'stuff' to others (in particular) and humanity and our world (in general), in my opinion. Stay tuned for more of my 'metaphorical' interpretations - lets both 'see' if you do or don't acknowledge their validity, shall we?

                          Repeating the last couple of paragraphs of the prior excerpt as shared in post #20 (for context) and continuing on from there:

                          Edited by a Moderator
                          More to come
                          Last edited by ke7ejx; 07-18-2017, 02:58 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            That's what
                            - She

                            Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                            - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                            I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                            - Stephen R. Donaldson

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Edited by a Moderator
                              Originally posted by davidsun View Post

                              More to come
                              no 'more to come.' This isn't your blog site. This is a discussion site.

                              Either discuss or leave.

                              Now present a parable, then give us your interpretation. We can discuss. Don't just keep spamming your book. We unfortunately had to end up banning another member who would not obey the rules and kept spamming his blog.

                              Rules:


                              Advertising
                              Do not post on the board, in Private Message or email any content that are primarily intended for self-promotion or the advertising of any product, website, business, ministry, event or other entities (whether or not such advertising is for free resources) such as a website link without prior consent of a Moderator or Administrator. Advertisements such as a website link including a brief description are welcome in the Campus Life section personal profiles, journals and signature lines as long as they comply with the rules of the site. Whether or not a post is intended as advertisement is solely at the discretion of the moderators. If you are unsure, please contact an area moderator prior to posting.

                              Post Length Considerations
                              The maximum post length is 24K characters not including quoted material. Do not use multiple posts to circumvent this restriction. Please keep your points concise and limit the number of major points made in a debate/discussion to 1 or 2 per post max as this encourages discourse. Rebuttal posts get undesirably lengthy from both a writer's and a reader's perspective when there are too many points to address. Additionally, please allow the other person to respond to your post before making additional substantive posts and points directed towards that same person (i.e. back-to-back responses to a single post are not allowed.)
                              Last edited by ke7ejx; 07-18-2017, 02:59 PM.

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X