|
|
did jesus teach.....andrew said Dec 31, 2008, 11:24 AM: |
||
|
the truth of all religion? or did he teach that the world was under the 'spell' of spiritual deception and corruption? |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Nicole said Dec 31, 2008, 11:36 AM: |
||
|
Guess it all depends on the perspective, eh, andrew? |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Dec 31, 2008, 3:01 PM: |
||
|
hey there budette! best wishes to you and everyone on the god pod in 2009……… it should be another interesting year……….. peace to you,too, andrew.
|
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Will said Dec 31, 2008, 3:18 PM: |
||
|
…I recall that Yeshua taught of only two commandments… |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Dec 31, 2008, 3:35 PM: |
||
|
hi will, that might imply that all religion is unnecessary and redundant, and perhaps even deceptive and corrupt……..surely the worlds religions are not following those 2 injunctions……… |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Dec 31, 2008, 5:19 PM: |
||
|
and also will, on a planet where one has a worldwide monetary system as the only means of survival then i tend to think that it's near impossible to fulfill the first injunction, because one will by necessity have to place a very high priority on money, making it most difficult to serve two masters, so to speak. and also, when the monetary system is combined with capitalist ideology then the 2nd injunction is near impossible to fulfill also. one will eventually look at their neighbors as objects to be exploited for profit, at least that's how it seems to me……. this seems like a conundrum that is near impossible for anyone to figure out. unless, there was a failsafe mechanism that has been miraculously implanted into the system…………
|
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Dec 31, 2008, 7:15 PM: |
||
|
hello Andrew…. The Judeo=Christian Scriptures state the LOVE of money is the root of evil.
i agree, that is what it teaches…….. Money itself is just a representation or more functional way of exchanging goods or services, a smarter barter system. yes, the evolution of money i believe,is much more convenient than carrying 20 cows around. Seen in this light, money itself is worthless unless people see value in it and are prepared to use it as an exchange. it seems the whole population of the planet has been convinced of the value and necessity of this mode of exchange. i am not so sure that people are mistaking it for a god; but rather, it's the all-pervasive, all-encompassing system that this mode of exchange has generated that may be making it near to impossible for humans to meet the 2 injunctions that will posted. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Dec 31, 2008, 7:31 PM: |
||
|
' if you look at a man or woman with lust in your heart you've committed adultery.'…………. in a way, this is the same conundrum. we have overwhelming built in behavior mechanisms that make most of us lust in one way or another. money and it's necessity is creating the same conditioned responses…. perhaps the only way out of this is not deceptive and corrupt religious systems; but rather, the grace that was given freely to the whole world……
|
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Opening said Jan 1, 3:59 AM: |
||
|
Jesus taught quite a few things that don't fit into the daily comings and goings in our lives unless we make it so. You don't have to love money to make money. You don't have to withold love of your neighbor in order to work and be successful. Our society just encourages love of money and competition to a level that is immoral according to scripture. We make the choice as to if we will live our lives in this way. Remember another verse “Be in this world but not of this world.” |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Attainment said Jan 1, 3:34 AM: |
||
|
Why do you speak of the dead, when the Living One is here before you? |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Rusty said Jan 1, 4:07 AM: |
||
|
Hello all, I am new to this site so let me introduce myself quickly. Rusty is the name. I'm in South Africa, Cape Town. Grew up here in the sixties/seventies and lived for 24 years in a small coastal town but was divorced last year and am now back in a deeply urban setting. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Rusty said Jan 1, 7:16 AM: |
||
|
Each of us will, according to our preference, pick on our own biblical quote which we think is the most definitive teaching of Jesus. I have always liked his “The Kingdom of Heaven is on Earth and only those who can see it will appreciate that.” Naturally that is a paraphrasing, I haven't memorised the bible. I also found that particular spin in the Gospel of St Thomas (an apochryphal gospel) but he mentions the Kingdom of Heaven or sometimes God as being on Earth in the regular gospels. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Timothy Paul said Jan 1, 8:04 AM: |
||
|
From the Thomas Gospel: |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....mikeS said Jan 1, 9:26 AM: |
||
|
yes and there is the crux of the whole paradox. If the kingdom of god or that which we call heaven, is “within” then it would seem to make sense that it makes absolutely no difference what you do 'outside.' |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Timothy Paul said Jan 1, 9:33 AM: |
||
|
From The Course In Miracles regarding idols: III. Beyond All Idols |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....mikeS said Jan 1, 9:41 AM: |
||
|
Wonderful selection, Timothy! |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Timothy Paul said Jan 1, 9:59 AM: |
||
|
I am currenlty working on a piece about New Years resolutions and “purpose” and how our purpose can become our idols. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Jan 1, 10:19 AM: |
||
|
thx. everyone for all your passionate heartfelt responses……. those rabbi's are certainly not alone when it comes to acts of trespassing against each other, specifically in the religious context. the new atheists argue that these religious folks are following their scripture all too accurately. nonetheless, i still have a tough time accepting followers of jesus committing these acts of aggression and violence, which is the theme of my post. perhaps if jesus hadn't tricked us and came wearing a swastika and army boots i might be more sympathetic to christian zionism and other forms of christian aggression. i tend to agree with openings sentiments but also believe that it is not possible to live without 'sin' at this time on this earth; hence, the grace that was offered freely by god. however, if the adversaries of god have been given dominion over this earth for a season, then it's logical to expect their system to be in direct opposition with and to the highest ideals of yeshua's teachings. also, if jesus was who he says he was then it is certainly possible that he will reveal that to all the nations of the earth at some point in time…… my own feeling on that matter is if and when that happens the christian church will be more surprised and shocked than the islamic world or even; dare i say it, the integralites……lol
|
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Opening said Jan 1, 11:58 AM: |
||
|
For me, churches, religion, are not where God is found. Attending church feels good; and, so I do it. It helps me to remember and to hear of God's work in the context of life on this Earth. Yet, when I really want to do work with myself through God, I have to take the time to be alone with him. In Matthew this is what Jesus directs when he says to go alone into an inner chamber. Within is where I speak to God and feel him move in me. I also feel this at times when out in nature, when looking at my son, when playing with my dogs. God is everywhere and in everything. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Mr. said Jan 1, 12:39 PM: |
||
|
That is because religion is not God. Religion is mankind's way of trying to explain God. Christ did not found a religion. Others did after him. Prophets do not found religions. Others found them in their name. Religion is a beautiful framework on which to base a belief in God or have a way to communally worship. God communicates with everyone. Few take the time to listen. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Mr. said Jan 1, 12:40 PM: |
||
|
And The Lord speaks to you through them as well. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Jan 1, 2:13 PM: |
||
|
i would imagine that no one is going to offer me a seat on the ecumenical councils:) once again though, i am left with the feeling that heaven and the angels are very very confused over the nature of reality; in fact, more so then we are, or so it appears to me anyway. why would gabriel appear to mary and tell her she was going to be the fulfillment of prophecy and give birth to the savior of the world, and then show up centuries later to muhammad contradicting what he told mary and setting the world on it's path to the apocalypse that is being played out on the world stage today. and don't even get me on the angelic writings and channeling that is all completely contradictory throughout history………. at this point i'm tempted to throw my arms up in the air and join the post-metaphysical, postmodern rational deconstructionists!lol
|
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Andrew [no longer around] said Jan 1, 7:53 PM: |
||
|
Come join the ranks of the pan-milleniests andrew |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Rusty said Jan 1, 11:56 PM: |
||
|
The Russians(? East European at any rate) use the nested dolls here as a metaphor. You know the dolls that break open to expose an identical doll within it and theres an identical doll within that etc. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Nicole said Jan 2, 10:44 AM: |
||
|
Timothy Paul, thanks for bringing in the Course of Miracles. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Mr. said Jan 2, 5:38 PM: |
||
|
Andrew, |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....andrew said Jan 2, 10:20 PM: |
||
|
thx. Andrew, i think i like the pan-millennialist perspective… Mr.- there are certainly many who share the perspective that jesus was just one of many of a seemingly endless amount of prophets. i certainly don't discount that possibility, but surely you are aware that there are many who believe that he was much more than an 'ordinary' prophet; in fact, many believe that he was the fulfillment of all the old testament prophecies about the messiah-or god incarnate. is this a viable perspective? i certainly have no desire to persuade you or anyone else (not in my job description) however, assuming for a moment that he is who he said he was then perhaps he has the ability to persuade you and everyone else on this earth. many would call this the revelation of god through the christ…………. sorry folks, i'm probably the wrong person to ask if your looking for validation about the mountains of channeled information from angels,aliens and dis-incarnate entities. it's all contradictory in my opinion…..
|
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Patty said Jan 3, 5:22 AM: |
||
|
reading through this discussion I can only take that certain deep breath - and hold it a second…….. there are millions of words that can be spoken, thrown back and forth like a football, accepted, rejected, 'agreed with' (my favorite)….. Yet it remains that fish swim in water but don't know they are wet. this little paragraph contains something in it, between the lines, that keeps me coming back, to poke around, ponder some ….. 'Duality, or the idea that man is separated in his essence and identity from the Totality we call God, has spawned innumerable religious concepts and a mind-boggling maze of philosophies that attempt to address the apparent paradox that although man is created in the image and likeness of God, he lives far below his potential and many times, with considerably less integrity than an animal. The fact that duality is taught as truth within the hallowed halls of mind-made religion, is a further indictment upon a flawed system which solidifies it adherents in the very bondage from which it professes to offer freedom. Jesus said that the Kingdom of God is within you, and yet many are waiting in time for the Kingdom to appear in the sky. (or in a formula, philosophy, channeling, etc) and then of course there is this: “Leave all, follow Me,” is a big command. It causes you to “judge not from appearances, but to judge righteous judgment.” To many this has been a sermon on charity, but it is anything but this. It is moving into this new dimension and disregarding the laws of the lower dimension and the results accruing there from. The story of the shadow kingdom or the realm of the two dimensional plane, where a chalk line constituted a prison, beautifully illustrates this point. The story continues that a three-dimensional being one day entered this kingdom and found a man in a prison made of a single chalk line circle. Getting into communication with this shadow being, he was finally persuaded to stand up. To his amazement, when he was standing up, he no longer knew anything about prison. He could completely disregard the appearances, for in the three-dimensional world a chalk line does not constitute a prison. No time is spent in “overcoming,” “setting aside,” or “getting rid ” of the prison as long as the man is standing up, for he is in the next dimension. Jesus, coming to a world imprisoned in a network of ugly Conscious-Thinking, so crystallized and solidified by centuries of beliefs and findings, spent no time in fighting the appearances (“put up your sword; ye do not need to fight”), because in the dimension of Jesus Christ, that which constituted a prison on the former dimension was nothing but a symbolic “chalk line” to the present elevation of consciousness. This chalk line of belief may be anything from am actual prison to an imaginary network of repressions of inhibitions. It might be anything from the most loathsome case of leprosy to the faintest headache — yea, it might be the putrefying flesh soiling its winding-sheet with corruption of death, or the dead, futile shroud of life's Te Deum. They are all “chalk lines” to the new dimension. Gradually, man begins to see that at no time was Jesus Christ fighting the so-called problems of the human mind. He did not inquire into the history of the case, was not concerned as to the length of time the “chalk line of belief” had been there, knowing that to do this was only to intensify the belief. Yet most people of the Truth movement today are busy with the idea that the reason for Jesus' advent in the flesh was to overcome something that was wholly a matter of relativity, and which might pass away of its own volition in many instances. He was only concerned with getting the man in the chalk line prison of belief to “stand up.” “If I be lifted up” — “Come unto Me.” What I know for sure is that if 'i' think it, that ain't it…….. Bright Blessings ~ Patty
|
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Nicole said Jan 3, 5:56 AM: |
||
|
Those are very interesting quotes, Patty. I was curious about the sources, do you have them handy? |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Patty said Jan 3, 6:01 AM: |
||
|
forgot to include that :-) … .penned by Walter Lanyon |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Nicole said Jan 3, 6:06 AM: |
||
|
I found a lot of his works here - The Best of Walter Lanyon |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Patty said Jan 3, 7:42 AM: |
||
|
I use this link: There is a search feature you can use to enter a key word and it will pull up all the articles containing the particular word. So if you enter 'chalk' , or 'duality' it will return links to all the articles containing those words. I find these writings most stimulating, and if anyone has trouble with the more traditional Christian cloak - I encourage you too look beyond all that - the reward is well worth the effort :-) |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....I will said Jan 9, 6:28 AM: |
||
|
yes he did and the most amazing message ever taught. Jesus taught about the kingdom of god. Yet to day most of what we haer is about jesus himself. This was not the purpose of jesus on this earth. His purpose was to spread the gospel ( good news ) of the kingdom of god. Yet some fo the people of his day were thinking he was a crazy man for what he was teaching. Even to this day people still think in their decieved minds that jesus was sent to save the world. NOT TRUE… he was sent to tell of the kingdom of god to come. Which when it was to come he would be the king of by the power of god almighty. And now the time of jesus is at hand. It has been almost 2000 years since jesus was on earth as a man and now the 6000 years god gave to man for self rule is at end and jesus will come to teach the whole world how to live in god kingdom. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....Nicole said Jan 9, 6:30 AM: |
||
|
Thanks so much for the link, Patty. |
|||
|
|
Re: did jesus teach.....jayceeii said Sep 14, 8:24 AM: |
||
|
Will said, …I recall that Yeshua taught of only two commandments… …Love God with All your Heart… …and… …Love your neighbor as yourself… Asked to summarize His teaching, this was indeed the response of the Lord. However, in responding this way, Jesus does not look like God at all. For, it would be incumbent upon the Maker to help His creatures define the meaning of God and the meaning of love, not simply to leave the ball in their court, to interpret according to their own wills and prejudices. If Jesus was God, then He did not here leave inherent clues to His stature, but instead spoke as He also indicated ambiguously, as Son of Man or Son of God. In fact the concept of a “son” is stolen straight from the human experience, and is neither a reflection of the Lord’s identity nor part of the angelic intellect. A man uses this word in two ways, first his son is an extension of his private power into the world, and second he dreams that his immortality is somehow secured thereby, that he “lives on” in his progeny. This word is then used like a hammer by a human father, here is how he will extend his conquest of the sense domain, and even continue it after death. It is thus a concept of false pride and arrogance, and putting it in the way of speaking of God, could only boost the ego rather than reducing it to its proper humility before the Almighty God. Jesus’ whole ministry was like this, He never clarified His meaning and left few inherent clues as to His stature, so that it could have been either way according to the evidence, perhaps He was a man, perhaps He was God. As in all the other religions, therefore, it appears that Christianity was intended to boost the ego, an action which may enhance social harmony, but surely blocks the way to Heaven. It seems possible to me that the religions, all of them, were given to externally-oriented mentalities, which have no inner awareness and so no independent standard of goodness within themselves. They are made to be good according to a low standard, as they line up in droves to get their facile rewards. In order to interpret these two injunctions correctly, a man would need to be able to form a meaningful concept about “God,” he would need the power of love, and he would need to be able to engage in authentic Golden Rule Thinking, actually putting himself in the place of another. I submit the ego fails egregiously in all three categories, and not even the best gurus of this planet to arise thus far are able to engage in Golden Rule Thinking. Jesus said the pure in heart would see God, and I notice that Andrew here, in questioning the planetary economic system as the only means of survival, comes closer to the higher standard than I have yet seen. However, in stating that the worldwide economic system prevents people from fulfilling the first injunction since they necessarily place a high priority on money, he’s missing the causative angle. He ought to consider that externally oriented minds are not facing the living God at all, that the God-concept as formerly introduced has little to do with the Deity which is real, and much to do with human vanity. In this way it becomes apparent that people are doing what they would naturally do, then after this is done attempting to justify it according to this false image of God. They are automatically grabbing their objects and fame, and the worship of Mammon is the inability to conceive of more than the material plane, which can be stated as the superstition that material gain can bring lasting joy, as in the Eastern traditions. The small minds are inherently worshipping Mammon, because no other concepts can enter, their idea about God having nothing to do with spiritual being, or the goodness of true virtues. As for the “smarter barter system,” in fact a pure soul confronting the fact of mass embodiment in an intelligent context, concludes independently of all others that the best modality is quality work by each individual, combined with wise oversight of social priorities by one sector which is entrusted with this task, in a needs-driven system instead of a desire-driven one. This preserves the resources, which is critical if we expect five billions years of civilized life on this planet. It is also the only truly friendly option. The very concept of the barter system, or its supposedly more advanced counterpart, an economic system, can only arise from a dualistic mind. Only a dualistic mind can possibly think of material exchange, because a unified mind sees too clearly himself standing on the other side of the barrier, and completely detached from the material contagion, he holds objects very loosely and his friends closely. He lives in relationship, the goods are secondary. As Andrew also implied, he won’t think of exploiting himself in another, because he is keenly aware that he does not wish to be exploited, but wants friendship and ease, for things to operate smoothly, cooperatively, happily and wisely. As for Andrew’s idea that the Christians will be surprised and shocked to learn they haven’t come close to interpreting Him correctly, perhaps the biggest shock of all would be to be left in darkness. The Lord in His magnificence, and the angels too, cannot be understood by even the mightiest gurus of this age. Perhaps God could bring a heavenly dominion by force, but if this is done the people will not understand. Again, if there is to be understanding of the heavenly ways, this is probably incompatible with dominion by force. Personally, I continue to consider that the pure in heart who see God, and the meek who inherit the Earth, are two different groups, and the mode of the Second Coming will be a split between populations, that drives across family bonds as Jesus averred. Forcing a Christian to admit he has not understood, will not bring understanding, for it is beyond their mental capacity. Since in my direct observations the angels also take embodiment alongside the Lord (isn’t it logical, that if the Lord has this ability, the angels might be able to come along with Him; why has no one thought of this, unless they do not really want the Lord or the angels in their midst?), they offer a gap which is tremendous to the highest of the gurus. In this scenario, it is obviously possible that the angels could gather around the Lord in a new way, noticing His teachings but obscuring the fact that He is the center of attention, which defeats the externally-oriented mind’s belief that charisma was the source of His power. What is charisma, but inflaming the passions where reason is too weak to tread? God and His angels could then all but disappear from the human scene in their own society, which amounts to the establishment of a corner of the Earth as another heavenly region, a heavenly annex if you will. Then eventually, humans will grow weary of their small-minded ways, and looking around they will find it is indeed possible to seek the Lord on this very Earth, but angels come first. I muse about things like this. But, the gurus of today, such as Da Free John or Eknath Easwaran, were too weak to recognize one another. If they cannot identify another guru like themselves, they also cannot identify the embodied angels, and if they cannot identify the embodied angels they surely can never recognize the Lord. Then, since the gurus are the highest of all mankind, what is true of them is true for all the rest as well. No one can form a meaningful concept about a divine entity, including the gurus. Therefore, no one is fulfilling the first injunction here. All they achieve is self-love, as they presume God is something like themselves, but greater only in His power-aspect. Then, no human knows the true nature of love, because if they did all family boundaries would virtually disappear as they saw that all souls are independent and equally deserving of love on an initial consideration, to be tempered later by awareness of noble character attributes which are seen. Humans have a double trouble, they are not likeable and they are not capable of liking others. If they try to like one another they run into obstacles in the other, and if others try to like them, these same obstacles will appear in them. For this reason all utopian experiments, such as communism or the groups from the nineteenth century, have failed. But, the angels are likable, and capable of liking others on the basis of noble character attributes, independent of any circumstances of genetics. Finally, the best evidence I have seen for a lack of true Golden Rule Thinking, loving your neighbor as yourself, is in the work scenario. You can work fifty years closely beside some people who act friendly and supportive, but you find it was all schmoozing and self-serving if you run into economic trouble after retiring, or come around their houses wanting to partake in some of their luxuries that you couldn’t afford since they were the boss and you were the employee. You know that it is money which people worship, because it is taken as a type of blasphemy or sacrilege to ask for it. Just try it sometime, if you don’t believe me! If there is true affection you always want to have only what the others have, since any other arrangement is being mean and unkind to them. Whatever is going on in those long years of working alongside those who say “Hello”, “Goodbye”, “Have a nice weekend”, and “Did you have a nice weekend?” in regular staccato rhythm, and with seeming feeling, it wasn’t actual affection, they don’t really like you and don’t care about your physical being. This is the crux, if you love someone you will want to support his physical being by your own labors, so that he has a chance to be happy in that platform of embodiment. This one factor is starkly missing in the mind of man, despite a surface appearance of friendliness, which is merely two greedy individuals fundamentally looking out for themselves and competing against all the others without caring about them. The current society is just mass mutual manipulation. A man seems to care about his children, but why won’t he care about those outside the family in the same way, particularly if their character traits are noble? It is because all other people are types of objects to his thinking, and the children are in a special class which is akin to possession. These are his children, this is his wife, don’t question it! But if it were true affection for the wife and children, he’d feel it for his coworkers too. That is to say, if he could see and appreciate their character attributes, it is a small step to see the attributes of those outside the family, with the natural and easy response of equally kind and gentle treatment. It is ineluctable therefore, they do not see these attributes, and must be thinking of the “near and dear” as types of objects, without inner differentiation. |
|||

Help



