outhouse
Atheistically
All this does is make you look more wrong by posting Pauls writings, a Hellenist who never knew or heard a word from Jesus while he was alive.
Paul was a reformer. Jesus no.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Jesus a Religious Reformer, or Transformer?
- Thread starter Windwalker
- Start date
All this does is make you look more wrong by posting Pauls writings, a Hellenist who never knew or heard a word from Jesus while he was alive.
Paul was a reformer. Jesus no.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Do you know what you mean ??. I don't need to seek that which i am already, as you are also.......stop lagging behind and get on board before you miss the train lol.
That is what makes Paul so awesome.
Now you can't answer my simple question?
Really? When an idea catches on, when people are inspired by a truth, when they see a vision, when they are in touch with something that pushes into the novel within them and through them into the world, isn't this Spirit in action? Isn't this the Spirit transforming the world?
He didn't challenge conventional religious understanding, such as "You have heard it said.... but I say...."? It seems to me he was all about challenging the status quo. It seems to me he was all about moving people to think beyond conventional thought, to not look at the exteriors of religion, those of rules and regulations, but to the "weightier matters of the law", which were about the heart's transformation.
Again, there is a difference between reformation and transformation. I believe getting rid of stumbling blocks of strict observance of religious rules and regulations is not reformation, but transformation.
Benoni, do you believe spiritual discernment is limited to how you read the Bible?
Not at all, deep spiritual discernment is trusting and hearing and seeing as an individual endeavor not a corporate or religious endeavor. By hearing as an individual God’s Spirit not man’s institutions brings us together as one. Too many trust their religious systems to lead and guide them into all truth and they assume that is the Spirit of truth.
Last edited:
And how do you develop this hearing? What practices do you do? And does this then translate into recognizing that same Spirit in others, despite them speaking using a different language or symbol set?
outhouse
Atheistically
This is all just a lack of knowledge of what first century Judaism actually was.
It was very wide and diverse and multicultural. Jesus taught nothing new. Jesus was using JtB foundation he had learned form him while alive. And there were others teaching the same thing.
Jesus didnt get rid of any stumbling blocks and had nothing to do with how Christianity turned out. he would have been against it.
Jesus taught to Galilean Jews, and when you read about him "teaching to all", it is because the unknown authors were Gentiles and Proselytes and thats what they wanted him to say, so thats how they wrote it. In their own version. According to most scholars.
Again the people who wrote the NT never knew or met him, never heard him, and lived no where near where he taught and grew up. They lived completely different life styles.
Jesus wasn't trying to change anyone's religion, it appears he was only going after those who were "holier than thou" types. People, and there are still plenty of them, who went through the motions, yet forgot about God. It's a big problem, always has been, that people put rituals ahead of worshiping God or people who do things just so they'll find favor from either God or their peers. Jesus seemed to have no problem with most of the people he taught.
I believe that in order to follow a theistic religion, one has to put God and people first and the rituals, practices, etc. second.
I believe that in order to follow a theistic religion, one has to put God and people first and the rituals, practices, etc. second.
Is it? If so, then the modern scholars themselves who say these things need to be corrected by you. Princeton and Harvard professors need to go back to school, apparently.
I understand this.
And you base this understanding of what Jesus taught upon whom? The authors of the Gospels whom you reject as not knowing what he taught. I see a self-annihilating loop of reasoning going on here. Or are you just assuming he taught something else, lacking any evidence to support this claim?
In part I agree with you, in that I don't believe an institutional hierarchical order of bishops and priest making the entire affair an exoteric shell of an otherwise spiritual aspiration, is what he had in mind and would find it a stumbling block. But I disagree Jesus had nothing to do with being the impetus behind what evolved into what it did in order to maintain it as a school of teachings. Something happened to inspire it.
I certainly don't dispute attribution. But my point is the "Spirit of Christ", is not a static rock of understandings, but rather a dynamic and evolving Truth. It lives, it changes, it evolves. Seeing attribution happen, speaks to that very Spirit.
The core difference between how I see these things, and your traditional understanding is just that. They see God as a static object, the way science sees the world as some pregiven form that with enough insights you can figure out the truth of it. I see these things as a dynamism. They emerge, they evolve, and a "living truth", is very different than a static truth. I look to that dynamic core, not the static history. And I believe you see that very thing happening in the evolution of that movement. It's the dynamic Spirit that I see in the form of Jesus that gave rise to itself in and through others. It was never meant to be codified, and chiseled into stone, a canon of "authorized texts".
So then how do you know what Jesus taught to say he didn't teach this?
To start with you do as Gods word tells you not the 20,000 systems of mans Christian an JW religions tell you what to hear To Hear
There are 46 verses in the Book of Revelation which speak of hearing. Notice this hearing is singular not plural. It does not say those who belong to a special group or system who have ears to hear but those that hear the words.
The Spirit of truth who leads and guides us into all truth is the key. Not the pastor or priest but the Spirit of god with in you. That is a key secret.
- Revelation 1:3
Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. - Revelation 1:10
I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, - Revelation 2:7
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. - Revelation 2:11
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death. - He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.
- Revelation 2:23
And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works. - Revelation 2:29
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. - Revelation 3:3
Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee. - Revelation 3:6
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. - Revelation 3:13
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. - Revelation 3:20
Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. - Revelation 3:22
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. - Revelation 4:1
After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. - Revelation 5:11
And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; - Revelation 5:13
And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. - Revelation 6:1
And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see. - Revelation 6:3
And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see. - Revelation 6:5
And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand. - Revelation 6:6
And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine. - Revelation 6:7
And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see. - Revelation 7:4
And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. - Revelation 8:13
And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound! - Revelation 9:13
And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, - Revelation 9:16
And the number of the army of the horsemen were two hundred thousand thousand: and I heard the number of them.
roger1440
I do stuff
Yeah, what she said.
roger1440
I do stuff
Jesus had no problem with the Torah. He had a problem with the abuse of the Torah. He had no desire to change it or abolish it. He did not reinterpret it. He understood the true meaning of the Torah. The meaning is to lead the Jews to God. Its not about being noticed by men. Its about being noticed by God. The ancient Jewish prophets had made the same point numerous times in Jewish scripture. All the author of the Gospel of Matthew had done was to put it into a story format.
The Pharisees are depicted in Matthews Gospel as being more concerned about their outward profusion of faith rather then there inward conviction of faith. They were more about show and tell.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. (Matthew 23:25)
The Pharisees are depicted in Matthews Gospel as being more concerned about their outward profusion of faith rather then there inward conviction of faith. They were more about show and tell.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. (Matthew 23:25)
outhouse
Atheistically
We really only have small clues to what Jesus may have even taught or said.
What we do know is what the later unknown authors taught, writing from a different parts of the world.
Christianity in the begining was also wide and diverse, and just because one form of it emerged as the most popular, hundreds of years later doesnt give it historical credibility in any way shape or form.
False.
I will direct you to Dale B Martin Yales professor teaching the NT.
Introduction to New Testament History and Literature (Yale, RLST 152); 26-lecture course by Dale B. Martin | Virtual Professors
I don't disagree with this. I think he was after people seeing beyond the form to the reason behind the form. In the sense that he takes the teachings and infuses them with an understanding of the spirit behind them, and to emphasize what is important, is to transform that religious expression.
My point of the difference between transformation and reformation, is that a reform is about getting back to the correct practice of the religion, to correct the errors in teachings, to polish up and get back to true form of the religion. I don't believe Jesus was about that. And I don't believe he would say they needed to change their religion either. Just "make clean the inside of the cup first". A reformer would be about making the outside properly clean. A transformer looks within first, and then the outside naturally flows from the inside.
I do not believe Jesus saw the religion itself as what was to be followed. And therefore, would it matter what religion you are, if the religion itself is not the beginning and end of ones 'salvation', or knowing God?
The problem is not always just one of self-righteousness and hypocrisy, which can in fact result from this, but the core problem is deeper than that. It all boils down to one simple action: externalizing God. By seeing God as outside of us, then we will seek God outside of us. The ritual becomes the thing in itself that must be performed. You "must" be baptized a certain way in order to get God to do his part for you. You "must" do this, or that religious proscription in order for God to work right in your life, and to avoid his displeasure of you. What happens is we substitute the forms, the rites, the rituals, the doctrines, the "correct beliefs", as some form of magical things outside of us to bridge that gap between us and God.
Then what happens is that you look to those things for your justification. "I know I'm saved because the Bible tells me so, because I believed and put my faith in Christ", etc. This is not an internal realization, at all. It's doubt. It is looking outside oneself to appease us of our anxiety. It is not expressive of inner Peace. Inner Peace, knows what that relationship is. It knows, without reasoning justifications, without looking outside ourselves at all.
So when that doubt arises, as well it will because no true Peace exists inside, then what follows is an anxiety and all the over-compensating religiosity, the self-righteous hypocrisy flows out of this internal mess.
"Make clean the inside of the cup", is inner transformation, and it does not matter what the religious forms are. Our Peace, does not come through religious justifications. And that I believe is what Jesus taught and wanted people to see. This is not religious reform, but transforming the religion to a living, dynamic form. The law is written on the tablets of the heart. It creates the law dynamically.
No, because most people want to find Peace. To the religious self-righteous who lacked an open and humble heart he said ironically, "You have your reward".
Personally, I don't see it limited to a theistic view, which is a theological understanding. I believe that which we call God, takes many forms of understanding. And the core of all them is to touch that timeless Spirit, first. And from that Source, love flows to others. Religion is best understood as a vehicle to help support us on that path, not make us into its image. At a point, I believe we can and should say, I am all religions, I am none.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Gee you sure do know how to manipulate a conversation to suit yourself, this usually happens when one wants to protect their beliefs at all coast, they can never see outside their own prison.
Not really. I had a quetion and you seem like you had an answer but if you don't I understand.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
I have more than answered you questions, maybe not how you wanted me to answer them though, as i have said, i can except your way of seeing what you believe in, but just like a devoted fundamentalist you cannot see how others see what you see, do you see ?.
This still doesn't explain what you do in order to hear. What makes the difference? Clearly, it has nothing to do with reading the words on a page, since all those you disagree with do the same, and claim the same. What do you do to open yourself to hear? Reading obviously isn't the key, since they do too and you and they don't see eye to eye.
What I'm getting at is that spiritual discernment requires something more than just reading words. Don't you meditate? What opens you to seeing and hearing, beyond just reading words.