EN \ NL \ FR
Current Wings Quest 122
Ask and Receive
print ShareShare 

Why God was so vengeful in the OT - Part II

Post new topic This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Page 11 of 11Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11

Author  Message 
Anamcara
Jenius!
cookie lover
Posts: 1246
Joined: 14 May 2005
Last Visit: 15 Jun 2009
Location: Work as usual
 
PostPosted: Fri 20 May, 2005  Reply with quote

You know what I wanna retract what I said about God having all emotions 'cause I don't think he would waste His time. But He knows them 'cause He made them. Learning tool I guess, choice.

back to top
Cyrus
the Virus?
cookie lover
Cyrus has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
43
Posts: 1008
Joined: 30 May 2004
Last Visit: 02 Jan 2017
Location: I'm here
 
PostPosted: Fri 20 May, 2005  Reply with quote

Sorry, but my puny theological education forced me to step in

Mindful wrote:

Why are there none of the original texts remaining?


Are there any original ancient texts from Plato, Aristoteles, etc? Or do we have only copies?

The answer is simple: they are either corrupted by time (papyri is corrupting material also), or they are not yet discovered. What we have are copies (i don't know any ancient text what we have today in original manuscript), and the older they are the best they are. This is one of the principles how the Bible is translated today (older copies are preferred).

Quote:

Why did Augustine order the burning of non church sanctioned texts?


Because they deviated from the official doctrines of the Church (they were either Gnostics, or some other).

Quote:

It has been said that Jesus probably only said 20% of the sayings that He has been recorded as having said in the Bible.


Probably. The Bible texts were at first in oral tradition until they were written down. It's highly probable that the words of Jesus are mixed with early teachings of Church. It's the same as with every oral tradition - in time they become more mixed, and they are not 100% authentic anymore. This is why scholars try to find what sentences might belong to Jesus and what are early church tradition, but so far there is not much consensus, because it's very hard.

Maybe it's similar as to find what Socrates really taught when you read Plato, because Plato usually interpretated Socrates from his own point of view. What does not say that some things, and sayings don't belong to Socrates what we find in the texts of Plato.

Quote:

The people who formed and wrote the New Testament did not Know Jesus and did not even live at the same time period.


It's debatable actually. Most probably what you say is correct. But those people for sure had the sayings of Jesus and collections of His actions what were orally carried and later wroted down to the 4 Gospels, and to some other writings (and Gospels). For example, i believe that the Gospel of Thomas does include many original sayings of Jesus, that are later mixed with the interpretations of Gnostic Christians.

Quote:

Much of the Old Testament is misinterpreted as it is now.
(Nothing said of God in the Old Testament can be taken literally e.g the wrath of God.)


I bet that the OT was understandable to ancient people, but today yes, we can say: it probably helped them to understand God, but today we can say: it's only THEIR interpretation of God, as we have our own. I believe in progressive revelation, and i believe that even we still lack much of understanding what God really is.

Quote:

There is the possibilty of purposeful tampering to control the masses, it has been said many times that the line about the virgin mother actually said "and He will be born by a young woman. Not virgin.
And the virgin story actually clashes with the prophecy anyway, if there is no father how could Jesus be born through the male lineage of King David, but if it was merely a young woman it makes sense.


I don't see how this passage is used to "control the masses", but i agree: in original Hebrew it's "young woman". In Greek OT (LXX, aka Septuagint) it becomes "virgin". This prophecy is probably at first meant to be used in another context, but Christians started to interpretate it in their own way. After all, LXX was their Scripture (at least for heaten Christians).



Current LD goal(s): Making LD my hobby
back to top
Mindful
The Same As You
Astral Explorer
Posts: 317
Joined: 30 Jan 2004
Last Visit: 31 Jul 2005
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere at Once
 
PostPosted: Fri 20 May, 2005  Reply with quote

Unconditional Love Knows only perfection because it sees passed all believed imperfection.
Is not accepting someone as they are not the same as saying You are perfect as You are?
Why would Unconditional Love want anyone to change, in the eyes of Unconditional Love noone needs to change because they are perfect as they are.
Unconditional Love is not limiting, a parent may Love there child very much, but unless they Love All Equally (Unconditionally) it is merely conditional love.
In Truth God did not create what You believe He did, God is Love and has created only Love. Duality is the dream, there is only the One, that One is Knowing, Love and Joy.
May I ask why the idea of Unconditional Love seeing only perfection in no matter whom it looks at upsets You?
I AM not speaking of Loving God as a dissassociated entity in the sky, I speak of Loving the All, I talk of looking at another person and seeing past all supposed imperfections and Knowing them as perfect, as they Truly are.


back to top
Dreamer
Yes Indeedy
Dream Deity
30
Posts: 585
Joined: 12 Sep 2002
Last Visit: 08 Sep 2017
Location: My body lives in England, but my spirit roams the wilds
 
PostPosted: Sat 21 May, 2005  Reply with quote

This is only a minor point, but I don't think unconditional love is seeing people as perfect how they are, I think that it is accepting them and loving them even though they are not perfect. Not needing them to be perfect to love them. Seeing them as perfect how they are still suggests you need to see them as perfect, and so conditional love. If unconditional love sees people as perfect it wouldn't upset me.

Quote:
In Truth God did not create what You believe He did, God is Love and has created only Love. Duality is the dream, there is only the One, that One is Knowing, Love and Joy.


No, this is what you think, you may be right, but it's only what you think.

I don't believe in God. I'm open to the idea that there might be a God, but I've seen no reason to believe so.

I don't think that there is any special unconditional love, or any constant in this life apart from the need to survive.

My point before was that if there is a God, I see no reason to assume that it has human emotions, or any emotions at all. In fact, I see much evidence against an unconditionally loving God.

Quote:
I talk of looking at another person and seeing past all supposed imperfections and Knowing them as perfect, as they Truly are.


I don't think that people are perfect. I don't need to think this to love someone, I accept that everyone has faults.


<mod>This discussion continues here</mod>


back to top
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Page 11 of 11Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11


print   ShareShare 

All times are GMT + 2 Hours
Jump to:  

LD4all ~ spreading the art and knowledge of lucid dreaming online since 1996 ~
created and copyright by pasQuale. All rights reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001,2005 phpBB Group ~