Clear teaching by Jesus

I know that most of you here don’t believe the Bible to be God’s Word to mankind, or believe that it is but we can’t trust it.  These verses should explain why Christians believe as they do.  Thoughts?

John 17:1–10 (NASB95): 1 Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You,

 2 even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life.

 3 “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

 4 “I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do.

 5 “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

 6 “I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word.

 7 “Now they have come to know that everything You have given Me is from You;

 8 for the words which You gave Me I have given to them; and they received them and truly understood that I came forth from You, and they believed that You sent Me.

 9 “I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;

 10 and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine; and I have been glorified in them.

Thinking required 22/05/2023

Visit thread: https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/20640/

Your belief

In listening to people talk about their religion, how well do you think people know what they believe to be factual and true? I find that most people who believe in a religion only believe in what they believe because that is what they have been told or either grew up in that religious household and that is what they were taught as kids. Any thoughts?

Thinking required May 18, 2023

Visit thread: https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/20630/

What happens when God enters a life

Titus 3:3–8 (NASB95): For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.
4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared,
5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,
6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,
7 so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
8 This is a trustworthy statement; and concerning these things I want you to speak confidently, so that those who have believed God will be careful to engage in good deeds. These things are good and profitable for men.

Thinking required May 21, 2023

Visit thread: https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/20635/

The Wilderness

A rather important part of the Bible story that relates to Christians, but relates more to Judaism, is the story of the Wilderness and the cusp where Israel came out of the desert into the Promised Land.

Anybody with American TV has seen the old Charleton Heston movie, which for the medium is a good telling of the story. There is more nuance in the Book.

Ark of the Covenant

Joshua

Moses never left the desert, he walked up a mountain and was not seen again as I recall the story. I want to say there is oral tradition his body was retrieved and proper ceremony rendered.

Jericho

My movie is coming on in 5 minutes, back later…

discuss?

juantoo3 21/05/2023

Visit thread: https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/20633/

Exclusive Bible

There is a lot of conversation when it comes to Bibles, or I should say Books from God. Jews have Books, Christians have Books, Muslims have a Book, Mormons have a Book and Jehovah Witnesses have a Book. Each of the Books claim exclusivity. Would God make give us a Book that was for only one group of people, meaning it the book is written in Spanish, could only the Spanish speaking people understand it.? I am not sure how many on this site have research translation of language or used interpreters. The reason I ask, is that I am once again reading the Quran and the flow of the English translation is terrible. I have been to that the Arabic reading is beautiful.

Since I don’t understand Arabic, then I don’t know what to think. Some of the Bible was also written in poetry form (I am assuming that the Quran was written that away, maybe for the ease of learning and reciting it, as I have also been told that the Quran was not to be written, but recited only. It never came into a book form until after the death of Muhammad. Anyway, All language is translational and can retain meaning in the translation. Sometimes not the exact thrust of the word or language but close enough so that it can be understood. The Hebrew texts of the Bible were translated @300BC into Greek. In the time of Jesus, I have read where many people spoke 3 languages.

This is not even uncommon in Europe today, at least two languages. The Christians letters were mostly written in Greek as that was the more common language of the day in that area. If translation is possible and God is concerned with all people, why limit a written text to just one group of people who speak one language. I say this to say that I have been told, a person has to read the Arabic Quran to understand it. Even though so much of it is just about stories and information that already exist in the Jewish Scriptures.

Thinking required 21/05/2023

Visit thread: https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/20634/

Did Most Early Christians Believe The Divinity of Christ?

@Thomas @muhammad_isa @juantoo3 @Tone Bristow-Stagg others …
At risk of repetition, and trying to start with a clean slate:

This is spin-off from recent threads about the Arian movement and the Nicean Council, trying to focus in upon the central issue, which seems to be whether or not Christian belief in the divinity of Christ the Son, was already THE mainstream belief amongst early Christians, long before the ‘trinity’ as most today understand it, was officially rubber-stamped at Nicea?

Prior to Nicea, did most early Christians accept the divinity of the Son? Or did they not?

Was the belief in the divinity of the Son already mainstream with early Christians, before the Nicea Council in AD 325? Or was Rome responsible for basically imposing upon early Christians a belief in the divinity of Christ?

RJM Mar 16, 2021

Visit thread: https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/19673/

Thoughts on Christian esoterism

In religions, the visible forms – rites and rituals, customs and practices, its architecture and its art, comprise the exoteric dimension, the formal, the visible form that identifies it as such. The esoteric is the inward, invisible essence transmitted to the body of believers through these forms. What is absolutely axiomatic in Traditionalists, the most recent incarnation of the schools of the Sophia Perennis, is that one cannot access the esoteric other than in and through its concordant forms, for the simple reason that the esoteric is formless, invisible, numinous, ineffable – as Scripture says: “The wind (pneuma) blows where it wills, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know whence it comes or whither it goes; so it is with every one who is born of the Spirit (pneuma).” (John 3:8). You cannot hold the wind. You cannot capture it, and if you do, it ceases to be wind.

+++

Christianity has been spoken of as a bhaktic religion, a religion of devotion, of love, an esoterism called upon to fulfil the role of an exoteric way for a considerable sector of mankind. It is perhaps providential that the Greek word for love favoured by the NT writer is ‘agape’, a Greek term that rarely appears at all in literature prior to or contemporary with the New Testament. It cannot be, however, that by fullfiling this exoteric necessity it excludes esoterism and thereby gnosis, for again the Perennialist insists that the sapiential path is implicit in every orthodox tradition, however hard to see, however few may be called to follow.

+++

The orthodox religious traditions contain within themselves the full spectrum of spiritual possibilities open to mankind – “No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main” the poet says. And Tradition speaks to the main, to all humanity. Anyone who thinks that Tradition is too restrictive or too limited is suffering either ignorance or delusion. When spiritual seekers find the Dalai Lama he invariably directs them back from whence they came. “if you cannot find it in your own tradition,” he says, “It’s unlikely you’ll find it here.” 

+++

The eso-exo dichotomy is best conceived as a sliding scale. The separation between the esoteric and exoteric is a matter of acuity than of actuality. Both the esoterist and the exoterist share the same doctrinal foundation, but understand in differing degrees.

The differences result from innate capacity (although any lack can often be compensated by perseverance), a desire to know, by perception and understanding; but the differences are real. There will always be those whose insight and understanding remains undeveloped because they are absorbed in more ephemeral interests, because they neglect the sacrifices which gnosis demands. Not everyone is called to be a jnani, a gnostic. But to assume this lack of a particular development hinders or debilitates the person is an error (often the case with the elitism of the esoteric schools) because no one way is necessarily superior to any other.

+++

Another aspect of the western error is to assume that to be ‘esoteric’ is to be better than ‘exoteric’. It’s in the nature of the West to quantify and qualify ad infinitum (itself a sign of quantity rather than quality). Everything breaks down into ‘this and that’, whereas in the East it’s more fluid and organic, it’s not ‘this or that; but neti-neti (‘not this, not that’). (Scripturally, it’s more holistic, ‘this and that’.)

And, of course, the esoteric is thereby superior in every degree to the exoteric.

The Biblical story of Martha and Mary (Luke 10:38-42) seems to offer a model of the esoteric and the exoteric – Martha bustles about her business, Mary sits at the feet of Jesus in rapt contemplation of Him. Martha troubles herself on her sister’s behalf, and Jesus gently rebukes her – “Martha, Martha, thou art careful, and art troubled about many things: But one thing is necessary. Mary hath chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

Throughout Christendom, exegetes have praised Mary (and that name is not by happenstance) as the model of the spiritual way, of Christian devotion – it took an Eckhart, in his sermons on this text, to bring out something ‘esoteric’.

In another sermon (5b) Eckhart says: “I say truly, as long as you do your works for the sake of heaven or God or eternal bliss, from without, you are at fault. It may pass muster, but it is not the best. Indeed, if a man thinks he will get more of God by meditation, by devotion, by ecstasies, or by special infusion of grace than by the fireside or in the stable – that is nothing but taking God, wrapping a cloak round His head and shoving him under a bench. For whoever seeks God in a special way gets the way and misses God, who lies hidden in it.”

In speaking of the sisters of Bethany (having in an earlier sermon praised Mary over Martha), he now (Sermon 68) turns the tables. He has already told of Mary’s inexpressible longing and the ‘sweet solace and joy’ she found at Jesus’ feet …

… But is Mary tending towards self-indulgence? Martha seems bothered by the same question. When she says, ‘Lord, tell her to help me,’ it is not out of spite but out of concern that Mary might have continued to sit there ‘a little more for her own happiness than for spiritual profit.’ (S. 68) Martha was worried that ‘by dallying in this joy’ her sister ‘might progress no further.’ (ibid) Jesus reassures Martha that, despite appearances, Mary’s heart is in the right place: she has ‘chosen the best part’ and will eventually grow into the fully grounded (spiritual) maturity that Martha desires for her, that Martha already possesses.

She has only just ‘entered school’ as it were, and begun ‘to learn how to live’. Martha is a lot further along the Way. (ibid)

+++

I once heard an apocryphal tale of Jesus from the Islamic Tradition. One day Jesus was walking along and saw a holy man, sitting in meditation by the roadside. “What are you doing?” Jesus asks. “I am contemplating the Divine Radience,” the man says. “Who looks after you?” Jesus then asks. “My brother takes care of all my worldly needs,” the man replied.

“Then your brother loves God more than you,” Jesus told him, and continued on His way.

Thomas Apr 19, 2023

Visit thread: https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/20594/