Was Jesus 'just a philosopher'?

[wil]

Yeah... I forgoe the miracles... Don't see the evidence or the need for that matter for virgin birth, turning water into wine, raising the dead, healing the sick, resurection etc.

But saying that taking that away makes Jesus just a philosopher, is like saying someone is just a housewife, or just a secretary....it is absolutely demeaning to the value received.

I am a Christian. I follow and appreciate the teachings of Jesus. They contain incredible words and if we can get away from the pomp and circumstance and required adherence to tradition we'll have more Christians and a better world.

There are many secularists sitting on the fence, rejecting the notions of an invisible sky faerie and Son of G!d who we must pay homage to to get to a perverbial kingdom in the sky....

If these trappings were let go, the teachings, the words, and the power and benefit included in them would shine and be set free.

Now I got no quarrel with those that wish to bow, dance, drink, pray in their way....but saying their way is the only way, be they Buddhist, Daoist, Christian, Muslim....whatever....divides, separates and by the actions and words alone reduces the benefits that their beliefs hold.

I love your incredible edifices, the architecture, the art, the sanctity of the spaces created. I honor the dedication to the ritual.....but it is yours....not mine. I can go with my family and friends and enjoy it, admire it, as they bathe in it. I feel no need to belittle it, I only ask the same.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —
I'm not contending any of these points with you — no point — but I thought I'd offer you a reflection from a different point of view.

Yeah... I forgoe the miracles... Don't see the evidence or the need for that matter for virgin birth, turning water into wine, raising the dead, healing the sick, resurection etc.

By the same token, there's no evidence for anything He said, either, so by that argument, the New Testament vanishes altogether.

Our Lord came to fulfill the promises made to Israel ... or did He? perhaps every 'saying' attributed to Him is just something cobbled together from various sources by your old boys ruminating round the fire ...

But saying that taking that away makes Jesus just a philosopher, is like saying someone is just a housewife, or just a secretary....it is absolutely demeaning to the value received.

No it's not.
Our Lord isn't claiming to be a housewife or a secretary ... or a philosopher, so the point is rather moot?

But saying He is a philosopher demeans Him according to ther self-declarations He made.

I am a Christian. I follow and appreciate the teachings of Jesus.

It seems to me you cherry-pick from Christianity, like so many do.

They contain incredible words ...

Do they though? Those incredible words could well be as fictional as the miracles. Taken alone, they're not unique nor startlingly original.

The only texts that are unique and original are the bits you've already discounted.

and if we can get away from the pomp and circumstance and required adherence to tradition we'll have more Christians and a better world.

The pomp and circumstance is your problem, Wil, don't inflict it on everyone else.

There are many secularists sitting on the fence, rejecting the notions of an invisible sky faerie and Son of G!d who we must pay homage to to get to a perverbial kingdom in the sky....

This is another of your fantasies. That's not what I think, nor have I ever met a Christian who does. The only people who have ever say this to me are those who are looking to ridicule Christianity.

If these trappings were let go, the teachings, the words, and the power and benefit included in them would shine and be set free.

Again, I think this is all your baggage ...

Now I got no quarrel with those that wish to bow, dance, drink, pray in their way....but saying their way is the only way, be they Buddhist, Daoist, Christian, Muslim....whatever....divides, separates and by the actions and words alone reduces the benefits that their beliefs hold.

So everyone should abandon what they believe and believe what you believe?

I love your incredible edifices, the architecture, the art, the sanctity of the spaces created.

But the world would be better off without it, according to you.

I honor the dedication to the ritual...

No you don't.

I can go with my family and friends and enjoy it, admire it, as they bathe in it.

You rude bugger! D'you think we're there for your entertainment and gratification, your amusement, or what?

 

[iBrian]

It's funny - you look at Buddhist and it seems the further away you get from Buddha's homeland, the more magical events and miracles happen in his wake.

In the 1st century AD, miracles were considered normal - Tacitus ascribes them to Vespasian, after he destroyed the temple in Jerusalem.

Additionally, history was never seen as a process of objective reporting, but instead a way of using stories selectively to provide a modern political point - propaganda. And ascribing miracles to someone has always been a very common method of propaganda in the less rational past.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Brian —

Additionally, history was never seen as a process of objective reporting, but instead a way of using stories selectively to provide a modern political point - propaganda. And ascribing miracles to someone has always been a very common method of propaganda in the less rational past.

OK ... but that does not mean that the miracles reported in Scripture did not happen. It's the old Bultmann error ...

There's quite a body of study into the structure and content of the New Testament narratives — Matthew (as we have it) was written with a Jewish audience in mind, his use of Semitic motifs and the inherent chiastic structure of the Gospel is quite marked when you know what to look for;
Luke is addressed to a Gentile world, he uses the Journey motif, common in Greek literature, half his Gospel is set on the road to Jerusalem;
Mark lacks the polish of Matthew and Luke. But if you recite it, there's the Oral Tradition (... and then ... and then ...)
John is a commentary on the above three, plus his own reaction to a nascent gnosticism and factioneering ...

But we cannot say the miracles did not happen.

Was the world less rational then? Probably. But it was more in touch with the spiritual, in many ways; we kid ourselves today ...

God bless,

Thomas

 

[iBrian]

But we cannot say the miracles did not happen.

Indeed - some would say it's a matter of faith.

My pointer is simply that when a writer in the ancient world wants to make another person seem more special, they invent miracles and extraordinary events to elevate them literally from the world of men to the world of the divine. To do so was not seen as dishonest, simply a tool for making a point.

And indeed, Vespasian really may have healed someone's hand and a man of their blindness. After all, he was a god. Or - is it simply that Vespasian brought stability to the Roman Empire after a few terrible years of civil war - and either Tacitus wanted to communicate this, or else communicate what other people wanted to say of him.

Simply an observation.

 

[wil]

Life of Pi....good flick. And frankly you are correct....it does not matter to me if Jesus, Moses and Abraham didn't exist. It doesn't matter to me that the flood never happenned, that nobody lived for 400 years, that Adam and Eve are metaphor....if they entire thing (as a believe much of it is for certain) allegory, mythology, metaphor, parables....it does not change the value of the allegory, mythology, metaphor and parables...

Which story do you like better?? (LoP reference)

 

[Thomas]

Life of Pi....good flick.

Going on Monday.

it does not matter to me if Jesus, Moses and Abraham didn't exist.

What does matter?

... it does not change the value of the allegory, mythology, metaphor and parables...

It does really, as they become just another genre of fiction. You've altered their values to suit yourself, beyond what the author ever intended.

It seems clear to me there's less substance to your version/vision of Christianity than there is to that of which you are so critical — by your own rubric, you've invented a fiction loosely based on bits-n-pieces you've cherry-picked from here and there.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[iBrian]

you've cherry-picked from here and there

This is what Christians always say to each other in disagreements.

 

[radarmark]

I have been too busy (job applications and hunting) recently.

will, wonderful thread!

The key to any door to the beyond (the way to Religion of any religion) is the internal experience... not the trappings. Does it matter if B-Reshith or the miracles are myth? Not really. Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, Leibnitz, Whitehead, Hartshorne (just the representative Western thinkers) did not need them.

Taking away the myths of Genesis does not change the social and ethical advances made by the pre-Christian Jews. Taking away the miracles does not the ethical and social and spiritual progress represented in the notion of J-sus.

There is a long tradition (see list two comments ago) of believing monotheists who reject all forms of prophetic and ideological approaches. Very good point, wil!

The key is the experience, the taste of G-d and J-sus and The H-ly Spirit. It is not the trappings or supporting beliefs. It is like the key to physics is the equations, not the assumptions Einstein or Bohr made while discovering them.

It is not the trappings (I dance at pow-wows and moon drums and fall to my knees to pray) but the exclusivity that matters... the singular "I am the light and the way" attitude of the religious. I find that attitude quite absent from the attitude of the Religious.

"Live your life that the fear of death can never enter your heart.
Trouble no one about his religion.
Respect others in their views and demand that they respect yours.
Love your life, perfect your life, beautify all things in your life.
Seek to make your life long and of service to your people.
Prepare a noble death song for the day when you go over the great divide.
Always give a word or sign of salute when meeting or passing a friend,
or even a stranger, if in a lonely place.
Show respect to all people, but grovel to none.
When you rise in the morning, give thanks for the light,
for your life, for your strength.
Give thanks for your food and for the joy of living.
If you see no reason to give thanks, the fault lies in yourself.
Abuse no one and no thing, for abuse turns the wise ones to fools
and robs the spirit of its vision.
When your time comes to die,
be not like those whose hearts are filled with fear of death,
so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time
to live their lives over again in a different way.
Sing your death song, and die like a hero going home."

Tekoomsē, "Panther Across the sky"

 

[wil]

. You've altered their values to suit yourself, beyond what the author ever intended.

Enjoy the movie, and which author are you speaking of? Or should I say authors? Known verifiable authors are in the vast minority when it comes to our bible....Paul is the standout, and we now know all the works attributed to him aren't by him.....but between the unidentified Yahwists, Elohists, Priests and Deuteornomists.....we haven't even a clue of how many they number....and we know they are more recorders and editors of oral traditions rather than authors.....but who is to say 'what the author intended' who has that authority or right, it is all guesses and conjecture.

We are alive and well and conversing and of all the folks posting on this thread, none of us can say with any level of certainty what any of the other posters intended...we can surmise, all through our own lense...but that is weak at best.

What does it matter? It matters a lot to me. Whether Jesus existed or not doesn't matter, whether the words are his or a compilation of people, does not matter....him being the Son of G!d and the only begotten son? If I were to buy that it will include that we are all children of G!d, all the only begotten of the continually begetting...all one.

But for me it IS the words and yes even the words that have been shown not to be his....the contemplation, the doodling in the sand, the ye without sin cast the first stone....powerful stuff that DOES matter....even if we know he didn't say it....it is in the vein of the avatar we refer to as Jesus the Christ....and it is worth emulating.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

... and which author are you speaking of?

Well I would discern between the known and unknown scribes, being the material authors who gave form and cloaked in words the 'incomprehensible' Word, by their individual logoi, and the Logos who is not only the Source, but who is He of which the words speak.

Supernal Triad, Deity above all essence, knowledge and goodness; Guide of Christians to Divine Wisdom; direct our path to the ultimate summit of your mystical knowledge, most incomprehensible, most luminous and most exalted, where the pure, absolute and immutable mysteries of theology are veiled in the dazzling obscurity of the secret Silence, outshining all brilliance with the intensity of their Darkness, and surcharging our blinded intellects with the utterly impalpable and invisible fairness of glories surpassing all beauty. (St Denys, The Mystical Theology)

The 'mysteries of theology' of which St Denys speaks, we could equally call 'the mysteries of philosophy' is we regard philosophy in its traditional understanding, when the practitioners of Philosophy saw no axiomatic distinction between 'theology', 'metaphysics' and 'philosophy'.

Such is not the case today. The three have separated into a sequential and symbolically vertical order: 'Theology' is the direct knowing of, by participation in, the life of the Divine; 'Metaphysics' is the direct knowing of, by participation in, the life of being-as-such; and 'Philosophy' (if we can agree is the pursuit of intellectual inquiry of the human intellect as such) is the direct knowing of, by participation in, the life of the individual psyche.

The middle and lower can, by his or her own virtue, participate in the higher, but only anonymously, that is, the higher is anonymous to the participant.

Or should I say authors? Known verifiable authors ...

Your focus is on the letter, not the spirit. The Canon was shaped by those who, under Divine guidance, saw the organic unity of the testimonies and thus the Book was composed.

Who is the author of Hebrews? We have known from the very earliest records that St Paul, to whom the Book was long attributed, was an unlikely candidate. It doesn't matter to us, as it seems to matter to you. Who authored the disputed books of the Pauline corpus? or the Johannine? It doesn't matter to us, as it seems to matter to you. What matters to us is not the materiality of the text, but that the text cloaks, and makes accessible, in an immediate way, the Corpus Verbum.

What does it matter? It matters a lot to me. Whether Jesus existed or not doesn't matter, whether the words are his or a compilation of people, does not matter....him being the Son of G!d and the only begotten son? If I were to buy that it will include that we are all children of G!d, all the only begotten of the continually begetting...all one.

You see? You have pre-determined what the text is allowed to say.

... and it is worth emulating.

The pre-eminent means of emulating the Logos of those words is the Eucharist. There is nothing comes close.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[wil]

It is different strokes for different folks. I see Jesus at the passover dinner doing not much different than any shabat service....the prayers and breaking/sharing of bread and wine was tradition to him.

If song and dance, rote repetition, some tradition is what gets someone in the spirit....that is for them and fine. For me I see trying to follow actions, like loving thy neighbor more appropriate...but again, different strokes for different folks.

 

[arthra]

Well this is a Christian section and I'm not a Christian of course but in response to the issue of whether Jesus could be seen as "just a philosopher" let me suggest that there were several "philosophers" who were celebrated around or close to the same period and being a philospher alone was not enough to influence civilization...

I had in mind for instance Philostratus' Apollonius of Tyana

Flavius Philostratus: The Life of Apollonius of Tyana

and of course you could also suggest Philo of Alexandria while contributing perhaps the concept of "logos"

The Works of Philo by C. D. Yonge


in and by themselves did not have the pervasive influence that the Christ had.

Will Durant also I believe had the perspective that

There is no greater drama in human record than the sight of a few Christians, scorned or oppressed by a succession of emperors, bearing all trials with a fierce tenacity, multiplying quietly, building order while their enemies generated chaos, fighting the sword with the word, brutality with hope, and at last defeating the strongest state that history has known. Caesar and Christ had met in the arena, and Christ had won.

Of course being a Baha'i I would agree with Durant as a whole in the above statement with the exception made that there are other dramas in human record that are equally significant.

 

[Sam Albion]

I, too, am able to forgo the Biblical miracles, believing them to be sleights of hand, or to use a loaded word: "propaganda", although I prefer to think of such as clever marketing, or First-Age media hype in the age of innocence. I don't mind that the sons of God lie to men -- I expect a little magic from my idols, even if it is smoke and mirrors. All Gods and most saints have miraculous births and miraculous deeds attributed to them-- it is partly what makes them holy and seperates them from the average, normal human, supposedly incapable of such mangificent deeds.

That, I dislike. I feel that seperating some men from the herd and making them Gods means less people become saintly themselves -- they shall never be able to attain such supra-human heights, so why should they bother to try? I would love it if more human beings realised their own potential-- that they too could be like Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, and if they listened, they too could become heroes, leaders, visionaries: true sons and daughters of the Gods.

Yes, I believe that Jesus was, like me, a human -- and not, for me, the Son Of God, or at least, no more the son of God than you, or I. But I believe he existed, I believe he was a lion amongst men -- a radical, a social reformer, a philosopher with a simple yet effective message, a message and a way of life that still has relevance, 2000 years later. My Jesus was an anarchist, a rebel, a socialist, who saw the inequality and the misery of life and sought to change it for the everyday human, the man who needs his miracles and his power ballads and his rock-operas to open his heart, to expand his mind enough for him to suspend belief and grow hope.

Personally, I am happy to have my own inner schism -- the rational aspect of my consciousness laughs that people believe in the biblical miracles -- yet that does not stop me from praying to God, and hoping that God will, by sheer force of his own miraculous will, intervene and assist me. It does not stop me performing rituals, aware as I am of their power. It does stop me reciting the Apostles Creed, though. I don't believe in the virgin birth, the resurrection after death, the one God, creator of heaven and earth, yada yada.

Hopefully,

There is no ONE way; there are many rooms in my father's house...

 

[Thomas]

It is different strokes for different folks.

Indeed it is.

I see Jesus at the passover dinner doing not much different than any shabat service...

I think this sums up your position as a 'Christian of the critical minimum', someone who professes as little as possible and still self-identify as a Christian.

For example, it would be hard to see the Last Supper as anything less, isn't it? The only option after that is to say the meal never took place.

If song and dance, rote repetition, some tradition is what gets someone in the spirit....that is for them and fine.

I don't mind that you say it's not for you. What offends is the insinuation that it's not necessary, and that there's no actual substance to it.

This may well be your opinion, but really it comes from nothing, as you just don't know. You've turned up your nose at others, and judged everything accordingly.

Weigh your words, wisdom and experience against those of the saints and sages, and you're wanting ... that's all I'm saying.

Your position is your position, but it's hardly a virtuous one, and nothing to brag about, nor complain about when others find it shallow and self-serving.

'tradition' is made by those who 'walk the walk, and talk the talk'. History ias littered with those who just like to talk ... but they leave no trace of any worth.

I'm happy to distinguish between 'rite' and 'ceremonial', and I'd be happy to see us discard all the trappings of state and power.

But if you're talking about the Liturgy, and the Sacraments, then really the weight of evidence is against you. You can say it's not for you, that's fine, but to imply it's all empty gestures, that's patently nonsense.

For me I see trying to follow actions, like loving thy neighbor more appropriate...but again, different strokes for different folks.

The 'actions' you've decided are credible, you mean. And you follow those actions as you think fit. It's all about ewhat suits you, Wil. You've carefully reshaped Christianity into something through which you can feel good about yourself.

You don't have to be a Christian to love thy neighbour, and loving thy neighbour doesn't make you a Christian.

Again, the insinuation that one bit of Scripture is 'more appropriate' than another, based on your own values and judgements is a self-serving philosophical position.

So what you end up with is a rational appreciation of some of the sayings, and that's about it. You reduce Scripture to 'The Little Book of Sayings'. Hardly the stuff that saints are made of, certainly not the stuff of which "greater than these shall he do" (John 14:12).

At best, it's idolatry.

Thomas

 

[wil]

Where do I begin....well to keep from pissing off the pope, I'll reduce my comments.

Last Supper....it may not have happenned...as reality is we know how much disinformation, hyperbole and added content the bible has...well we know a lot of it, and the inconsistencies and outright wrong history are so prevelant that we cannot in our right minds use it as proof of anything....so yeah...it may not have occurred.

The minimum Christian.....one who wishes to attempt to follow the guidance of the words purported to be delivered by Jesus.... oh what a world it would be if that is ALL every christian did....they'd be held in much higher esteem than they are now, as unfortunately what the public sees is greed and the abuse of power and manipulation of the masses and elections from our pulpits.

And of course there is substance to pomp and circumstance, to dancing to a tune if someone needs it. I enjoy the heck out of Dances for Universal Peace, the alter my perception, the group participation, moving meditation, create an experience I enjoy and benefit from. I understand how adhering to tradition and ritual is soothing and deemed beneficial to me on occasion, and to you, and to others. I don't discount your need for it in your church, or the need for the rastafarian to smoke ganga, or the need for the shaman to drum...I am fully aware each feels their tradition is the only sensible way to that end....and they are correct for them, as you are correct for you....your assumption that it is something I need or we all need is what I question.

luv ur neighbor....one helluva start!

 

[Thomas]

Last Supper....it may not have happenned...

I just knew you'd get round to saying that!

Going gets a bit tough — easy: dismiss the text.

Wil, why do you think any of it happened? If you reject so much, why not find a path you can actually follow, and not a path that you can't follow, but can only find reason to doubt?

And your 'look at what he's like' option is not an option. Didn't your folks ever give you the 'I suppose if he put his head in the oven' lecture?

If X or Y or Z is a bad Christian, then X and Y and Z will have their conscience to answer for. But if your excuse for not doing something is to say 'look at X and Y and Z' then, I'm afraid, that no excuse ... it may well be that they tried, and failed, where you never even tried at all.

Consider the rich man and the publican in the temple. Of course, you wouldn't even be in the temple because you don't need to be. Someone probably made that parable up, anyway. Forget it.

as reality is we know how much disinformation, hyperbole and added content the bible has...well we know a lot of it, and the inconsistencies and outright wrong history are so prevelant that we cannot in our right minds use it as proof of anything....so yeah...it may not have occurred.

Yeah, just keep convincing yourself that Christianity comprises how many things you don't have to believe in.

Word of Wil: "when two or more are gathered in His name, they're probably lying."

That's what I mean about 'minimal Christian', Wil — you do realise that your Book of what one can't believe in the Bible is a darn site bigger than your Book of what one can believe in the Bible – i bet that hardly makes a page.

The minimum Christian.....one who wishes to attempt to follow the guidance of the words purported to be delivered by Jesus....

Don't sell yourself short: you pick 'n' choose what words, too.

But the most telling point is, you don't think anyone's a good a Christian as you. You think those silly faithful who go to church, bend a knee, pray their beads ... your assumption is they don't follow the words ... that your Christianity is way better than every traditional form ...

oh what a world it would be if that is ALL every christian did....

What, live in their ivory castles, with their heads in the clouds ... ?

....your assumption that it is something I need or we all need is what I question.

Because Christ said it? And the Gospels? And Paul and every Epistle? And every voice since? And your assumption is that those whom you choose to condescend about, because of their profession of faith, are not as good a Christian as you, is something I flatly reject.

luv ur neighbor....one helluva start!

It certainly is, and when you come down from your ivory tower, you'll realise just how hard it really is.

Presently you love for your own sake. You do it because it makes you feel good about you. That's easy. That's what everyone does Wil, even though you probably think you're the only one doing it, that's what everyone does.

But agape is a whole other thing, Wil, and not until you factor in 'the Other', will you get to it.

My advice:
Forget Christianity, it's too burdened for you. Find something, Wil, anything, and commit to that, for your own peace of mind.

Thomas

 

[wil]

Too funny Thomas...I especially liked when two or more are gathered in his name they are probably lying....that was not only hilarious but odds are unfortunately often true.....if lying includes not being honest with oneself....

ivory tower? I'd like the definition of that...yes it is true, in life I mostly coast downstream...this is only because I've done the paddling upstream, I've tried to cross the stream, I've run pell mell into brick walls...and learned....going with the flow is the preferred path...

Struggle is a choice...I was homeless before it had a name...they called us bums....I've been without meals, lost a house to forclosure, went through a divorce, and raised two glorious children who are now off to college...

Now I have a goal still to be debt free when they get out of college, to wean myself of the vast majority of my material possessions and live that life in my ivory tower...spreading joy and love....as a Christian should.

Teaching the young to find their way....I got no problem Thomas if you feel standing on your head and spittting wooden nickels will bring on Nirvana...whatever floats your boat my brother....and I realize that it pisses you off that me and our elder brother Jesus dance down the path to jump in G!d's lap without a care of whether we doodle in the sand or not....we just choose not to throw stones.

The portions of the book we don't know to be false might just be true...you are right...but I'll worry about that less than i'll worry about the afterlife....I'll focus on this life....

big hugz all around!!

 

[iBrian]

Going gets a bit tough — easy: dismiss the text.

If the text is the Word of God then this is a problem. If the text is writ by the hand of man then is it not therefore fallible? Is a text beyond question because the writer is devout? If men decide upon a position of agreement about a text, together, then are they beyond approach?

you don't think anyone's a good a Christian as you.

Isn't this a truth for most believers?

 

[Thomas]

that was not only hilarious but odds are unfortunately often true ...

That you think the Bible is largely a tissue of lies, sophistry and hyperbole, I find not funny at all. I wonder why you bother? It would seem to be written by the self-deluded at best, by frauds and charlatans at worst.

ivory tower? I'd like the definition of that ...

The phrase originates from the Song of Solomon: "Thy neck as a tower of ivory" (7:4). Today it's used to designate an atmosphere of intellectual engagement that is disconnected from the everyday and the practical (The Way).

....going with the flow is the preferred path...

Isn't that the definition of a 'sour grapes' response?

But whatever it is, 'going with the flow' is not a path. Check out Matthieu Riccard, the Buddhist monk and 'the happiest man in the world', he's very critical of this western assumption that 'going with the flow' is somehow an exercise in freedom and self-determination. He sees it as being subject and victim of whatever fad and fancy happens to catch the attention.

... and live that life in my ivory tower...spreading joy and love....as a Christian should.

Love of what, Wil?

Not Scripture, you have a minimal opinion of that. Not Christ really, you have a minimal opinion of Him. Not Christians, you're endlessly critical and contemptuous of them ... We're just a sad bunch who have to kid ourselves with empty pomp and circumstance and believe in an old man with a long white beard sitting on a throne in the clouds ... You call that love? It comes across as barely-concealed contempt for what simple folk believe.

Teaching the young to find their way....

By teaching them to 'go with the flow?'

What worries me is that all you will do is pass your condescending attitude on to the next generation.

You're mind is closed to so much, Wil Scripture can't mean this ... that can't have happened ... they must have made that bit up ... this is sophistry ... that's obviously not true ... this is just ...

If you're teaching them that the simple faithful believe in 'an old man with a beard sitting on a throne in the clouds', as you so often claim they do, then you do us a great disservice; if you believe the Sacred Scribe was some old guy sitting round a fire making up tales — tales they all put their lives on the line, and died for, by the way — then you do Scripture a great disservice.

What you're left with is a message that's more Haight Ashbury than Hebrew.

and I realize that it pisses you off that me and our elder brother Jesus dance down the path to jump in G!d's lap without a care of whether we doodle in the sand or not....we just choose not to throw stones.

I rather think we piss you off, and this 'me and my elder brother' shtick is just your way of getting back.

Wil ... don't you see ... all you do is throw stones, that's all I ever contend with you about.

You're the one constantly posting here about how naive, silly and superstitious simple Christian belief is; how we all fall short of your idealist standard; how your philosophy outsmarts all their Christian dogmas; how we're crippled with dependencies; how one day you'll make a bigger impression on the world than Christ ever did ...

So if your Christ dances along with you as you piss on everyone else, ridiculing the meek and the mild for not being as clever or as critical as you, you're welcome to him. We're talking about two different people here.

I suggest you find a way you can say yes to, and get on with it, and stop making a way out of finding reasons in orthodox Christianity not to ...

Thomas