Respectful question about Jesus (pbuh)

Netti-Netti said:
Here's another possible view: see the material world as a spiritualized world. The process of incarnation an in fact be seen as the spiritualization of matter.
Click to expand...
It's worth noting an over-arching theological/philosophical distinction here ... the view of the material and the spiritual as separate and distinct is not a Christian metaphysic, not even an Abrahamic one I think, although poor teaching and preaching has substantially obscured this point ... it's primarily Hellenic, and in that sense was always alien.

Netti-Netti said:
The dualistic view of matter versus spirit is overcome by the realization that they are in convergence.
Click to expand...
The dualistic view as expressed in the Abrahamic metaphysic presupposes a divergence from a foundational holistic state.

Platonism points towards this with the principle of exitus - reditus, a going-out and returning back, although of course in Plato and the pagan systems, the body, as part of the material realm, does not belong to the spirit or the good, and has no place in either — it's only the incorporeal soul that goes out and returns, the existence of matter is either punitive or pedagogic.

In a properly Abrahamic metaphysic the body is the means by which the soul is present in the material realm ... the soul does not find itself in a body, the body is the physical manifestation of the soul — body and soul is one thing.

Thomas
 
seattlegal said:
Do you mean that idolatries are based on the belief that Spirit arises from the flesh, rather than flesh arising from the Spirit? (If so, I agree. :) )
Click to expand...
I think idolatries probably occur when the person has not made the distinction between the two.

According to Genesis, the Creator made the human "from the dust of the earth, breathing into him the breath of life: and the human became a living soul." Once spirit is embedded in matter, there is a tendency to identify with matter. Some would say that this is part of G-d playing hide and seek with Himself. For whatever reason, some people get stuck in Phase I.

The other part of the game is proceeding to Phase II: overcoming the forgetfulness that follows from incarnation. Specifically, the task is to overcome the faulty view by re-learning to identify with the spirit. In Buddhism we see this process outlined in a very practical way: disengaging oneself from the world of the senses.

In Buddhism, the mind is also considered an organ. And so one becomes detached towards one's thoughts as well. If I recall, there is a separate Buddhist hell just for people who are preoccupied with their thoughts or use their thoughts for entertainment, especially if they spend a lot of time developing elaborate fancy ideological/political/narcissistic thoughts and getting other people's feedback on those thoughts in the context of an Internet Discussion forum. :):):)

The Buddhist dismissiveness to towards mental processes makes sense when you consider that mental imagery can be said to be even less substantial than sensory experiences.
 
Thomas said:
the soul does not find itself in a body, the body is the physical manifestation of the soul — body and soul is one thing.
Click to expand...
See the Genesis story cited above, which seems to suggest a different picture, with Spirit being separate from matter that has the power to spiritualize matter in a way that matter evidently can't do for itself.
 
Netti-Netti said:
I think idolatries probably occur when the person has not made the distinction between the two.

According to Genesis, the Creator made the human "from the dust of the earth, breathing into him the breath of life: and the human became a living soul." Once spirit is embedded in matter, there is a tendency to identify with matter. Some would say that this is part of G-d playing hide and seek with Himself. For whatever reason, some people get stuck in Phase I.

The other part of the game is proceeding to Phase II: overcoming the forgetfulness that follows from incarnation. Specifically, the task is to overcome the faulty view by re-learning to identify with the spirit. In Buddhism we see this process outlined in a very practical way: disengaging oneself from the world of the senses.

In Buddhism, the mind is also considered an organ. And so one becomes detached towards one's thoughts as well. If I recall, there is a separate Buddhist hell just for people who are preoccupied with their thoughts or use their thoughts for entertainment, especially if they spend a lot of time developing elaborate fancy ideological/political/narcissistic thoughts and getting other people's feedback on those thoughts in the context of an Internet Discussion forum. :):):)

The Buddhist dismissiveness to towards mental processes makes sense when you consider that mental imagery can be said to be even less substantial than sensory experiences.
Click to expand...
Well this is the Christianity thread, with a question specifically about Jesus. However, since you are bringing Buddhism into the mix, I will refer you to the opening lines of the Dhammapada.
 
Netti-Netti said:
See the Genesis story cited above, which seems to suggest a different picture, with Spirit being separate from matter that has the power to spiritualize matter in a way that matter evidently can't do for itself.
Click to expand...
Well, Genesis is a work of profound and complex metaphysics.

Nevertheless, we see there the foundation of man is the unity of spirit and matter — there was no material man, just the earth; no spiritual man, just the divine breath ... but the two bring forth a third, a living soul, and that's what man is, a living soul, who is both spirit and matter, that's my point, man was created whole ... any divergence is subsequent to that.

Genesis 1:26 prefaces the creation of man, and would seem to determine the principle of human nature as such ... to reflect the Divine likeness and image, and to be present as a being in the world ... to be spirit and matter in one thing?

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
....that's what man is, a living soul, who is both spirit and matter, that's my point, man was created whole ... any divergence is subsequent to that.
Click to expand...
The main problem with religion and spiritual beliefs is that they help settle philosophical issues. This is my belief, which is perfectly compatible with Platonic and NeoPlatonic philosophical doctrines of essences:
"My consciousness has never associated itself with this temporary body. Before I came on this earth, Father, ‘I was the same’.

As a little girl, ‘I was the same.’ I grew into womanhood, but still ‘I was the same.’

When the family in which I had been born made arrangements to have this body married, ‘I was the same.’

"And, Father, in front of you now, ‘I am the same.’ Ever afterward, though the dance of creation change around me in the hall of eternity, I shall be the same.
​
~Anandamayi Ma


462.jpg
 
Netti-Netti said:
The main problem with religion and spiritual beliefs is that they help settle philosophical issues.
Click to expand...
I don't see that as a problem ... if religions are founded on some order of mediation/revelation, then they should illuminate philosophical issues, which are the work of human reason and logic.

Netti-Netti said:
This is my belief, which is perfectly compatible with Platonic and NeoPlatonic philosophical doctrines of essences ...
Click to expand...

OK, but that's your belief ... that's not necessarily compatible with the belief of the authors of Scripture, nor what Christians believe, as they fundamentally revised and restructured NeoPlatonism according to what they believe is the data of Divine Revelation.

There are correspondences between traditions, but there are also distinctions, and we can't do justice to any tradition if we ignore the very thing that makes them uniquely what they are.

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
OK, but that's your belief ... that's not necessarily compatible with the belief of the authors of Scripture,
Click to expand...
Hello Thomas. In you previous post you stated that "the body is the physical manifestation of the soul — body and soul is one thing." This is contrary to Jesus teaching on the immortality of the soul. Specifically, in Matthew 22:30, Jesus describes a person's afterlife as not involving a physical self. He speaks of immortality in terms of people being "like the angels in heaven" - that is, without a fleshy body.

This comment about the afterlife appears in the context of a discussion of a hypothetical woman who was married multiple times while on earth. The questioned raised was: Who would she be married to in the afterlife? Jesus responded that human physical presence considerations for love are moot — they simply don't apply in the heavenly realm. The implication here is that souls may exist in purely spiritual form, which is obviously different from human existence.

It surprises me when I hear a Christian speak dismissively of Hindus who believe that you are not your body. That is in fact Jesus' teaching on the immortality of the soul!


your belief (is) not necessarily compatible with...what Christians believe
Click to expand...
You might want to check out St Cyril of Alexandria — Bishop and Doctor of the Church — who maintained that the Spirit cannot suffer because it lacks bodily existence. This actually makes perfect sense if you see suffering as a symptom of the incompleteness of the finite creature (not uncommon in Eastern religions).

At any rate, St Cyril's highly dualistic view would seem to be incompatible with your position that the body and soul are one thing — but very compatible with Jesus' teaching on immortality.
 
Netti-Netti said:
Hello Thomas. In you previous post you stated that "the body is the physical manifestation of the soul ã body and soul is one thing." This is contrary to Jesus teaching on the immortality of the soul.
Click to expand...
D'you think so? I don't ... I can see that if one presupposes as dualist idea of the soul, then one might assume that.

Netti-Netti said:
You might want to check out St Cyril of Alexandria ã Bishop and Doctor of the Church ... At any rate, St Cyril's highly dualistic view ...
Click to expand...
Oh dear ... you do know St Cyril opposed the dualisms of Nestorius and Eutyches? You do know that St Cyril is known as "The Doctor of the Incarnation" which is anything but dualistic? You do know that if he was indeed, as you say, 'highly dualistic', then he would not have been made a saint or doctor, would he? And indeed, if he is highly dualistic, then he is in error regarding the Doctrine he received ... so your argument refutes itself ... but I've got to give it to you, to read St Cyril as highly dualistic is either flat wrong or a revolutionary breakthrough in theology ... I'd get into print straight away — show St Cyril to be dualistic, and your fame would be assured.

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
It's worth noting an over-arching theological/philosophical distinction here ... the view of the material and the spiritual as separate and distinct is not a Christian metaphysic, not even an Abrahamic one I think
Click to expand...
There are scriptures that support a dualistic metaphysics, with matter being considered transient and dependent phenomena:
For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Genesis 3:19)

All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust. (Job 34:15)

The sons of men....have all one breath... All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. (Ecclesiastes 3:19-20)
​
This appears to be a direct comment on Genesis:
And the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it. (Ecclesiastes 12:7)
​
In Judaism, death was limited to the death of the body ("for dust thou art"). Consistent with a dualistic matter/spirit distinction, the animating spirit was not integral to the body. This view allows for the possibility of a continuity beyond bodily existence. The soul is een as not being dependent on bodily existence. In fact, according to Adin Steinsaltz ( "Discourse on the essence of Jewish existence"), the soul is G-d in matter.

Based on these Judaic views, the body needs to be animated by a power that antedates and transcends the matter it animates. This, of course, is what the creation story in Genesis is telling us.

One other quick comment, I'm not sure how much sense it makes to speak of universal resurrection/ glorious union of body+soul after Jesus' second coming that reunites people with their reconstructed old bodies if one maintains that the soul and body are inseparable, as you have.

My point here, if it's not obvious already, is that the matter/spirit and body/soul inseparability you have espoused is not compatible with a Christian metaphysic (Jesus' teaching on immortality of the soul) or an Abrahamic one that includes the OT.
 
Netti-Netti said:
There are scriptures that support a dualistic metaphysics, with matter being considered transient and dependent phenomena
Click to expand...
It's evident to me that people tend to find in Scripture what they want to find.

Netti-Netti said:
One other quick comment, I'm not sure how much sense it makes to speak of universal resurrection/ glorious union of body+soul after Jesus' second coming that reunites people with their reconstructed old bodies if one maintains that the soul and body are inseparable, as you have.
Click to expand...
You see, if you can't even correctly grasp what I'm saying, but apply your own presuppositions, and get it all wrong, how do you suppose to make sense of scripture?

As a matter of fact I don't think people will be united and certainly not with 'reconstructed old bodies' — that's your dualist notion of one thing and another thing — not what I think at all, and it's not scriptural either, by the way ...

Furthermore, I don't maintain the body and soul are inseparable, all I've maintained is that the body is the form of the soul, it's the means by which the soul manifests itself according to 'environmental necessity', one might say, according to the laws of the sphere in which it finds itself, which is something else altogether.

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
Well, Genesis is a work of profound and complex metaphysics.Nevertheless, we see there the foundation of man is the unity of spirit and matter — there was no material man, just the earth; no spiritual man, just the divine breath ... but the two bring forth a third, a living soul, and that's what man is, a living soul, who is both spirit and matter, that's my point, man was created whole ... any divergence is subsequent to that.Genesis 1:26 prefaces the creation of man, and would seem to determine the principle of human nature as such ... to reflect the Divine likeness and image, and to be present as a being in the world ... to be spirit and matter in one thing?Thomas
Click to expand...
All exisiting beings have both an invisible, internal character and a visible, external form. In man, we have an invisible mind and a physical body.
In addition, man lives in two worlds, the visible world (physical) and the invisible world (spiritual). Our physical self has a physical mind and a physical body (as mentioned above). Our spiritual self has a spiritual mind and a spiritual body.
Our physical self needs vitility elements like air, sunlight, food, water to grow.
Our spiritual self also needs (nutrients) life elements from God to grow. These elements develop our heart within us and also to become beings of truth. When our physical self acts in accordance with God's words,(good deeds) it projects good vitality element for the growth of our spirit self.
In return our spirit self return spirit elements that give joy and strength to our physical self.
When we pass on to the spirit world, we take on on our spirit self (body and soul) and leave our physical self, mind and body behind.
 
Is dualism not the product of the discursive mind?

The natural movement of the mind is (or rather should be), according to the will, which itself operates according to the principle of its nature, towards the fulfilment of its being.

In the absence of firm data however, the mind engages in a process of deliberation towards not its own essential good, which remains obscured or occluded, but towards the apparent goods that fall within its range of perception.

The resolution of this dilemma is actually tripartite, although the objective appears singular.

Ephesians 4:23
"And be renewed in the spirit (pneuma) of your mind (nous)"

Thomas
 
Actually I think I've oversimplified the issue in my comment above. Dualism is in the nature of things ... it's whether the distinction is absolute or relative that's the issue.

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
Actually I think I've oversimplified the issue in my comment above. Dualism is in the nature of things ... it's whether the distinction is absolute or relative that's the issue.

Thomas
Click to expand...
And therein enters the issue of perception and perspective, which are relativistic. This would naturally limit our understanding, imo.
 
Thomas, If the physical form is as integral a piece to the whole as the spirit, do you mean this only in the context of humans, or of God as well? Was God only whole once he had brought about the physical, and become one with it? Where does Jesus stand in all of this? Was he not whole when he left the body, after he had died, and before he was resurrected, or, since he is a manifestation of God, is he different from the rest of humanity?

I'm asking, not trying to argue any point, but because I'd like to hear how this theory covers these questions. Helping you troubleshoot I guess, lol.

SG, I agree, and perception and perspective are born of the segregation, or closed offness from everyone and everything else that is part of the physical world, imo. Everything is separate and in it's own separate packaging. We can't really connect with, or understand anything fully, and so we make guesses, and form conclusions based on our own separate and unique experience with those people or things.

I'm still interested about learning more about your stance Thomas, but for now, I just see things from my perspective, lol, and physical reality seems more a cutting off from completeness, rather than the fulfillment of. My physical appearance doesn't reflect my soul. It doesn't change as I grow spiritually, and it doesn't reflect physically if I regress. It's just a vessel. And a way to truly experience the physical as part of it.

So there is where I stand now. But perceptions do change. :)
 
Muslimwoman said:
Hello everyone, may I ask a question about Jesus (pbuh) from a Christian view.

I was watching a tv programme called the Islamic Jesus, it was looking at the story of Jesus (pbuh) in the Quran and the similarities and differences with the Bible story.

Now forgive me because, as those of you that speak to me regularly know, I have trouble understanding whether Christians see Jesus (pbuh) as G-d Himself or ..... well I really don't know, so shall not try to guess.

The programme asked a question that made me stop and think, it was "if Jesus (pbuh) was G-d then who was he praying to?"

I would be interested in the Christian answer to this question, as I would love to understand what you believe the relationship between Jesus (pbuh) and G-d was/is. Forgive me if I don't get it quickly as I have struggled with this question all my life.
Click to expand...
Hi MW. Read "The Shack" by William Young. It will help you understand who/what the Trinity is. Three personages-one God.

v/r

Q
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top