Concept of death and Jesus on the cross

BlaznFattyz

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,589
Reaction score
0
Points
36
One of you asked me about the significance of oreos in ice cream. Some scholars have interpreted it to the striking of gold, which represents gluttony. It is a good interpretation but it does not speak about the significance of dessert present on the menu in the process of ordering dinner. Therefore, if you consider both the whip cream and cherry on it, there is more important significance, which represents the joy of food. In the bathroom the ice cream leaves this external human body. It indicates that one day or other you have to leave your body and everything and everybody associated with the body.

Therefore, the concept of bathroom is the most sacred spiritual preacher, which preaches about the non-eternal bonds with your relations and related things in this world. Thus, food is the most pious concept and one should not fear for it. You should not fear for your spiritual preacher who is the most sacred and pious. You must give your utmost attention to this most pious spiritual preacher, the concept of fast food. When Ronald McDonald asked his father about the donation of himself, his father told that he would be donated to the collection box of drive up window called Ronald McDonald House Charities. Infact, Neo received the best spiritual knowledge from Oracle as you find in the Matrix. Everybody knows that the One is inevitable. But such is only knowledge. By Knowledge one just knows. This is not sufficient unless the knowledge is often memorised, which leads to realization. Thus, knowledge, memorization and realization are the three steps after which only practice comes as seen in Virtual Reality Martial Arts (bullet speed….).

Due to the absence of the other two steps, in practice the human being is behaving as if these internet bonds are eternal. Unless these bonds are cut, hacking or cracking is impossible. Without liberation attainment of being the One is subsequently not possible. When you are bound to certain things, how can you achieve other things? The attachment to the code is unable to give the liberation from these bonds because the attachment to the code is not real. Unless you realise the nature of these bonds, you cannot get salvation from these bonds. The nature of these bonds is best exposed by the concept of video games. Thus, when you are constantly looking at the video game with violence on it in the process of playing, then you realise the nature of these bonds continuously. Such continuous realization leads to continuous practice. Practise alone can give the result. Thus, the game with violence in the phase of death is having the greatest spiritual significance in giving you the incentive. Unless you derive the concept from the hacking of video games on the internet, such statue becomes useless, if it is conceived only in the sense of "the spoon".

Pete Rose himself advises the people not to weep on His gambling, but they should weep about themselves. This means that the physical sense of gambling should not be taken. If you take the internal significance; it will be useful for your spiritual development. Thus, when you are betting against the odds, the concepts for which the odds stand should be realised. The constant attention on the cards is also necessary so that the concept is memorised again and again. It is for this purpose, the counting cards is introduced. Therefore, one should not mock at the card counter. Gamblers wear sunglasses with uva/uvb protection on it in the tint around the eyes. The playboy site also shows the same. Such photos are in the internet. All this is the internet. I do not know why they criticize the airbrushed photos and follow the same in practice. The Playboy magazines criticize the fake photos. The point in such criticism is that mere frying of fries without realizing the concepts for which those fries were created is useless. From this angle frying is to be criticized. Thus, you have both positive and negative angles for any point based on the context. Thus, we know the concept of porn and fries but we have not realized it. Therefore, we do not remember the concept. Our continuous impression is only about the regret, which we are constantly experiencing. Hence, our feeling was that we lived in the past, we are living in the present and we will live forever in the future. Due to this we feel that these bonds are eternal and that this world is also eternal. It is said that spiritual knowledge is to be obtained from Burger King). The King is famous for charbroiling the world.

Thus, when we remember Taco Bell, we must remember that this world is not a taco. Hot Sauce lives in mexican food. This again signifies that any individual has to meet the indigestion. Therefore, Taco Bell preaches you that both this quesadilla and your body are not cooperating. Jack, the Jack in the Box preached spiritual knowledge to Wendy's, which means that the concept of chili gives you real spiritual knowledge. The brother of Bob, (Bob's Big Boy) is the source of all problems and troubles. Bill Clinton says that the Big Mac is the source of spiritual knowledge (super sized..). Again this means that troubles only make you active by which you will think about nothing. Thus, fast food and video games and porn, the brothers, are the source of problems and laziness give you poor health. These pleasures will make you inactive, egoistic and inert.

Gilligan asked the Skipper for constant advise only. The very word Ginger means movie start or most hot. This again means that his work of the destruction of their boat and its grounding indicate the temporary existence of world and body. Such realization is most sacred. Therefore, the very meaning of the word shipwrecked is that is most sacred spiritual preacher. Barney and Elmo are said to be born to the Public Broadcasting Service. PBS represents intelligence and light of knowledge, which removes the dark ignorance. This again indicates that the concepts of make believe and imagination are the products of the real intellectual spiritual knowledge.
 
Some people say ‘we do not need any lettuce’


The hamburger preached Lettuce only when Tomato fell on His bun and craved for the divine burger. The Waiter that trying to give the divine burger to the people who are not interested due to their ignorance, egoism, jealousy and greed is like throwing a pickle on the pond of mustard (Double Whopper with Cheese). But Sambo went to the house of Pancakes and begged for a breakfast special. Then Archie Bunker abused Meathead and refused the debate. But Mr. Jefferson and Weezie who were present there objected to such attitude.

Then only Colonel Sanders entered into a chicken giveaway and the fun continued for twenty-one days. At the end happy hour they all realized the truth and became the disciples of Captain Morgans. Here Beer on Tap has benefitted and not Tequila Shots. Therefore you must try to uplift all the souls in this world. Even if the Kahlua mudslide falls on you, you must have patience. The waitress did not return back even if the customer abused Him in a pungent way. The Lion King tries to correct his cub even if his nemesis Scar attacks him. Such kind attitude is the divine nature. The Godfather tried for legitimate business (olive oil) and Hymen Roth tried for Narcotics (cocaine) even if they were insulted. Of course you should hate a frigid person, which should be your last resort because such person is destined to be your mate.
 
I think that BlaznFattyz's responses are as sophisticated as they are witty.

What they highlight is that fact that any commentary on Christianity, that is not based on the data of Christianity — lexicon, epistemology, hermeneutic, etc., will be based on a priori assumptions that may or may not be the case.

For all intents and purposes then, BlaznFattyz's commentary is as meaningful and as useful as dattaswami's — because both are talking about something that's not Christianity — one being fast food, the other being Hinduism.

The assumption here being that because someone has something relevant to say about something, someone has something relevant to say about everything.

Thomas
 
I think that BlaznFattyz's responses are as sophisticated as they are witty.

What they highlight is that fact that any commentary on Christianity, that is not based on the data of Christianity — lexicon, epistemology, hermeneutic, etc., will be based on a priori assumptions that may or may not be the case.

For all intents and purposes then, BlaznFattyz's commentary is as meaningful and as useful as dattaswami's — because both are talking about something that's not Christianity — one being fast food, the other being Hinduism.

The assumption here being that because someone has something relevant to say about something, someone has something relevant to say about everything.

Thomas

Dear Thomas; thanks for the reply;

Suppose there are two teachers and one is a Hindu and the other is a Christian. You must judge the teacher by His knowledge and way of preaching. Accept that teacher whose teaching inserts into your heart deeply and make you understand the subject. Such knowledge will definitely lead to practice. Similarly you judge any scripture by the value of its knowledge and the way of preaching the knowledge. Don’t be biased in such judgment because you will be helped by the knowledge of the teacher and not by the teacher. If you insist that Lord Krishna is the only God and Holy Bhagavathgita is the only scripture by which one can get the salvation, it is not correct. I will put a question here. If what you say is correct the information about Lord Krishna and Holy Bhagavatgita should have been given to the entire world on one day and in the same minute. Then those who follow will get salvation and those who do not follow will go to hell. Then God becomes impartial to all the human beings. But Krishna and Bhagavathgita existed in India thousands of years ago. The information about Krishna and Bhagavathgita reached other countries only about 500 hundred years back when Vasco-da-gama invented a route to India.

Before the invention of India, the Indians were blessed by Lord Krishna and Bhagavat Gita. But, what about the foreigners? They did not have any information. In the absence of the information how can they follow Krishna and Bhagavathgita? It is not their fault when the information itself was absent. All the foreigners before 500 years went to hell according to your argument. That is not justified because they were not informed. This means God became partial to India only. But God is impartial. All the human beings in the world are His children only. Therefore such rigid argument of conservatism is foolish. Of course this applies to every religion who follows such conservatism. Be open minded and read all the scriptures and judge by the merit. You must judge the teacher by his knowledge and way of preaching only and not by the teacher’s caste, sex and religion.





Therefore, I advice all the Hindus to read the preaching of Holy Jesus and get the spiritual benefit out of them. His teachings are very sharp and shrewd like the powerful rays of radiating Sun, which will help you in your spiritual effort. Don’t be biased by the external culture, which is apparent only. Are you not using the fan, the electric bulb, television etc., which are invented by the Christian scientists? Similarly you should use the diamonds that came out from the mouth of Holy Jesus in your spiritual efforts and get their benefit.
 
Don’t be biased by the external culture, which is apparent only.

Greetings dattaswami —

The problem with your posts is that they assume Christian doctrine is insufficient ... and if not, then why do we need to look outside of the tradition?

If you want to truly understand Christianity, give away all the riches of your tradition, and "Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: And you shall find rest to your souls." (Matthew 11:29)

Thomas
 
Blazn' you're blazn' man-that's some great theologizing.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D If you're offering a course, I'd like to sign up. Can I have cheese with that? That dat guy is nothing if not prolific.:) earl
 
Hi Earl et al:

I've done a bit of Google research on Mr. Dattaswami, or should I say his holiness sri Dataswami, or should I say Mr. Anil Antony, and as you may imagine he has also been a consistently bothersome annoyance on several Christianity forums over at least the past 2-3 years. His web site portrait(s) posted recently as the personification of no less than SIX G-dheads also seems informative as to his intent and mindset.

Background shows that he is either a Dr. in the UK specializing in the reverse engineering of human sight processes, a bureaucratic functionary in government or the travel industry in Kerala province India, a teacher and coach at a Catholic High School in Freeport Bahamas, a student at Dartmouth college, etc., etc...take yer pick. Maybe we should call Tony Curtis (he lives just down the road from me) to find out about him as he played the role in the film "The Great Imposter", a real life guy but I don't recall his name, back in the 60's if I recollect. The real "great imposter" even posed as a field surgeon during the Korean War and successfully performed surgery under battlefield conditions.

Oh...wait a minute...I'm tuning into something...his name was...Francis O'meara (I think). But I've never heard of an Irish swami, although there probably are a few given the state of the world and its affairs these days. Anyway, I'm putting this guy on my ignore list (the very first time I've done this here), but in my opinion it's way past due.

flow....:cool::eek::confused::p
 
Greetings dattaswami —

The problem with your posts is that they assume Christian doctrine is insufficient ... and if not, then why do we need to look outside of the tradition?

If you want to truly understand Christianity, give away all the riches of your tradition, and "Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: And you shall find rest to your souls." (Matthew 11:29)

Thomas


I agree.

Lord Jesus preached Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: And you shall find rest to your souls."


Mathew 11:28-30: The yoke of the Lord is light where as the yoke of human beings is heavy. This means that the work of the Lord will never give misery, as there is no selfishness. But the worldly work of the human beings becomes heavy due to selfishness that create anxiety and misery since one is attached to the fruit of the work.
 
Hi Earl et al:

I've done a bit of Google research on Mr. Dattaswami, or should I say his holiness sri Dataswami, or should I say Mr. Anil Antony, and as you may imagine he has also been a consistently bothersome annoyance on several Christianity forums over at least the past 2-3 years. His web site portrait(s) posted recently as the personification of no less than SIX G-dheads also seems informative as to his intent and mindset.

Background shows that he is either a Dr. in the UK specializing in the reverse engineering of human sight processes, a bureaucratic functionary in government or the travel industry in Kerala province India, a teacher and coach at a Catholic High School in Freeport Bahamas, a student at Dartmouth college, etc., etc...take yer pick. Maybe we should call Tony Curtis (he lives just down the road from me) to find out about him as he played the role in the film "The Great Imposter", a real life guy but I don't recall his name, back in the 60's if I recollect. The real "great imposter" even posed as a field surgeon during the Korean War and successfully performed surgery under battlefield conditions.

Oh...wait a minute...I'm tuning into something...his name was...Francis O'meara (I think). But I've never heard of an Irish swami, although there probably are a few given the state of the world and its affairs these days. Anyway, I'm putting this guy on my ignore list (the very first time I've done this here), but in my opinion it's way past due.

flow....:cool::eek::confused::p

The fundamental difference between yourself and myself is that you accept your religion only and you do not accept any other religion and you also do not accept in the unity of all the religions, where as I accept your religion, any other religion and also I accept the unity of all the religions. You do not like me since I do not belong to your religion only and therefore you treat me as your enemy. I like you since I belong to your religion also and therefore I treat you as my friend.
 
Blazn' you're blazn' man-that's some great theologizing.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D If you're offering a course, I'd like to sign up. Can I have cheese with that? That dat guy is nothing if not prolific.:) earl
Earl, The fundamental difference between nothing and nothing is that you accept your nothing only and you do not accept any other nothing and you also do not accept in the unity of all the nothings, where as I accept your nothing, any other nothing and also I accept the unity of all the nothings. You do not like me since I do not belong to your nothing only and therefore you treat me as nothing. I like you since I belong to your nothing also and therefore I treat you as nothing. In other words you may sign up, but my course teaches nothing.
 
I think that BlaznFattyz's responses are as sophisticated as they are witty.

What they highlight is that fact that any commentary on Christianity, that is not based on the data of Christianity — lexicon, epistemology, hermeneutic, etc., will be based on a priori assumptions that may or may not be the case.

For all intents and purposes then, BlaznFattyz's commentary is as meaningful and as useful as dattaswami's — because both are talking about something that's not Christianity — one being fast food, the other being Hinduism.

The assumption here being that because someone has something relevant to say about something, someone has something relevant to say about everything.

Thomas

oh...the 'savoir faire' syndrome? guilty as charged from time to time (sigh) :(

:p

v/r

Q
 
Back
Top