Gyroscopic Investing

shoestring wrote:

MediumTex wrote: One item I would like to comment on relates to the idea that we hold the validation of the Jesus story to an unfairly high standard.

Here's the thing, though: If you ask me to believe that God impregnated a virgin, that the resulting son Jesus was actually God in mortal form, that Jesus performed all sorts of supernatural acts as a way of bolstering his ministry, that when the authorities executed him he suffered but then walked out of his grave three days later, that a bunch of other people popped out of their graves as well when Jesus came back to life, that Jesus travelled around for a bit after rising from the dead, that Jesus finally ascended into the heavens to sit at the right hand of God (or maybe re-commune with God), and that my fate through all of eternity rests on my correct understanding of all of these events, I'm going to subject it to more scrutiny that I would an account of what Abraham Lincoln had for breakfast on a given day.

I think that it's perfectly reasonable to subject more farfetched claims to greater scrutiny, with the starting assumption that claims involving the supernatural are false.

Not all things that exist must exist in nature.  This is demonstrably provable with the number 3, for example.  Another example is your mind, it has been demonstrated that it is separate from the physical body that's associated with any individual and therefore has no actual physical presence in the universe either.  Either every mathematical equation involving numbers is false and none of us are sentient, or some claims involving the supernatural must be true.

Even if one believes that my particular examples are incorrect and assumes all things which exist are fundamentally of the same matter, that only means God, Jesus, etc. are natural.

Finally there is no correlation, inverse or otherwise, between how extraordinary, incomprehensible, or demonstrable something is and how true it is.

I love Jesus.  It's obvious as I read the New Testament that others loved him as well.  As writers of that era were wont to do, they translated their love for him into embellishments of what he actually did during his life.  According to the common practices of the time, they attributed miracles to him, culminating in the miracle of rising from the dead.  That all makes perfect sense to me, and I probably would have done the same thing if I had been one of the original authors or subsequent scribes who "jazzed up" the story a bit to make it clear that Jesus was an amazing man.

The thing that makes me really love Jesus, though, is based on what happens when I clear away all of the supernatural accoutrements of the various Jesus stories.  When I do this, what I find underneath is a rock-solid message of love, kindness, generosity, humility, and skepticism about authority.  It's the most "true" message I have ever heard, and IMHO requires no attribution of supernatural abilities in order to validate its truth.  Its truth becomes apparent through the practice of the principles themselves.  With no disrespect to Peter, I think these timeless divine truths are actually the "Rock" that Jesus built his church on.

Jesus showed me that heaven really is a peaceful heart.  He showed me that hell is a tortured soul.  Jesus taught me that all of eternity is in each moment.  The challenge of following him is in grasping the potential we have for experiencing heaven in each moment, and in understanding the sacrifices that will be necessary for that to occur.  It basically requires one to transcend his animalistic instincts and tendencies, and that's hard to do, but the rewards are so amazing!

I know that a lot of people get really hung up on wanting to live forever and always wondering about whether they did all of the right things to guarantee themselves a spot in heaven.  I think that Jesus might tell these people that they missed his point entirely.  All they have really done is trade the legalism of the Jewish authorities of Jesus's time for the legalism of modern Christianity, with all of its endless pondering of the nature of the afterlife without giving serious thought to the nature of this life.

Followers of Jesus most certainly do tap into realms that transcend time, but rather than the eternity of bliss that people imagine they will experience after they die, I think the truth is that Jesus wanted people to see how each moment can transcend time, how there can be eternity in everything that we do, how we can find God in our hearts as we pursue these things.

An afterlife of eternal bliss based upon the correct decisions during this life seems like a basically selfish pursuit.  I don't think that God is interested in making such deals with his people.  I think that God wants us to understand his nature more fully, and Jesus showed us the way to do that, and that's why he said that he was the truth, the way and the light. 

My belief is that when religion becomes contentious and anxiety-inducing, it has probably long since gotten off of any path toward God that it may have ever been on.

I love Jesus.  He has opened my eyes to what God is really about.  I now see God all around me, all of the time.  I feel God in everything I do.  I don't need to die to receive my reward; I receive it every moment. 

When it comes to people, "sinner" is really a shorthand way of saying "animal", as in animals always want to know what they can take; they always want to know what's in it for them.  Animals don't care about the manifestation of God in a rainbow if there isn't a meal at the end of that rainbow.  A sinner is a person who goes through life like an animal, simply looking for meals to devour and whatever else he can lay claim to or use to satisfy his own desires.

Jesus helped me to see my animal nature.  He helped me to understand it.  I don't think that Jesus's blood was necessary for me transcend my animal nature; his wisdom was entirely sufficient.

In the same way that I would suggest people not become too preoccupied with what they can "take" from this life in the form of immortality, I would similarly suggest that people not become too preoccupied with Jesus's death either.  The wisdom and beauty of Jesus's message to humanity doesn't require an empty tomb to be true. 

The empty tomb was an expression of love and gratitude from the people to whom Jesus meant so much.  It was not the lynch pin that determined whether Jesus was, in fact, the Son of God.    If Jesus's teachings were not true, then an empty tomb would be little more than a cheap sorcerer's trick.  If, however, Jesus's teachings were true, then anything that happened in the tomb is simply irrelevant--i.e., if it's empty his teachings were true and if it's not empty his teachings were still true.

The truth of Jesus's teachings is determined by observing their effects when applied diligently in your own life, not by a leap of faith about what did or didn't happen 2,000 years ago.

shoestring wrote: Finally there is no correlation, inverse or otherwise, between how extraordinary, incomprehensible, or demonstrable something is and how true it is.

MangoMan wrote: Serious question:
I currently have this dog . He is the sweetest creature I have ever encountered, human or otherwise. He is now about 9.5 years old. It saddens me to think that he only has a few years left, and that at some point I will be without him. I consider myself an agnostic/atheist. Now, if there was a heaven, surely this dog would go there after his passing, even though he has not 'accepted Christ'. How do the believers here reconcile that? Would I be united with him in heaven if I chose to believe? Because it would not be heaven if he was not there waiting for me upon my arrival.

MangoMan wrote: Serious question:
I currently have this dog . He is the sweetest creature I have ever encountered, human or otherwise. He is now about 9.5 years old. It saddens me to think that he only has a few years left, and that at some point I will be without him. I consider myself an agnostic/atheist. Now, if there was a heaven, surely this dog would go there after his passing, even though he has not 'accepted Christ'. How do the believers here reconcile that? Would I be united with him in heaven if I chose to believe? Because it would not be heaven if he was not there waiting for me upon my arrival.

MediumTex wrote: What would any of you say to the following statement:

I love Jesus.  It's obvious as I read the New Testament that others loved him as well.  As writers of that era were wont to do, they translated their love for him into embellishments of what he actually did during his life.  According to the common practices of the time, they attributed miracles to him, culminating in the miracle of rising from the dead.  That all makes perfect sense to me, and I probably would have done the same thing if I had been one of the original authors or subsequent scribes who "jazzed up" the story a bit to make it clear that Jesus was an amazing man.

The thing that makes me really love Jesus, though, is based on what happens when I clear away all of the supernatural accoutrements of the various Jesus stories.  When I do this, what I find underneath is a rock-solid message of love, kindness, generosity, humility, and skepticism about authority.  It's the most "true" message I have ever heard, and IMHO requires no attribution of supernatural abilities in order to validate its truth.  Its truth becomes apparent through the practice of the principles themselves.  With no disrespect to Peter, I think these timeless divine truths are actually the "Rock" that Jesus built his church on.

Jesus showed me that heaven really is a peaceful heart.  He showed me that hell is a tortured soul.  Jesus taught me that all of eternity is in each moment.  The challenge of following him is in grasping the potential we have for experiencing heaven in each moment, and in understanding the sacrifices that will be necessary for that to occur.  It basically requires one to transcend his animalistic instincts and tendencies, and that's hard to do, but the rewards are so amazing!

I know that a lot of people get really hung up on wanting to live forever and always wondering about whether they did all of the right things to guarantee themselves a spot in heaven.  I think that Jesus might tell these people that they missed his point entirely.  All they have really done is trade the legalism of the Jewish authorities of Jesus's time for the legalism of modern Christianity, with all of its endless pondering of the nature of the afterlife without giving serious thought to the nature of this life.

Followers of Jesus most certainly do tap into realms that transcend time, but rather than the eternity of bliss that people imagine they will experience after they die, I think the truth is that Jesus wanted people to see how each moment can transcend time, how there can be eternity in everything that we do, how we can find God in our hearts as we pursue these things.

An afterlife of eternal bliss based upon the correct decisions during this life seems like a basically selfish pursuit.  I don't think that God is interested in making such deals with his people.  I think that God wants us to understand his nature more fully, and Jesus showed us the way to do that, and that's why he said that he was the truth, the way and the light. 

My belief is that when religion becomes contentious and anxiety-inducing, it has probably long since gotten off of any path toward God that it may have ever been on.

I love Jesus.  He has opened my eyes to what God is really about.  I now see God all around me, all of the time.  I feel God in everything I do.  I don't need to die to receive my reward; I receive it every moment. 

When it comes to people, "sinner" is really a shorthand way of saying "animal", as in animals always want to know what they can take; they always want to know what's in it for them.  Animals don't care about the manifestation of God in a rainbow if there isn't a meal at the end of that rainbow.  A sinner is a person who goes through life like an animal, simply looking for meals to devour and whatever else he can lay claim to or use to satisfy his own desires.

Jesus helped me to see my animal nature.  He helped me to understand it.  I don't think that Jesus's blood was necessary for me transcend my animal nature; his wisdom was entirely sufficient.

In the same way that I would suggest people not become too preoccupied with what they can "take" from this life in the form of immortality, I would similarly suggest that people not become too preoccupied with Jesus's death either.  The wisdom and beauty of Jesus's message to humanity doesn't require an empty tomb to be true. 

The empty tomb was an expression of love and gratitude from the people to whom Jesus meant so much.  It was not the lynch pin that determined whether Jesus was, in fact, the Son of God.    If Jesus's teachings were not true, then an empty tomb would be little more than a cheap sorcerer's trick.  If, however, Jesus's teachings were true, then anything that happened in the tomb is simply irrelevant--i.e., if it's empty his teachings were true and if it's not empty his teachings were still true.

The truth of Jesus's teachings is determined by observing their effects when applied diligently in your own life, not by a leap of faith about what did or didn't happen 2,000 years ago.

Mountaineer wrote: I'd say it sounds pretty new-age, where are the crystals?  I'd further say, the person saying that wants it to be all about them rather than all about God.  Even further, I'd say, that person has sucumbed to Satan's lies and tricks.  Even further yet, I'd say, I would like to have them for a neighbor - they sound very at peace with themselves and would probably not cause much trouble for the 'hood as well as being interesting to talk with over a beer.

MediumTex wrote:

Mountaineer wrote: I'd say it sounds pretty new-age, where are the crystals?  I'd further say, the person saying that wants it to be all about them rather than all about God.  Even further, I'd say, that person has sucumbed to Satan's lies and tricks.  Even further yet, I'd say, I would like to have them for a neighbor - they sound very at peace with themselves and would probably not cause much trouble for the 'hood as well as being interesting to talk with over a beer.

Is it "new age" to simply take Jesus's words at face value and try to understand his teachings as best you can?  That sounds more "old age" to me.  JESUS IS ALL OVER THE SCRIPTURES.  SINCE I BELIEVE IN THE INERANCY OF SCRIPTURE, THEN I'D HAVE TO SAY THAT JESUS' TEACHINGS INCLUDE ALL THE SCRIPTURE AND ALL THE TEACHINGS.  SO, TAKING JESUS' WORDS AT FACE VALUE AS YOU PROPOSE MEANS THAT I DO TAKE THEM AT FACE VALUE IN THE CONTEXT I'VE DESCRIBED IN MY OTHER POSTS.

Can you elaborate on why the interpretation that I am describing makes it all about the believer instead of all about God?  It seems like the more that we release ourselves from the obsession with immortality, the more it allows us to see beyond ourselves.  BECAUSE IT IS FUNDAMENTAL AS TO WHY JESUS CAME - SO WE COULD LIVE WITH GOD FOREVER WITH PERFECT BODIES AND SOULS - A COMPLETE PERFECT WHOLE.

With respect to Satan's lies and tricks, which ones would such a believer be succumbing to?  There is no pretext or justification for sinning.  There is no desire to turn away from God in any way.  There is no desire to justify the continual satisfaction of worldly desires.  There is no picking and choosing of which of Jesus's teachings to follow.  Perhaps most importantly, though, the interpretation I am describing potentially puts the believer into direct and constant contact with God.  How would a setup like that be the result of Satan's lies and tricks?  YOU DO NOT WANT TO BE IN CONTACT WITH GOD WHILE ON THIS EARTH.  GOD CANNOT BE IN THE PRESENCE OF EVIL SO YOU WOULD DIE SINCE WE ARE ALL SINNERS.  JESUS IS OUR MEDIATOR WITH GOD.  BECAUSE OF JESUS, GOD DECLARES US JUSTIFIED.  BECAUSE OF WHAT JESUS DID, WE ARE FORGIVEN OUR SINS AND WILL BE SAVED.  IT IS ALL ABOUT WHAT JESUS DID AND NOTHING ABOUT WHAT WE DO.

It seems like the approach to Christianity I am describing would be precisely what Satan would not want people to do.  If I were Satan it would bug me to have to try to tempt someone who experienced the presence of God many times every day.  I would much prefer to target people who went to church on Sundays, but who didn't really think too much about God or God's plan for them during the rest of the week.  THANKS BE TO GOD YOU ARE NOT SATAN.

Pointedstick wrote: Mountaineer, maybe you can help me resolve something that's been bugging me today.

I feel like the messages I'm being told come from the Christian religious denominations are somewhat at odds with what Jesus himself said when he was alive. I mean, Jesus spoke heavily about how one should act while still on this earth. It seemed important to him that people be humble, generous, and not overly doctrinaire (he was a Jewish reformer, after all).

But now I'm hearing that one's acts on this earth are irrelevant to salvation as long as one believes in the stories about who Jesus was and what he did. This seems to contradict a large part of the very message that Jesus was preaching.

"Believe in who Jesus is and you'll get into heaven" is what I'm hearing, but that just seems so simplistic. One could believe this and totally ignore all the nuances of the messages of peace and charity and forgiveness, right? So then what was the point of those messages if you don't actually have to follow them in order to receive your eternal reward?

Pointedstick wrote:One could believe this and totally ignore all the nuances of the messages of peace and charity and forgiveness, right?

ns2 wrote:According to the gospels Jesus said in the sermon on the Mount that not everyone who calls me Lord will enter the Kingdom but He who does the will of my father in heaven.

God, John 6:29 wrote:Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

Xan wrote:

God, John 6:29 wrote:Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

Pointedstick wrote:

Xan wrote:

God, John 6:29 wrote:Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

But surely that's not all, right? I mean, am I to believe that's the only thing that matters? Or rather, that it's the prerequisite for any of the other good things you do to matter?

Pointedstick wrote: Also "Quote from: God, John 6:29" made me LOL.

Pointedstick wrote: Mountaineer, maybe you can help me resolve something that's been bugging me today.

I feel like the messages I'm being told come from the Christian religious denominations are somewhat at odds with what Jesus himself said when he was alive. I mean, Jesus spoke heavily about how one should act while still on this earth. It seemed important to him that people be humble, generous, and not overly doctrinaire (he was a Jewish reformer, after all).

But now I'm hearing that one's acts on this earth are irrelevant to salvation as long as one believes in the stories about who Jesus was and what he did. This seems to contradict a large part of the very message that Jesus was preaching.

"Believe in who Jesus is and you'll get into heaven" is what I'm hearing, but that just seems so simplistic. One could believe this and totally ignore all the nuances of the messages of peace and charity and forgiveness, right? So then what was the point of those messages if you don't actually have to follow them in order to receive your eternal reward?

MediumTex wrote: Do people who subscribe to a certain set of religious beliefs think of the beliefs of other religions in atheistic terms?

For example, how would a typical Christian feel about Allah?  I predict that it would be a basically atheistic position.

One thing that continually bothers me is that picking one religion in most cases means that you think all other religions are misguided, wrong, and maybe even evil.  That always seemed like a shame to me.

MediumTex wrote: Based upon the Christian worldview being described above, it seems like the following conclusions would logically flow:

1. Prior to Jesus's ministry, Heaven was populated exclusively by Jewish people.  Prior to Jesus's ministry, all non-Jews and Jews who didn't obey the Law went to Hell where they will suffer for all of eternity.

AND

2. After Jesus's ministry, Heaven was populated almost exclusively by non-Jewish people (with the exception of the small population of messianic Jews).  After Jesus's ministry, most Jews have gone to Hell, where they will suffer for eternity.


***

In other words, the identical behavior--i.e., a Jewish person following the Law--at one point in time was a ticket to Heaven, and at another point in time was a ticket to Hell.  When you really think about it, there would have to have been a moment in time (unless there were some kind of "phase-in period") where literally all Jews who died before it would go to Heaven and all Jews who died after it would go to Hell based upon the identical beliefs and actions during life.

I know that God moves in mysterious ways, but the idea that all of the Jews who Hitler slaughtered are now in Hell, while Hitler is now in Heaven (he was a Christian, after all) just strikes me as very dissonant.

In fact, the whole idea of the Jewish God basically setting things up so that Jews who follow the Jewish Law will suffer in Hell for all of eternity doesn't make sense to me.  The response to that observation may be: "Well, it may not make any sense, but that's the way it works."  Sometimes, though, if enough things don't make any sense, it can be a way of realizing that a certain set of beliefs may not be true.

I WOULD SAY THAT ALL PEOPLE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE THE PROMISES OF GOD, THAT IS TRUST THE TRIUNE GOD ABOVE TRUSTING THEMSELVES, ARE THE ONES WHO ARE NOT SAVED.  BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER WHEN GOD TOOK THE FORM OF MAN IN JESUS.  JESUS WAS THERE ALL ALONG, BOTH IN TIME AND BEFORE GOD CREATED TIME.  FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH, THE TERM "JEW" CAME ABOUT AS A DERAGATORY TERM USED BY THE CAPTORS IN THE BABYLONIAN CAPITIVITY ... ROUGHLY 600 BC.  THE PROMISES HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE THE ORIGINAL SIN OF ADAM (MEANING MAN IN HEBREW) AND EVE,  GN 3:15.  ANOTHER GOOD EXAMPLE OF TRUSTING GOD WAS NOAH WHO BELIEVED AND TRUSTED GOD IN SPITE OF HOW FOOLISH IT SEEMED TO ALL THE OTHERS WHO SUBSEQUENTLY PERISHED, OR ABRAHAM WHEN GOD TOLD HIM TO SACRIFICE ISAAC, OR THE CENTURIAN IN JESUS'S TIME.

For example:

Who did Adam and Eve's son Cain marry?  SCRIPTURE DOES NOT SAY.  I SEEM TO REMEMBER MY PASTOR SAYING THERE IS A PRETTY GOOD THEORY THAT HIS DESCENDENTS POPULATED SOME OF THE ARABIC LANDS.  I RECALL  ALL THE DESCENDENTS OF SETH ARE THE ONES WHO ULTIMATELY BECAME THE ISRAELITES - GOD'S CHOSEN PEOPLE TO BRING FORTH CHRIST TO THE WORLD.

How did Noah fit all of the animals in the world in one boat?  Even if you could travel the whole world to collect all of those animals (which you couldn't back then), they simply wouldn't fit in a single boat that could have been built back then.  IF GOD CAN CREATE THE UNIVERSE, SOMEHOW IT DOES NOT SEEM IMPOSSIBLE TO FIT THE ANIMALS INTO THE ARK.  I COULD SPECULATE AND SAY IT WAS JUST DNA SAMPLES AND SOME MIRACULOUS EVENT TO BRING LIFE FROM THAT DNA AFTER THE FLOOD, BUT, THE SCRIPTURES DO SAY THAT NOR TELL US THE ANSWER.

How do the cave paintings by primitive humans all over the world fit into the Adam and Eve creation story?  If the Bible is inerrant, the geneology starting with Adam and Eve only goes back 6,000 years or so.  How do we overlay that with what we otherwise know about the history of our own species?  THE CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW THAT I HAVE BEEN DESCRIBING SEVERAL TIMES NOW SAYS THAT AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE "FALL" EVERYTHING (MAN, ANIMALS, THE EARTH, TIME, ETC.) WAS CURSED AND AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THAT, THERE IS NO RELIABLE WAY TO DATE ANYTHING PREHISTORY.  ALSO, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ANCIENT HEBRAIC TERMINOLOGY AND LANGUAGE IS LOOSY-GOOSY COMPARED TO OUR ENGLISH ... A GENERATION FOR EXAMPLE CAN HAVE SEVERAL DIFFERING MEANINGS HEAVILY DEPENDENT ON CONTEXT.  JUST LIKE IT HAS NO VOWELS; THEY HAVE TO BE "UNDERSTOOD" ACCORDING TO CONTEXT.  SIMILARLY, GREEK HAD NO PUNCTUATION AND HAS TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN CONTEXT.  I HAVE HEARD IT DESCRIBED THAT GOING FROM ONE LANGUAGE TO ANOTHER VIA TRANSLATION RESULTS IN LOSING 30% OF THE ORIGINAL DETAIL AND INSERTING 30% NEW STUFF; HOWEVER THE MEANING IS SPOT ON.  THAT STATEMENT WILL LIKELY DRAW FLIES  ABOUT HOW UNRELIABLE I SAID THE BIBLE WAS.  THAT IS WHY THE "SCRIPTURE INTERPRETS SCRIPTURE" AND "EASILY UNDERSTOOD PASSAGES INTERPRET THE MORE NEBULOUS PASSAGES" METHOD IS SO IMPORTANT ... IT KEEPS ONE FROM CHERRY PICKING AND FOCUSING ON THE TRIVIAL AT THE EXPENSE OF THE IMPORTANT.

Where does Neanderthal man fit into the Adam and Even/Garden of Eden narrative?  Was the Garden of Eden a paradise for Cro-Magnon man only?

I THINK A BIGGER QUESTION IS WHY DID GOD PICK THE ISRAELITES TO BRING JESUS TO THE WORLD AND WHY DOES THE BIBLE NOT ADDRESS WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE REST OF THE WORLD AT THE TIME IT WAS WRITTEN.  THE ANSWER IS, ONCE AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE THE SCRIPTURES DO NOT ADDRESS THAT.  ONE WAY I CAN GET MY HEAD AROUND IT IS TO COMPARE IT TO THE LIBRARY.  THERE ARE MANY BOOKS.  I HAVE NOT READ THEM ALL.  WHY NOT?  OUR ANSWERS WILL PROBABLY DIFFER DEPENDING ON WHERE AND WHEN WE LIVED.  WHY DID ONE PARTICULAR AUTHOR DECIDE TO WRITE A BOOK ON CAR REPAIR AND NOT ART APPRECIATION?  WHO KNOWS, PROBABLY ONLY THE AUTHOR.  THE ONE THAT I CARE ABOUT MOST IS THE ONE WHERE THE AUTHOR THAT TELLS ME HOW TO BE SAVED.  AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, HE TELLS ALL WE NEED TO KNOW BUT NOT ALL WE WANT TO KNOW.

Is it possible that Satan is the one who buried all of those bones and did those cave paintings just to throw people off of the one true path?  WITH GOD ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE.  AS WITH THE STORY OF JOB, GOD ALLOWS MANY THINGS TO HAPPEN FOR HIS PURPOSE.  IN THE CASE OF JOB, PERHAPS IT WAS SO WE WHO READ THE JOB ACCOUNT WILL REALIZE "WHO ARE WE TO QUESTION THE MIND OF GOD?" WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE SUFFERING THAT JOB DID.  BUT, TO COUNTER MY OWN POINT, THERE IS NOTHING IN SCRIPTURE THAT SAY WE WILL NOT SUFFER IN THIS LIFE, IT IS JUST THE OPPOSITE.  CHRISTIANS HAVE BEEN PERSECUTED FROM THE TIME OF CHRIST TO NOW, SOMETIMES MORE, SOMETIMES LESS, BUT USUALLY NOWHERE NEARLY AS BAD AS WHAT CHRIST SUFFERED WHEN HE TOOK ON THE SIN OF EVERYONE FROM ALL TIME AND DIED FOR US SO THAT WE COULD LIVE.

Those are just a few things that cross my mind here and there.

MediumTex wrote: What would any of you say to the following statement:

I love Jesus.  It's obvious as I read the New Testament that others loved him as well.  As writers of that era were wont to do, they translated their love for him into embellishments of what he actually did during his life.  According to the common practices of the time, they attributed miracles to him, culminating in the miracle of rising from the dead.  That all makes perfect sense to me, and I probably would have done the same thing if I had been one of the original authors or subsequent scribes who "jazzed up" the story a bit to make it clear that Jesus was an amazing man.

The thing that makes me really love Jesus, though, is based on what happens when I clear away all of the supernatural accoutrements of the various Jesus stories.  When I do this, what I find underneath is a rock-solid message of love, kindness, generosity, humility, and skepticism about authority.  It's the most "true" message I have ever heard, and IMHO requires no attribution of supernatural abilities in order to validate its truth.  Its truth becomes apparent through the practice of the principles themselves.  With no disrespect to Peter, I think these timeless divine truths are actually the "Rock" that Jesus built his church on.

Jesus showed me that heaven really is a peaceful heart.  He showed me that hell is a tortured soul.  Jesus taught me that all of eternity is in each moment.  The challenge of following him is in grasping the potential we have for experiencing heaven in each moment, and in understanding the sacrifices that will be necessary for that to occur.  It basically requires one to transcend his animalistic instincts and tendencies, and that's hard to do, but the rewards are so amazing!

I know that a lot of people get really hung up on wanting to live forever and always wondering about whether they did all of the right things to guarantee themselves a spot in heaven.  I think that Jesus might tell these people that they missed his point entirely.  All they have really done is trade the legalism of the Jewish authorities of Jesus's time for the legalism of modern Christianity, with all of its endless pondering of the nature of the afterlife without giving serious thought to the nature of this life.

Followers of Jesus most certainly do tap into realms that transcend time, but rather than the eternity of bliss that people imagine they will experience after they die, I think the truth is that Jesus wanted people to see how each moment can transcend time, how there can be eternity in everything that we do, how we can find God in our hearts as we pursue these things.

An afterlife of eternal bliss based upon the correct decisions during this life seems like a basically selfish pursuit.  I don't think that God is interested in making such deals with his people.  I think that God wants us to understand his nature more fully, and Jesus showed us the way to do that, and that's why he said that he was the truth, the way and the light. 

My belief is that when religion becomes contentious and anxiety-inducing, it has probably long since gotten off of any path toward God that it may have ever been on.

I love Jesus.  He has opened my eyes to what God is really about.  I now see God all around me, all of the time.  I feel God in everything I do.  I don't need to die to receive my reward; I receive it every moment. 

When it comes to people, "sinner" is really a shorthand way of saying "animal", as in animals always want to know what they can take; they always want to know what's in it for them.  Animals don't care about the manifestation of God in a rainbow if there isn't a meal at the end of that rainbow.  A sinner is a person who goes through life like an animal, simply looking for meals to devour and whatever else he can lay claim to or use to satisfy his own desires.

Jesus helped me to see my animal nature.  He helped me to understand it.  I don't think that Jesus's blood was necessary for me transcend my animal nature; his wisdom was entirely sufficient.

In the same way that I would suggest people not become too preoccupied with what they can "take" from this life in the form of immortality, I would similarly suggest that people not become too preoccupied with Jesus's death either.  The wisdom and beauty of Jesus's message to humanity doesn't require an empty tomb to be true. 

The empty tomb was an expression of love and gratitude from the people to whom Jesus meant so much.  It was not the lynch pin that determined whether Jesus was, in fact, the Son of God.    If Jesus's teachings were not true, then an empty tomb would be little more than a cheap sorcerer's trick.  If, however, Jesus's teachings were true, then anything that happened in the tomb is simply irrelevant--i.e., if it's empty his teachings were true and if it's not empty his teachings were still true.

The truth of Jesus's teachings is determined by observing their effects when applied diligently in your own life, not by a leap of faith about what did or didn't happen 2,000 years ago.

Pensees,S252/L2I9 wrote:Other religions, such heathen ones, are more popular, for
they are wholly external, but they are not for clever people. A
purely intellectual religion would be better suited to the clever, but it
would not serve the common people. The Christian religion alone is proportionate
to all, being a mixture of external and internal. It elevates the
people to the internal and humbles the proud to the external; it is not
perfect without both, for the people must understand the spirit of the
letter, and the clever must submit their spirit to the letter.

Gosso wrote: Christians are to humble their exterior, but also elevate their interior.  It is far more difficult for the common person to humble the exterior than it is for the clever person.  While the difficulty for the clever person is in elevation of the internal, which comes more easily to the common person.  I find a mainly intellectual religion lacking in joy, which is why I moved away from Stoicism and Zen.  GK Chesterton made the interesting point that Christian saints are typically painted with eyes that are wide open or full of compassion, while Buddhists are typically painted with closed and sleepy eyes.  If I have to choose then I'd go with the openness and compassion.

MediumTex wrote:

Gosso wrote: Christians are to humble their exterior, but also elevate their interior.  It is far more difficult for the common person to humble the exterior than it is for the clever person.  While the difficulty for the clever person is in elevation of the internal, which comes more easily to the common person.  I find a mainly intellectual religion lacking in joy, which is why I moved away from Stoicism and Zen.  GK Chesterton made the interesting point that Christian saints are typically painted with eyes that are wide open or full of compassion, while Buddhists are typically painted with closed and sleepy eyes.  If I have to choose then I'd go with the openness and compassion.

That is an interesting and very thoughtful take on religion, but it seems to cast religion as sort of like a spiritual health club, where the individual simply shops around for the one with the facilities, equipment and membership profile that is most appealing to him personally.