It will be Sunday, March 30Has Europe already "sprung"?
It will be Sunday, March 30Has Europe already "sprung"?
Europe switches to "Daylight Savings Time" on March 30th.The time "springs forward" tonight, so how will that affect everyone? Has Europe already "sprung"? And Redrock's province has foregone this nonsense.
Slowly, beauty changed
— Mambo Italiano (@mamboitaliano__) February 26, 2025
Year after year, the objects around us lost their magical details
And our eyes became accustomed to a dramatically flat aesthetic
Who decided? - A Thread 🧵
✨ Cash registers pic.twitter.com/HOKTYOLEKw
THE SECOND REFORMATION
...the philosophers of the Romantic age, and their view that one had to combine reason with imagination, system-building with perception of individuality, consistency with contradiction, analysis with a sense of the whole. What is striking is the degree of enthusiasm for, and active participation in, science that they had exhibited.
[...]For even rationality cannot get by without imagination, but neither can imagination without rationality. The marriage of the two is, however, of such a peculiar kind, that they carry on a life and death struggle, and yet it is only together that they are able to accomplish their greatest feats, such as the higher form of conceptualising that we are accustomed to call reason.
But this marriage was not to last. A sort of second Reformation was on the way. The Reformation of the sixteenth century could be seen as having involved a shift away from the capacity to understand metaphor, incarnation, the realm that bridges this world and the next, matter and spirit, towards a literalistic way of thinking — a move away from imagination, now seen as treacherous, and towards rationalism. In the middle of the nineteenth century in Germany, there arose a new intellectual movement, which, as one of its protagonists Ludwig Feuerbach indeed acknowledged, had its roots in the Reformation. It too had difficulty with the idea that the realms of matter and spirit interpenetrated one another: if a thing was not to be wholly disembodied, just an idea, it had to be wholly material. Gone was the understanding of the complex, often apparently paradoxical nature of reality, an acceptance of the coniunctio oppositorum: we were back to the realm of ‘either/or’. It too embraced a sort of literalism, and mistrusted imagination. This philosophy, known as materialism, was explicitly based on a view that science is the only foundation for knowing and understanding the world.
The origins of this scientific materialism, or ‘positivism’, lay in the French Enlightenment. Auguste Comte had asserted that science was not only our sole source of genuine knowledge about the world, but that it was the only way to understand humanity's place in the world, and the only credible view of the world as a whole. He saw societies and cultures passing through three stages: a theological phase, where religious perspectives dominate, ceding to a stage of philosophical analysis, inevitably shaped by metaphysical assumptions, which in turn gives way to the ‘positive’, scientific stage, in which these are jettisoned, and we achieve ‘objective’ knowledge.
Q: (L) Where did the Jews come from?
A: Atlantis.
Q: (L) Who was Yahweh.
A: Fictional being.
Q: (L) Who was the god that spoke to Moses on the mount?
A: Audible projection of Lizards.
So what time would I start if at present it's at 10AM Sask time. Would start time then be 11AM Sask time?Would everyone be okay if we changed the time of the workshops to the end of March (French time)?
If I understand your question you want to know if we all agree to follow the time change of France.Would everyone be okay if we changed the time of the workshops to the end of March (French time)?
Regarding the discussion of Paul's God, it seems that the following paragraph can be interpreted in at least two ways:Below are the links to what we discussed:
It can be thought that Laura is referring to Paul's "one god" as the Jewish Yahweh. However, she may have been referring to the milieu of the Philippians' beliefs, and that Paul's theology was not Yahwistic, only monotheistic or universalist.From Paul to Mark said:Recall that the most complete ‘story of Jesus’ in Paul’s letters is found in the so-called Philippians hymn, widely thought to be a pre-Pauline tradition (see ‘The Cross’ in chapter 7). For the Philippians to accept it as authoritative, they must already have been familiar with its presentation of Christ. I propose that if the Philippians (and many others) paid honors to Divus Julius – a widespread cult throughout the Empire at the time, though it faded as Christianity blossomed – they would know without saying who ‘Christ’ was, the one who had received the name of ‘Savior.’ And since there was only one god, as far as Paul was concerned, and that god was the Jewish Yahweh, obviously Julius Caesar must have been his son. That would have been the main element of Paul’s gospel, the thing he was most anxious to convey to all: that there was a man who had been a perfect man (as Caesar was said to be by many, though of course, not by his enemies – same for the fictional Jesus), who had the courage to be obedient unto death in order to save all of mankind who would accept his patronage, and whose death – as Paul experienced it in its heavenly copy – had cosmic significance. That’s the short version.
C's Session 7th October 1994 said:Q: (L) Who did Paul encounter on the road to Damascus.
A: Spirit of the 6th density.
C's Session 7th February 2015 said:Q: (L) Did Paul and the people in this Jerusalem church together come up with the idea of replacing the worship of Julius Caesar with this Christ figure who was universal more or less?
A: Yes
Q: (L) Did they plan on it being a Jewish Jesus?
A: No, that came later.
Q: (L) But he did, in fact, persuade them that they should refocus from Caesar to a universal creator god. Is that it?
A: Yes
Q: (L) Because that is the strong concept among the Jews.
A: Yes
C's Session 30th October 2021 said:Q: (Ryu) Did Paul believe Yahweh was the same god as Caesar's or did he use the Jewish religion as a template for his message?
A: Latter.
Q: (L) I think he was just using the Jewish god as a stand-in. He didn't really have much in the way of anything to reference. At the time, there were all these different gods. Then of course the Jewish god was claiming to be the only high creator god. That's what Paul was working with.
So, I tend to think that Laura was referring to a later conflation of Yahweh with Paul's deity.Grok said:### Key Points
- Research suggests Paul’s God, as described in Laura Knight-Jadczyk’s book “From Paul to Mark,” is a transcendent, spiritual deity, distinct from the traditional Jewish God, aligning with Gnostic interpretations.
- It seems likely that Paul’s concept of God involves “Seeing the Unseen,” a mystical understanding beyond the material world, possibly influenced by Gnostic and Marcionite ideas. [Or the Gnostic and Marcionite ideas were influenced by Paul.]
- The evidence leans toward Paul’s God being the supreme, unseen entity, not the God of the Old Testament, which is a controversial interpretation challenging traditional Christian views.
### Understanding Paul’s God
Laura Knight-Jadczyk’s book “From Paul to Mark: PaleoChristianity” offers a revisionist perspective on early Christianity, particularly focusing on the apostle Paul. The book suggests that Paul’s understanding of God is not the same as the traditional Jewish God but rather a transcendent, spiritual deity. This interpretation aligns with Gnostic beliefs, where the supreme God is distinct from the material world’s creator, often seen as the Demiurge in Gnostic cosmology.
The book highlights Paul’s revelation of “Seeing the Unseen,” which likely refers to a mystical or spiritual perception of God, beyond physical reality. This concept is tied to Gnostic and Marcionite ideas, where figures like Marcion rejected the Old Testament and saw the God of Jesus as different from the Jewish God. This interpretation is controversial, as it challenges the traditional Christian view that Paul’s God is the same as the God of the Jews, with Jesus as the Messiah fulfilling Old Testament prophecies.
This perspective is unexpected for readers familiar with mainstream Christian theology, as it positions Paul as a Gnostic teacher with a distinct view of divinity, potentially influencing later Christian texts like the Gospel of Mark.
### Detailed Analysis
Laura Knight-Jadczyk’s “From Paul to Mark: PaleoChristianity,” published in 2021, delves into the origins of early Christianity, focusing on the transition from Paul to Mark and challenging conventional narratives. The book’s exploration of Paul’s God is rooted in a mythicist approach, suggesting that Jesus, as traditionally understood, did not exist historically, and thus, Paul’s references to God and Christ are interpreted differently.
#### Background and Context
The book is described on [Amazon.com](https://www.amazon.com/Paul-Mark-PaleoChristianity-Laura-Knight-Jadczyk/dp/173490741X) as a groundbreaking study that strips away centuries of assumptions to reexamine early Christian fundamentals. Reviews on [Goodreads](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58167381-from-paul-to-mark) and [Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Paul-Mark-PaleoChristianity-Laura-Knight-Jadczyk/product-reviews/173490741X) highlight its focus on Paul’s mission and teachings, with some critics labeling the author a pseudo-historian due to her association with the “Church of Revived Paleochristianity.” Despite this, the book is noted for its meticulous research, proposing a timeline from Caesar to Paul and Mark, backed by contemporary sources.
#### Paul’s Concept of God
The book’s table of contents, as seen on [Z-Library](https://zlib.pub/book/from-paul-to-mark-paleochristianity-6dt242ttqpe0), includes chapters like “Paul’s Mission” and “Paul’s Theology,” which are crucial for understanding Paul’s God. Reviews suggest that Paul is depicted as the “heart and core of Christianity,” with his teachings focusing on a revelation of “Seeing the Unseen,” a concept decoded in the book and linked to Marcion’s later resurrection of these ideas.
An interview with Knight-Jadczyk on [Sott.net](https://www.sott.net/article/314412-Behind-the-Headlines-Jesus-never-existed-Interview-with-Laura-Knight-Jadczyk) reveals her view that Paul was a Gnostic teacher, teaching that the God of the Jews was not the true God, and that the true God was something else, with Jesus as its emissary. This aligns with Marcionite theology, where the God of the Old Testament is rejected, and a new, transcendent God is embraced. This interpretation is supported by discussions on forums like [earlywritings.com](https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8604), where the book is noted for placing Paul in the mythicist field, suggesting his Christ had a non-Jewish origin.
#### Comparison with Traditional Views
Traditionally, Paul’s God is the same as the Jewish God, with references in his letters, such as Romans 3:29-30, affirming monotheism (“Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one”). However, the book’s Gnostic lens interprets these references as pointing to a supreme, unseen God, distinct from the material world’s creator. This is evident in discussions of 1 Corinthians 2:6-11, where Paul’s wisdom of God is seen as hidden, possibly referring to a transcendent realm, aligning with Gnostic archons and rulers.
#### Controversies and Implications
This interpretation is controversial, as it challenges mainstream Christian theology and aligns with mythicist scholars like Wells, Doherty, and Carrier, as noted in reviews on [Amazon.com.au](https://www.amazon.com.au/Paul-Mark-PaleoChristianity-Laura-Knight-Jadczyk-ebook/dp/B095W1C4KX). The book’s suggestion that Paul’s God is not the Jewish God but a Gnostic, transcendent entity is unexpected for readers expecting traditional views, potentially shifting paradigms in biblical criticism.
#### Detailed Table of Contents Analysis
The book’s structure, as seen in the Z-Library listing, includes:
| Chapter | Section | Relevance to Paul’s God |
|---------|---------|-------------------------|
| 5. Paul’s Mission | Paul’s Theology | Discusses Paul’s understanding, likely Gnostic |
| 5. Paul’s Mission | Sacrifice and Paul’s Christ | Explores Christ’s role, possibly mystical |
| 5. Paul’s Mission | Paul and the Cross | May link to transcendent interpretations |
| 7. Paul and The Gospel of Mark | Mark: Interpreter of Paul | Connects Paul’s God to Mark’s narrative |
This table highlights key sections where Paul’s concept of God is likely elaborated, supporting the Gnostic interpretation.
#### Conclusion
In summary, “From Paul to Mark” presents Paul’s God as a transcendent, spiritual deity, associated with “Seeing the Unseen,” and distinct from the Jewish God, aligning with Gnostic and Marcionite views. This interpretation is controversial but provides a detailed, revisionist perspective on early Christian theology.
### Key Citations
- [Amazon.com: From Paul to Mark: PaleoChristianity book page](https://www.amazon.com/Paul-Mark-PaleoChristianity-Laura-Knight-Jadczyk/dp/173490741X)
- [Goodreads: From Paul to Mark: PaleoChristianity reviews](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58167381-from-paul-to-mark)
- [Sott.net: Interview with Laura Knight-Jadczyk on Jesus myth](https://www.sott.net/article/314412-Behind-the-Headlines-Jesus-never-existed-Interview-with-Laura-Knight-Jadczyk)
- [earlywritings.com: Forum discussion on From Paul to Mark](https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8604)
- [Amazon.com.au: From Paul to Mark: PaleoChristianity eBook reviews](https://www.amazon.com.au/Paul-Mark-PaleoChristianity-Laura-Knight-Jadczyk-ebook/dp/B095W1C4KX)
- [Z-Library: From Paul to Mark: PaleoChristianity content listing](https://zlib.pub/book/from-paul-to-mark-paleochristianity-6dt242ttqpe0)
Leave the meeting and try the link I posted again.I get an "Invalid meeting ID" message when I click on the link. Is it just me?