Christianity disinformation?

[ana]

Thank you Ana for your kindness too. The link tells me to translate my answers just for this topic or for all?

It was meant to translate the specific post I was addressing, anyway since there are already responses to it and the conversation has developed maybe we can continue here.

If it is true what you say. Then he thought better. Religions serve those who can discern the essential from the addition. If you can not discern corral you into a netherworld of rituals without a soul.

What if it's otherwise?, maybe once you start to discern as you put it, you do understand that institutionalized religions can't really help you evolve and in many instances even hinder this possibility.

The problem of religion is to become an earthly institution that keeps the soul rise.
You can trust a religion if you already know very spiritual and distinguish gold from straw.
You can also rely on a religion if the pastor is truly spiritual. I mean religions forever.

Tell me, if a bird can fly to the river and quench their thirst, would this ask someone else to take him to the river?

This is what the Cassiopaeans say:

'Life is religion. Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the world will cease. They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the 'past.' People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the 'Future.'

Learning builds spiritual growth, and awareness "solidifies" knowledge.

All you need is knowledge.

All there is is lessons. This is one infinite school. There is no other reason for anything to exist. Even inanimate matter learns it is all an "Illusion." Each individual possesses all of creation within their minds. Now, contemplate for a moment. Each soul is all powerful and can create or destroy all existence if know how. You and us and all others are interconnected by our mutual possession of all there is. You may create alternative universes if you wish and dwell within. You are all a duplicate of the universe within which you dwell. Your mind represents all that exists. It is "fun" to see how much you can access.

Then, Have you read The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer? I think it's a great book which hopefully can give you some insights here.

 

[judaswasjames]

I remember the "cancel my subscription" letters. They enjoyed publishing them and the letters could be fun reading. The magazines seemed to manage to run over somebody's sacred cow every month.
[/quote]

I wrote about the scholarly misinterpretation of the Gospel of Judas and the "Betrayal" of Jesus by 'Judas', but they were not interested.

 

[judaswasjames]

[quote author=Bud]My point of view is that there was never an objective problem with anything Jesus is supposed to have said. The problem was/is with the original translations of the Gospels from the Greek to other languages and then the interpretations of these teachings from those cultural mindsets.

Actually there are objective problems, and they are in the original Greek texts. One is commonly known as "the Synoptic Problem," which to put it briefly, is that there are contradictions when comparing Matthew, Mark, and Luke that weigh on the understanding of who Jesus was and what he taught; how it was developed in generations that followed.

When studying this the layperson can benefit a lot by knowing a little context of modern biblical scholarship.

Although various degrees of research to reconstruct the historic Jesus had been around for centuries, a greater effort began at the turn of the 20th century, particularly following the publishing of Albert Schweitzer in this regard.

Theologians recognized that there were numerous "Jesus' of faith" in the minds of individuals and doctrinal orthodoxies. Sincere desire for unity and apologetic integrity led scholars to quest for the historic Jesus as an objective measure to safeguard against undo sbjectivity in the developed Jesus' of faith, which they didn't necessarily deny.

To sum it briefly, rigorous application of historical-linguistic research techniques, especially form criticism, eventually showed there is no reliable information regarding the historic person of Jesus within or without the bible (in the original texts) even though the literary form of the Synoptic Gospels was basically biographic. This brought into relief various assumptions that founded both the conventional views of the historicity of Jesus and the Jesus of faith - all of which had to be questioned and revised, some of which include:

- Jesus was a Jew and virgin born.

- Jesus and his teachings were the fulfillment and new exposition of Judaism.

- Jesus was betrayed by the Sanhedrin and delivered to the Romans.

- Jesus was crucified and rose again.

- The existence of an original community of faith headed by the Apostles who assured doctrinal correctness.

Laura and Burton Mack are particularly gifted in explaining to the layman the results of New Testament scholarship. Mack's "The Lost Gospel," "Who Wrote the New Testament?: The Making of the Christian Myth" and "A Myth of Innocence: Mark and Christian Origins" are highly recommended, providing a clear picture of the social context in which these documents evolved.
[/quote]

Bart Ehrman always says the crucifixion is the one thing "we know for sure" about Jesus. I always wonder to myself (to him, as well) what gives him that certainty? I don't want to hear "Josephus". His text is compromised.