8 of 10
8
What does it mean to be a Christian??
Posted: 12 October 2017 10:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 106 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2207
Joined  2013-06-01

Adamski,
Being a Christian.
 
The resurrection requirement is new, in our lifetimes. This is the way I understand it. Lausten should be able to fix any mistakes. Some decades back in the war of Evolution Verses Creation. Anyone claiming the Creation wasn’t real, got the wrath of the Catholic power machine. The problem was that these damn evolutionists kept popping up. It was like the colleges were manufacturing them. So, the Catholic machine decide that it needed to put together a team of priests that were highly learned in religious history and could clobber anything the colleges could produced. 
 
That was a huge mistake for the Catholics. It totally backfired when several of the priests started questioning if the resurrection ever took place. After all, they had access to the Vatican library and the history that colleges don’t. And it just wasn’t the resurrection, it was whether Jesus was at the crucifixion.
 
To fix the problem the Church made the requirement that to be a priest, you had to believe in the resurrection.
 
To answer your question. No, I have never heard that you had to believe in the resurrection to be a Christian. You do to be a priest.   
 
Next. Rejecting the virgin birth?
This is also a change in our lifetime. My understanding is that most Christian religions except for the Catholics have accepted that the word “virgin” was misinterpreted. The real meaning is “young woman”.
The Catholics problem from what I understand is the Holy Trinity. Mary is not part of the Trinity, but Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary through the Holy Spirit without the use of a human father and born while Mary was still a virgin.
Not all Christians have a god that is made up of three entities.
 
Redemption and Salvation.
I have never heard of any Christian filling the plate getting kick out for not believing in either redemption or salvation.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 October 2017 11:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 107 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2207
Joined  2013-06-01

Lausten,
I agree. Point I was trying to make was that in Adam & Eve a change in direction to control the knowledge took place.
 
Interpreting mythology is not my main goal. I think mankind experienced a massive loss of knowledge about the time of the third migration out of India. And I am trying to figure out if it had to do with man being domesticated by the gods. It fits most of the older stories.
 
The bible is a little harder to figure out. The clues are in Genesis with the Nephilim’s before the deluge. Some of the bible’s other clues are the six-digit giants and the androgynous creator of gods.
 
Right now, if you got any ideas about the “Sons of Gods” and the “daughters of men” connection, let me know. I see it as relating to warning about domestication.

[ Edited: 12 October 2017 11:23 AM by MikeYohe ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 October 2017 01:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 108 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4162
Joined  2009-10-21
MikeYohe - 12 October 2017 10:51 AM

Adamski,
Being a Christian.
 
The resurrection requirement is new, in our lifetimes. This is the way I understand it. Lausten should be able to fix any mistakes.

Oh, an easy one.  This creed was voted on and finalized in 381AD. It is recited every Sunday and used in the the membership of most churches today. Many don’t believe every word of it, but that is a separate issue.

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
    creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
    who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
    and born of the virgin Mary.
    He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
    was crucified, died, and was buried;
    he descended to hell.
    The third day he rose again from the dead.
    He ascended to heaven
    and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.

    From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
    the holy catholic* church,
    the communion of saints,
    the forgiveness of sins,
    the resurrection of the body,
    and the life everlasting. Amen.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 October 2017 05:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 109 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  225
Joined  2017-07-06
MikeYohe - 12 October 2017 09:38 AM

This type of thinking started before Paul and Corinthians. OT – 2 trees, tree of knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life.
 
Several pathways a guy can go with this. One pathway is that the tree of knowledge of good and evil is that man is not to judge. God will be the judge. The pathway I am trying to grasp is from the older Rig Veda Samhita. Remember, Veda means knowledge. And there are two trees, Tree of Jiva and Atman.
 
Rig Veda Samhita says:
1.164.20 Two birds associated together, and mutual friends, take refuge in the same tree; one of them eats the sweet fig; the other abstaining from food, merely looks on.
1.164.21 Where the smooth-gliding rays, cognizant, distil the perpetual portion of water; there has the lord and steadfast protector all beings accepted me, though immature in wisdom.
1.164.22 In the tree into which the smooth-gliding rays feeders on the sweet, enters, and again bring forth light over all, they have called the fruit sweet, but he partakes not of it who knows not the protector of the universe.
 
There are claims that concept of Atman and Jiva was used in the bible in Adam and Eve. 
 
The scholars mostly went in the direction of soul and spirit. I see it as early steps in wanting to control the knowledge in the Adam and Eve story.
 
Note, in 1.164.22 “bring forth light over all”. “light” is a term that means “knowledge”. It was still being used in that manner by Jesus in his Gnostic saying. Another note is, in I Corinthians in your link. Did you look up the same translations in the Orthodox Jewish interpretation?

Sounds like god is a poor communicator

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 October 2017 05:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 110 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  225
Joined  2017-07-06
MikeYohe - 12 October 2017 10:51 AM

Adamski,
Being a Christian.
 
The resurrection requirement is new, in our lifetimes. This is the way I understand it. Lausten should be able to fix any mistakes. Some decades back in the war of Evolution Verses Creation. Anyone claiming the Creation wasn’t real, got the wrath of the Catholic power machine. The problem was that these damn evolutionists kept popping up. It was like the colleges were manufacturing them. So, the Catholic machine decide that it needed to put together a team of priests that were highly learned in religious history and could clobber anything the colleges could produced. 
 
That was a huge mistake for the Catholics. It totally backfired when several of the priests started questioning if the resurrection ever took place. After all, they had access to the Vatican library and the history that colleges don’t. And it just wasn’t the resurrection, it was whether Jesus was at the crucifixion.
 
To fix the problem the Church made the requirement that to be a priest, you had to believe in the resurrection.
 
To answer your question. No, I have never heard that you had to believe in the resurrection to be a Christian. You do to be a priest.   
 
Next. Rejecting the virgin birth?
This is also a change in our lifetime. My understanding is that most Christian religions except for the Catholics have accepted that the word “virgin” was misinterpreted. The real meaning is “young woman”.
The Catholics problem from what I understand is the Holy Trinity. Mary is not part of the Trinity, but Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary through the Holy Spirit without the use of a human father and born while Mary was still a virgin.
Not all Christians have a god that is made up of three entities.
 
Redemption and Salvation.
I have never heard of any Christian filling the plate getting kick out for not believing in either redemption or salvation.

Sorry mike. Is the bible divine or human in origin??

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 October 2017 10:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 111 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2207
Joined  2013-06-01
Adamski - 12 October 2017 05:18 PM

Sorry mike. Is the bible divine or human in origin??


I’m not a believer, so it is just human data to me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 October 2017 10:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 112 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2207
Joined  2013-06-01
Adamski - 12 October 2017 05:11 PM

Sounds like god is a poor communicator


The Rig Veda is some of the oldest stories from pre-history that have been pasted down verbally. But as in the case of what we are looking at is not from the Gods. What I think is going on is that the Gods were hyperthymesia. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. The Gods where most likely another branch of the human tree. As there were no deities at that time that we are able to prove. The term god meant “knowledge”. They were the people of knowledge.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with knowledge, and the Word was knowledge”. The way I read it so that it make sense. The people back them were not stupid or fools.

I am betting the Gods were hyperthymesia. The Sanskrit literature was written works taken from scholars who spent a minimum of 27 years remembering the text. If the Gods were hyperthymesia, that would not have been necessary. Most of the Rig Veda are in rhymes. Quoted wrong and it will not rhyme. The reason for scholars is most likely the Gods were dying off due to not being able to fight off a disease. The story is that the Gods created man. Several stories.
The main texts covering science, math and stuff like that were written in rhymes. For example, writing have been found where Islam tried to adapt one of the stories. But could not make the changes because of the rhymes. 


The way I see it, there is no way this data came directly from the Gods. I am betting the Gods were hyperthymesia. And as the hyperthymesia was breed out of the Gods, the scholar priests who took the place of the Gods and passed down the stories by memory techniques and then it ended up in the Rigvedic Sanskrit hymns. Next, we had the beginning of history. And it was most likely around this time that the interpretations of the Rig Veda Samhita got written down. 
If this is correct, after the Gods create modern man from races of humanity by progeny of artificial selection. OT Genesis tells us that the Sons of the Gods liked the beautiful daughters of the men. And that they were having children with them. 
 
There seems to be a lot of interest in this type of thinking today and many books and YouTube stuff that works with these types of hypothesis.  The key word is “Nephilim”.
 
When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose. Then the Lord said, “My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever, for they are flesh; their days shall be one hundred twenty years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them. These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown.
Genesis 6:1-4

“My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever….” Could this be the loss of hyperthymesia? There seems to be a connection with hyperthymesia and red hair. There are 12 known hyperthymesia in the world today. Can you tell I am having fun with this puzzle?
There are many breeds of animals where the original wild animal that the breed came from are now extinct. They include horses, cattle and dogs for example. Why should humans be any different. A key point is that white skin people suddenly appeared on earth 12,000 years ago.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 October 2017 10:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 113 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2207
Joined  2013-06-01
Lausten - 12 October 2017 01:19 PM
MikeYohe - 12 October 2017 10:51 AM

Adamski,
Being a Christian.
 
The resurrection requirement is new, in our lifetimes. This is the way I understand it. Lausten should be able to fix any mistakes.

Oh, an easy one.  This creed was voted on and finalized in 381AD. It is recited every Sunday and used in the the membership of most churches today. Many don’t believe every word of it, but that is a separate issue.

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
    creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
    who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
    and born of the virgin Mary.
    He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
    was crucified, died, and was buried;
    he descended to hell.
    The third day he rose again from the dead.
    He ascended to heaven
    and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.

    From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
    the holy catholic* church,
    the communion of saints,
    the forgiveness of sins,
    the resurrection of the body,
    and the life everlasting. Amen.

 
Now that you posted the pledge. I do remember saying something like that in church. Had no idea what it meant at the time. Just going along with the crowd. I don’t remember the last paragraph. There was a time I was going to the Catholic church, I was young and everything was in Latin. Never understood a word.  Thanks for correcting me, I was wrong with my answer.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 October 2017 01:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 114 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  225
Joined  2017-07-06
MikeYohe - 12 October 2017 10:38 PM
Adamski - 12 October 2017 05:18 PM

Sorry mike. Is the bible divine or human in origin??


I’m not a believer, so it is just human data to me.

ok so youre an athiest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 October 2017 09:11 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 115 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2207
Joined  2013-06-01

Yes. I am an atheist. I do not agree with deities or believe in deities. I like religion. There are many good qualities about religion. I like Jesus’s Gnostic teachings. Jesus was an amazing guy who accomplish one hell of a lot in just a few years. I think the Pauline teaching have overall been very bad for mankind and been costly in the areas of advancing knowledge and human life.

Adamski, my layman hobby here is to understand the past and to understand religion. Which the bible is only a small part of the puzzle. There are a few major items that have been standing out. One is that unlike Europe up until the 1850’s we here in American have never understood the Age of Domestication. The second is that most American’s are unable to visualize what and how life operated like in the past, both near and far past. And the one of the biggest issues is the understand of mankind’s most valuable asset “knowledge” and the history of knowledge.
 
Professor Gerald Crabtree, who heads a genetics laboratory at Stanford University in California, has put forward the iconoclastic idea that rather than getting cleverer, human intelligence peaked several thousand years ago and from then on there has been a slow decline in our intellectual and emotional abilities.

Although we are now surrounded by the technological and medical benefits of a scientific revolution, these have masked an underlying decline in brain power which is set to continue into the future leading to the ultimate dumbing-down of the human species, Professor Crabtree said.

His argument is based on the fact that for more than 99 per cent of human evolutionary history, we have lived as hunter-gatherer communities surviving on our wits, leading to big-brained humans. Since the invention of agriculture and cities, however, natural selection on our intellect has effective stopped and mutations have accumulated in the critical “intelligence” genes.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 October 2017 09:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 116 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1561
Joined  2012-04-25
MikeYohe - 13 October 2017 09:11 AM

Yes. I am an atheist. I do not agree with deities or believe in deities. I like religion. There are many good qualities about religion. I like Jesus’s Gnostic teachings. Jesus was an amazing guy who accomplish one hell of a lot in just a few years. I think the Pauline teaching have overall been very bad for mankind and been costly in the areas of advancing knowledge and human life.

Adamski, my layman hobby here is to understand the past and to understand religion. Which the bible is only a small part of the puzzle. There are a few major items that have been standing out. One is that unlike Europe up until the 1850’s we here in American have never understood the Age of Domestication. The second is that most American’s are unable to visualize what and how life operated like in the past, both near and far past. And the one of the biggest issues is the understand of mankind’s most valuable asset “knowledge” and the history of knowledge.
 
Professor Gerald Crabtree, who heads a genetics laboratory at Stanford University in California, has put forward the iconoclastic idea that rather than getting cleverer, human intelligence peaked several thousand years ago and from then on there has been a slow decline in our intellectual and emotional abilities.

Although we are now surrounded by the technological and medical benefits of a scientific revolution, these have masked an underlying decline in brain power which is set to continue into the future leading to the ultimate dumbing-down of the human species, Professor Crabtree said.

His argument is based on the fact that for more than 99 per cent of human evolutionary history, we have lived as hunter-gatherer communities surviving on our wits, leading to big-brained humans. Since the invention of agriculture and cities, however, natural selection on our intellect has effective stopped and mutations have accumulated in the critical “intelligence” genes.

I wouldn’t give religion any credit though. Anything good that has come out of it could have been accomplished with out it, with say a non-religious social club. I do agree that Jesus, like Gandhi, MLK, and others had a very enlightened message and atheists should not shun him. In fact we should actively save him from the Christians, many/most of whom are very un-Jesus-like.

As for Crabtree, very interesting and it does make some sense. It used to be that pretty much everyone had to contribute or die. Now, not unlike the WALL-E movie, so many people do very little for themselves, survival-wise that it makes sense brain size overall must be shrinking as specialization takes over.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 October 2017 02:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 117 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2207
Joined  2013-06-01

What does it mean to be a Christian?
 
Christianity in its beginning was going in a lot of directions until the 318 Nicene Creed where Christianity was being defined. Then we had the Orthodox Christians splitting out in 1054. Somewhere between the Creed and the Schism of 1054 the making of new gods and the worship of the many gods vanished leaving Christianity as the main player.
 
My guess is at the time of Jesus, if your little girl asked. Where did the ducks come from? The answer would be, duck came with ancient people from the East.
 
The area the Christians evolved in was first used by people using the Red Ochre burials. Then the Sky Burials, followed by the Jewish ground burials. A few decades before Jesus, Ossuary Boxes were used. In each case of burial changes there were also religion changes. Therefore, I don’t think Jesus started the Christianity religion. And that people today would not recognize the Gnostic religion of Jesus as being Christianity as we know.

Who did the first Christians respect more, the priests or the gods? Well, who is asking? Jesus had to work with three groups of people living in his area with backgrounds in different religious thinking. The Jews, Greeks and the Egyptians.
 
Gods in the beginning of Christianity were many. Mary, Jesus’s wife is claimed by some scholars today to have been a god. The rulers of Rome were made gods. Along with their mother’s, brothers, sisters, wife and children. Most gods only had one miracle, the higher your god status the more miracle claimed. Jesus is credited with 22.
 
Christianity in America. There are very few early Christian churches in America. And the big Christian movement started in the time of the Civil War. Christianity was not a scholarly or organized type of religion in America. That came with the Catholic religion and then caught on with the other branches. I guess one could say it was an uneducated, unorganized type of religion. Or put another way. Faith based religion.
 
Today, young scholarly Christians dealing with faith based leadership. Some young Christians have trouble with the faith and we see them passing through CFI on their way to self-realization. 
 
There, I think I said it. It is part of a movement.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 October 2017 03:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 118 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4314
Joined  2014-06-20

It means you’ve been snookered.

Lois

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 October 2017 03:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 119 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2011-09-13
LoisL - 15 October 2017 03:19 PM

It means you’ve been snookered.

Lois

I agree.  If you “believe” anything supernatural, you have been had.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2017 02:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 120 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7802
Joined  2009-02-26

Adamski said;
Mary is not part of the Trinity, but Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary through the Holy Spirit without the use of a human father and born while Mary was still a virgin.

This is physically impossible. If Jesus was born from a virgin mother without a human father, Jesus would have been female and a clone of Mary.
A female egg, unfertilized by a male, cannot produce male offspring. It is physically impossible.

The Silvery Salamander is a perfect example. It mates with males from a different species of salamander, but rejects its sperm. The result is that the entire Silvery Salamander family is female and clones of their mother. There exist no male Silvery Salamanders.

Lacking its own males, the Silvery Salamander breeds with male Blue-Spotted or Jefferson Salamanders from March to April. The males’ spermatophores only stimulate egg development; their genetic material does not contribute to the offspring’s DNA.

Therefore all Silvery Salamaders are female and clones of the mother.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
   
8 of 10
8