Clivedurdle

Wiki also has this!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laodicea_on_the_Lycus

Clivedurdle

Hmm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Colossians

My view is that we are seeing a high Christology from the get go - it seems to me to be a fundamental facet of a mythological Christ.

I did not realise that that means that I therefore think the stuff not thought to be Paul's because it has a high Christology is therefore likely to be Paul's!

sotto voce

I said scholarly discussion, Clive.

What comes out of seats, Clive?

SkyGuy

Seems to me, "educated" and "wish they have never been born" are opposites. Education infers rationality, while wishing you'd never been born is a emotional response.

I can see how the religious get these confused.

Sheshbazzar

It is the perception of the members of my faith that the words of Rev. 1:20-3:19 are directed directed to the seven אספות (Ecc.12:11, Isa 4:5, Eze 44:24) the 'as'soo'photh' = 'assemblies', literally 'the added ones', (the feminine plural of אספ to 'add') which in Greek becomes translated in the NT as the ἐκκλησίαι the 'ecclesia' meaning the 'in gathering', the 'assembly', or the 'called out' ones.

No Greek word 'church' actually ever occurs within any of these verses. The word for 'church', circe or kyriakon is of a pre-christian pagan origin and has been subtly foisted off on us, and substituted by the 'church's into these texts, So distorting the sense of these texts, while giving the present 'powers that be' (that is the 'Church') a ring in our noses to lead us about by.

The 'Church' and 'Church's' religious organizations that we are commonly familiar with and we are presently dealing with every day are actually those degenerate religious and fundamentally evil organizations that are so eloquently described in Rev. 17 & 18 as 'The Great Whore' and 'Mother of Whores' ('harlots') that deceive the whole earth.

From the beginning it has always been, and remains to the end, a matter "of words, and of names, and of (our) Law" ('Torah' > doctrine) and of those faithful, of always remaining on their guard and faithful to the maintaining of these - קדש - 'set apart' words, and names, and (our) laws ('Torah' > doctrine)

Most however, because of a lifetime of being fed on and indoctrinated into the common acceptance and employment of rank pagan derived substitutions for these 'set apart' (<sic> 'holy' 'sacred') terms, have thereby been rendered almost incapable of distinguishing the difference between what IS to be 'set apart' maintained and cherished, and what is 'common' and 'profane'. (Lev 10:10)

The indiscriminate acceptance and employment of the pagan derived terms 'church' and 'church's', particularly within the context of 'translating', reading, or in any discussion of religious institutions only fosters and contributes to misunderstanding and confusion.
There are two very distinct and entirely different religious organizations being discussed in Revelations, the common and generic substitutions of the words 'church(s)' throughout only serves to obscure and to disguise that fact.

Our religious texts have long been in the hands of 'The Great Whore' and all of her whoring daughters.
If we willingly eat at their table, we will be found to be feasting upon Her polluted bread.
One may tell and explain, but only those that have ears that hear and get understanding, are ones able to do anything about whatever knowledge they receive.


ששבצר העברי




.

sotto voce

But have you never heard that 'Ignorance is bliss'? Do you suppose that the great artists, who have aroused the full range of human emotions, were uneducated?

It is irrational to suppose that rationality and emotion are mutually exclusive. It may be that rationality causes emotional activity. There is very considerable evidence that it does, and one hardly needs to search to find it.

aa5874

It cannot be that there was a high Pauline Christology before a low Christology.

The very Pauline writer claimed he was a Persecutor of the Faith before he was called by a Mythological God.

It is not logical that there was a High Christology before Paul's Revealed Gospel or else Paul's Christology would be Obsolete.

The Pauline writer claimed he was the Last to See the resurrected Jesus.

Over 500 people were BEFORE Paul and that number is only those who "SAW" the resurrected Jesus.

Based on the Pauline writings, Paul's Jesus and Gospel were Revealed AFTER he was a Persecutor of those who preached and believed some kind of Christology.

All stories about the Pauline writer placed Paul AFTER the Jesus story was already known, circulated, preached and believed.

All stories about Paul claim there were Believers or a Jesus cult whom Paul persecuted.

No Jesus story have been found and dated in the 1st century and before c 70 CE, Apologetic sources Admit that the Pauline letters were composed After Revelation by John and 2nd century Apologetic sources did NOT acknowledge the Pauline Christology.

It is far more likely than that the Low Christology of the short, long gMark and gMatthew was followed by High Christology.

Remember Paul claimed he was LAST to see Jesus.
Remember Paul claimed he was a Persecutor.

1 Corinthians 15:8 KJVGalatians 1:13 KJV The Pauline Christology was Dead Last.

The Pauline writings are 2nd century or later anti-Marcionite texts.

Sheshbazzar

No problem Clive, just ignore or edit out anything found within the texts that does not agree with one's theories. Adam does it all the time.

Chili

'Last to see Jesus' about 200 years later makes Jesus the main character personification of an archetypal event that he relates to when writes. We call that mythh that so makes myth real, and the reason why Paul was 'last' to see Jesus is because he was 'persecuting the Church of God' that exists only in his own mind where these 'vision' appear that most likely were insights.

Persecuting here means testing religion for what it was worth, like Augustine and soo many others, and so was tithing his own fair share of time instead of just giving money and go about his own ambitions instead.

Paul also knew and understood the prevailing error of the 7 churches that he could see from his lofty postion wherein he 'as last one was first.'

outhouse

not sure I follow you


are you trying to say Acts has credibility with its visions.

Paul never claims himself to see jesus, or to be blind, or any other mythology ascociated with Acts.


Paul states he had a feeling within himself, that brought out the change from headhunter, to follower