RED DAVE

From Amos:1. Why is it for my own good, Amos? Please explain why a relentless search for and combat against antisemitism isn't for my own good. Is it possible that xtains don't like to be reminded that there is an antisemitic core to their religionl and when reminded about that at inconvenient times they are liable to make threats and worse?

2. Judaism was certainly left abandoned by Jesus because the poor motherfucker was dead. And all was certainly dark for him. But for the rest of the Jews, except for a few apostates here and there, it wasn't dark at all and, for the believing Jews, it isn't dark yet.

3. For Jews, the house of Judaism was by no means empty and to state that it was empty as a fact is dubious.

RED DAVE

Amos

The antisemitism you see is not part of Christianity but at best is part of Christian religions which already is a paradox because there are no churches in the New Jerusalem and so there is no such thing as a Christian religion and those who think there is are already wrong and likely to act upon their own misinterpretations and this can lead to major problems. To combat antisemitism you must censor its readership and not allow the bible to be read with curious eyes just because "it speaks on behalf of salvation."

It was the bare naked ego that died and even his faculty of reason (as personified by the apostels) had already forsaken him. Notice also that only the senses were pierced to indicate that that is exactly what they were after.

Judaism is a good religion and I don'think that it will ever be dark for Judaism as a whole but if you slant the bible in your favor you better make sure that you are in control over its readership and that is where antisemitism finds its origen.

RED DAVE

From Amos:Strangely enough, I pretty much agree with this. My wife is an ordained Baptist and And Episcopal minister, and this is her postion: xtianity was never meant to be a religion, certainly not by Jesus. (We argue about who or what Jesus was.)

RED DAVE

Bernard Muller

Josephus recorded an eclipse (of the moon, not the sun) in these words:
Antiquities, XVII, VI,4 (Whiston's translation):
"And that very night there was an eclipse of the moon."
I hope the Greek reflects the translation.

Best regards, Bernard

DrJim

Could someone please explain the distinction that is starting to develop in this threat between "Christianity" and "Christian" religion"? also expressed in other places as a difference between "sprituality" and Religion.

I've heard it lots in a number of guises, and I never understood it. It seems like a convenient way for a member of the Christian Religion to disown policies, doctrines, ritualism or whatever else othereise done in the name of Christ that seems to him or her as wrong, embarrassing or inconvenient.

JRL

Wayne Delia

"Total Eclipse of the Mind" sounds like it would be better suited for something like a Pink Floyd album title.

WMD

Doctor X

Sigh. . . .

That one can compensate for a sensation--even block it which is part of the pain regulation system--does not make it any less "real."

Of course, some experience pain--know it as pain--but do not suffer.

Dr.Jim:

You may have to sniff the same brand of model airplane glue to achieve the singular gnosis of the poster. Otherwise, I imagine that one refers to the situation now that he disagrees with whilst the other refers to what he feels and believes is "right."

Convenient, no?

--J.D.

Amos

That's not strange at all because the condition of being Christian is to have been transformed into the likeness of Christ. Before we become Christian all faith and doubt must be annihilated because their is no place of doubters in heaven and since faith cannot be conceived to exist without doubt there is no place for faithers in heaven either. Notice how Jesus had to remove all doubt when he convinced Thomas and it was about this time that Peter was "defrocked" because Peter of faith was the twin of Thomas the doubter.

Christianity became a religion after the Reformation and until that time only Catholics and Jews aspired to obtain this lofty end to their religions.

DrJim

So, lets me see if I got this right.
1. Christianity was not a religion until the reformation.
2. Before the reformation Catholicism was a religion with lofty ends.
Therefore: Pre-reformation lofty ended Catholicism could not have been a Christianity.

My question is, did Catholicicm remain a non-Christianity after the reformation (any radical Lutherans around?). Did their lofty ends finally sag with age?



JRL.

Amos

Hello Dr. Jim, yes I like to make that distinction to isolate Catholicism from protestant religions and I am happy to do this according to the protestant idea of what it means to be a Christian.

According to most protestant religions we become Christian when we are born-again and until then are we not saved and therefore not Christian. Once saved the member is expected to become active in the church and dedicated to his Christian religion of choice.

Catholics don't see it that way and just live with the hope of salvation which will be in Gods time and because salvation will be in Gods time it cannot be an active part of their religious agenda.

Besides this, it is impossible for us to be followers of Christ because Jesus himself did not become fully Christ until his Resurrection and so we just do not know what Jesus did after he went to heaven.