Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chili · 11-01-2008, 08:38 AM

Not sure where you want to go with this (I am not a theologian) but you might consider that myth is real and they are archetypal images of that.

It may be true that we are a product of our ancesters but we all have a genesis wherein we are one with God and son of the Father. To be a disciple here means that we must be born again from the rout wherein also our family is a liability and at best pertain to our richess in heaven where we are a solitary individual.

. . . they then, are part of the cross we carried.

The two against three must be as seen from the TOL and three against two as seen from the TOK. From the TOL it is Man and Woman and from the TOK it is Adam, Eve and me as outsider.

The "some" in Thomas means that we are the continuity of God and the "all" points at the full extent that we are are God after consolidation.

Chili · 11-01-2008, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But if there was a real figure behind the Q sayings, does this figure have to be Jesus Christ? Or do you want to define that figure as the historical core of Jesus?

Suppose this founder was named Levi and hung out in the taverns and talked a lot, but died peacefully in his sleep, leaving a wife and 10 children. Would you still call him the historical Jesus?

Any Galilean can make it but not every Galilean will make it. They are known to talk alot (they are a charismatic bunch that "speak in the light what they hear in the dark" (Mt.10:27), and will drink but are not know to be drunks (liberty prevents slavery of any kind).

One might consider here that if 'Jesus is the way' he may have just found the way that already was. I can't help but think of Golding here who near the end of "The Spire" told us that "it is as easy as eating and drinking" with 'it' being 'the way' . . . once you have your life-houseboat stocked with all of the animals including the wolves.

Chili · 11-02-2008, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

[
Dear Toto,

If he rose on the third day from his slumbers and filled the christmas stocking before appearing to the Galilaeans, who preserved his sayings due to the novelty of the situation, certainly others would have written about the trend in literature about Levi, and we would have external corroboration from inscriptions and art and statues, murals, frescoes, kitchenware, etc, all depicting the wonderful ascension of Levi from the matrimonial bed. I can see it something like "The Gospel of the householder Levi". And yes, if we had independent archaeological corroboration this Levi would most certainly be granted a favorable index of historicity, and he would be considered to have some degree of authentical historical significance, commensurate with all the available citations. And we would not be here discussing this, because Levi's historicity might have been quite strong.

Pete

Well Pete, we made Joseph the patron Saint of the family (or fathers maybe) so anything that happened to him could have happened to Levi except that Joseph was an upright sinner and not a drunken sinner.

That same Joseph, btw, had that chat with Nicodemus that nigth and proceded to carve a tomb in his own backyard in case he needed it and later asked Pilate if he could take the body home with him (not being a drunk Pilate was never far away from him).

Lambert

Chili · 11-03-2008, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

The "some" in Thomas means that we are the continuity of God and the "all" points at the full extent that we are God after consolidation.

So let me add here that we are Catholic until we become like a tree in a forest that is called Christendom wherein every tree is a solitary being living in harmony with the next in that same spirit of God. So now "who is the Christian."

11-01-2008, 08:38 AM	#1
Chili Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Alberta Posts: 11,885	Chili split from 4 singularities in Q Not sure where you want to go with this (I am not a theologian) but you might consider that myth is real and they are archetypal images of that. It may be true that we are a product of our ancesters but we all have a genesis wherein we are one with God and son of the Father. To be a disciple here means that we must be born again from the rout wherein also our family is a liability and at best pertain to our richess in heaven where we are a solitary individual. . . . they then, are part of the cross we carried. The two against three must be as seen from the TOL and three against two as seen from the TOK. From the TOL it is Man and Woman and from the TOK it is Adam, Eve and me as outsider. The "some" in Thomas means that we are the continuity of God and the "all" points at the full extent that we are are God after consolidation.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.