Amos

Have to be careful because Jesus rose form the death because Christ was never crucified but was set free under Bar-abbas. Resurrection just means that "reason prevails" in the end (again from a last page of Joyce but I forgot where).

Hawkingfan

So the bible is at fault if the one who reads it is led in the wrong direction and never gets it right (like the people I mentioned before who "thought" they had the Holy Spirit). By no stretch of the imagination would I say that the bible has "furthered civilization for the benefit of mankind as a whole". The bible has shown that it does the opposite.

What a clear and concise bible would do or not do is your opinion. In my opinion, it would do the opposite as what you are saying. It would lead people to god, not shew them away as it does. The bible should be able to be understood by the masses, not just David Koresh and you.

Hawkingfan

Again, not founded in scripture.

Amos

</strong>

But I do not deny anyone the Holy Spirit nor do I say that "drunk drivers" are bad people. They are just misled by literalism and quite capable of killing people when they are under the influence.

Well, all civilizations have a mythology but some do not even have an alphabet. All have some form of artistic expression which indicates that they can be inspired. We could have been just like them and some people actually think that their way is better than ours. Maybe you are one of them? The bible should not be read by the masses and that way there would not have been a David Koresh. Understand here that bible reading is not encouraged in [traditional] Catholicism.

Celsus

Amos,

Thanks for that reply. I'm beginning to understand your cryptic style of writing better and better each time you post. I was wondering if you have read any gnostic works, or perhaps The Jesus Mysteries, since your interpretation (in my view) seems to get ever closer to these every time you post. I notice that you didn't say you weren't a gnostic, only that you are a Catholic, and that you've been asked the question before. I don't know how this idea of personal resurrection and redemption seems to fit into reality, unfortunately.

As for Joyce, I don't see why (if indeed he did) his use of a psychological death and rebirth/resurrection is relevant, since it's entirely possible that he is merely using these because they are a powerful image in Christianity, and it tells us nothing about whether he actually thinks in that manner.

Bel and the Dragon is an apocryphal addition to Daniel, and 4 Maccabees is also apocryphal, I think only accepted by Eastern churches.

Amos

Hi Joel, I once was at a gnostic board and I sure did not agree with them (they were just hinting at reality). Never read the Jesus Mysteries nor any gnostic literature. I think some philosophers were gnostic but they did not write much to learn from, but I really forgot and maybe that is why.

The entire Portrait leads up to it and the foreshadows begin on page one with the happ-go-lucky childhood of Stephen. For sure, it is much too detailed for that not to be true. I just gave you two hints but the whole story is there.

Thanks.

[ November 06, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>