ADN

QUOTE(highlife)At raum..to post 13....Thats a lot of opinions but ill start here.First of all your asking us to believe you some how know exactly what these three belief systems were... and were sopposed to believe you have interpreted all there beliefs accuratly.Thats a lot to ask.Im sure if you gave ten different experts the same evidence they would come up with ten different opinions. How can you have three different belief systems and claim there all christian.Thats like saying theres an apple a pear and a peach but there all apples.I have no dought that there were different groups that concederd there beliefs to be the true path but they cant all be christion.Just becouse you or they call it christian doesnt make it so.If your going to exept jesus came and taught some thing.. than what did he teach and what is the clearest version of that teaching.If you want to discuss what you believe the true teachings of christ are than great.post away.This whole.. i know how every thing came to be.. is pointless.

sigh* No. I don't expect you to believe me. I don't give a damn what you say you believe. The only time you really know is when you face death. That is when you know what God you call to from your heart of hearts, and that is the only one profession of faith that matters beyond all others.

BUT I do read and have studied Christianity in Antiquity for over 15 years. I study original texts, and authoritative redactions. I have been a guest fellow to Members of the Graduate Theological Union, as well as to The Thelesis Society of Penn State, on the influence of Enochian Legends on the Christian Idea of Emmanuel. I was providing a pretty basic view of the three earliest sects found in the atiquated Christian Origins. Analyze or debate it as you will.

QUOTEThats like saying theres an apple a pear and a peach but there all apples.

No, its like saying Apples, Pears and Peaches all grow on trees can be grown in the same orchard, have similar cooking temperatures, and thus, even though they come from different trees and have different tastes and smells, they can easily be substituted in recipes for one another, or a mixture of them can be used.

QUOTEraum......My beliefs in the matter respectfully reside between the three of these distinct views, that quickly became one when the western mind became respectful of the need for literacy. Until then, most of the Bibles were filled with gibberish, and many of them still exist today.
.... ..It sounds like your saying you cant make up your mind.Get off the fence..pick some thing....will try not to pick your beliefs apart....=)

No, I am saying MY Philosophical View developed after 2 decades of sincere and fruitful research and study into my own being, and the world I percieve, is respectfully at the intersection of these three, as found around the same time Western thought became a sound philosophy; basically the Pre-Rennasiance Magus who held that the Natural Philopsophy which emanantes from the Logos was a means by which to study the concourse of forces responsible for all Creation. It deviates from these, however, in that it incorporates much of the Liguinstic inspired Post-Modern movent of post-Structuralism, along with some heavy leanings of Emmanuel Kant and Carl Gustav Jung, along with other less known Eastern Philosophers and Poets.

Brains wrote.......seriously: I do not believe a lot of Catholics think about god; they (should) go to church instead and (should) hear about god. then they go home, do whatever they want and confess their sins when they think they made them. You get a few assignments - e.g. pray a few - and you are set to continue your life of sin.

......Unfortunately I cant argue with your observations .Personally I†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚¢ve never been to a church except for a wedding or baptism . Mabey an Easter ceremony. I†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚¢ve only been at the christian thing for about 2 years and every thing I†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚¢ve learned is from the bible .One of these days ill start going but not just yet. I don†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚¢t concider going to church for an hour and forgetting about god the rest of the week much of a relationship. Your describing a certain type of practice that im sure happens in most religions.The forgiveness thing is tricky . Im sure other more mature christians could do a better job explaining it.but ill give it a try.

If you believe jesus died for your sins your forgiven but I believe the question becomes what does it mean to believe. Also you must ask to be forgiven and believe in your heart you were wrong for doing the sin. Just saying your sorry isn†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚¢t the same as believing you were wrong and knowing why you were wrong. You have to come at this thing with total honesty or it doesn†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚¢t work. This is why I disagreed with your earlier statement because when your forced to look at your actions so honestly on a regular basis I think it keeps you aware of who you really are and what the choices you make mean.

If you believe in jesus means not only you except him but that you except the holy spiret.The holly spirit in my opinion only stays around if you allow it to work in you.It moves you in a very natural way on a daily basis towards all the best parts of your self and to a deeper understanding of god.Sinning is purposeful rebellion against the holly spirit and the work it is trying to do.If your truly excepting of jesus than it becomes very obvious how much sin messes things up.You become detached from the spiret and have to leave the sin behind to reconnect.If you continuously sin I think you endanger your relationship with god.The holly spirit is put in you to bear fruit.As you become aware of the gifts you gain as a result of your growth you share them.It says some were in the bible that god prunes the branches that bear no fruit.

That†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚¢s the best I can do for now.My point is that there is a lot more to this than some may think. Hope that made some sense.

You're an interesting fellow Raum, no doubt about it. Kant and Jung are still on my "to do" list, along with a number of other philosophers of the mind. But from what I've read there were considerably more than just 3 schools of early christianity, covering the widest possible gamut of ideas. People who worshiped one God, or a dead God, or multiple Gods. Those who believed we were in Hell, or in a proving ground between Heaven and Hell, or already in the Kingdom of Heaven (quite how they justified that, god only knows).

BTW what is the earliest existing copy of one of the four official Gospels? 2nd century? 3rd century? And what of the earliest recognized reference to the following of these teachings? I've seen dates given for the creation of the various Gospels but never any evidence to support the claims. It would be interesting to know just how far back we can in fact go before certainty becomes speculation, even if that speculation is well informed.

My own personal take on Jesus (more of a pet theory really) is that he was indeed a man like any other, and carried out many of the actions attributed to him in the Gospels. When he was young and living in a house it's described that he was visited by wise men from the east. It seems at least possible that these were Buddhist monks, who are known to have had a community in Egypt during this time of jesus's childhood. There is a gap in the Gospels between this time and the time Jesus reached maturity, so it's impossible to know what the early followers thought he had been up to early on in his life. Perhaps he spent some time talking with the people who lived near him and learned some of their philosophies. When he returned to Israel the message he was preaching was at odds with the traditional Jewish vision of God, and more in line with the teachings of Buddha. Perhaps it was his attempt to instil this new way of thinking into the prevailing religion of the area which had the Jewish High Priest so determined to see him put to death. Certainly Jesus' understanding of suffering and his apparent desire to love and not judge are consistent with Buddhism. The idea of resurrection is another little parallel. It's an interesting thought at any rate.

an interesting website

Some more discussion of this idea on this next site, along with debate of the oft referenced "Q" document which (alongside Mark's earlier Gospel) is believed to have formed part of the basis for Mathew and Luke's version of the Gospels.

Was Jesus a Buddhist?

ME - QUOTEyou have at least three different entitites and movements in the early tenets of Christianity.

My comment spawned these two replies.

Highlife †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦¢‚¬Å“ QUOTE †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬Å¡‚¦First of all your asking us to believe you some how know exactly what these three belief systems were... and were sopposed to believe you have interpreted all there beliefs accuratly.Thats a lot to ask.

Lightfoot †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦¢‚¬Å“ QUOTE But from what I've read there were considerably more than just 3 schools of early christianity, covering the widest possible gamut of ideas.

I clearly need to clarify my statement.

In the early beginnings of the time that the followers of Christ were officially uniting, you have at least three previously existing entities with influence of their own adopting Christian influence and reforming into the 7 churches. Of these, The Ebionites are the most displeased with the current incarnation of the Church, which they say has far strayed from the initial teachings and includes all kinds of outside influence from other religions and philosophies and has since at least the Council of Nicea.

Each of these three entities had lots of sects and cults, which varied in views and influences.

The easiest answer : Was Jesus a Buddha? No. He did not make or fulfill a vow of Maha-Boddhicita or Maha-Samadhi.

(i.e. he did not wait to achieve the buddha state until all other people achieve the buddha state, nor did he dissolve entirely into the VOID (and never return), to ease the suffering of all others strive to achieve the buddha state.)

Did he have direct influence of their teachings direct his own? My answer is Jerusalem was a renowned center of Religious thought and philosophy. There were certainly buddhists, among many other peoples Rome interacted with or occupied, who at least had extended visits. And if nothing else, Jesus would likely have sought to debate them.

And never underestimate the love Joseph of Aramathea had for his nephew Jesus, whom he followed and even allowed to be sealed in his own tomb, to prevent molesting of the body. Many don't realize the symbolism that the fact when Jesus died, the tomb of Joseph of Aramathea's tomb was sealed is an indication of his great love for his nephew Jesus. His prosperous mining ventures (which is how Jesus could afford to attend rabbinical school, just as Mary's blood of Judah entitled him to the right.) certainly had the money to make any provision for Jesus's travels to other lands.

I suspect that the answer is a ways off, but I doubt it. If evidence exists that Jesus was a buddhist, it is most likely in the region now known as Afghanistan, which was the second Buddhist Holy Land. I suspect it is more the case that the popularity of the teachings of Buddhism was an influence on Roman Christianity, and thus serves to help inform the "Let Jesus be Everything Divine for All People" vision that Saul of Tarsus (i.e. "Paul") used to created the modern mythos of the New Testement. I expect Jesus had contact with some of their ideas, but the notion of Jesus dropping into a Buddhist temple and staying for years of instruction is a fairly new age concept.

I suspect he was hanging with the Essenes, who are the only people who wrote about his times and journeys in thie time. But their writings are "Wisdom Teachings" not meant to be completely literal accounts, and often use words in context that just aren't understood nowadays. But their writings were mostly disposed by the Council of Nicea.

My pastor didn't like when I told him that the only difference between him and me were that he serves God... AND I AM GOD!!!

Way to bring the quality of the debate down a notch...

You can count on me to do that for sure. Religion is all about faith. Either you have it or you don't. It is simple. I peronally think religion was made to give people a sense of hope. When people feel hope, they tend to work and try harder. Thats my view.

rr23

In regards to this section, we take our debates seriously...If you do not intend to contribute in such a way that is consistent with the rest of the posts, then its probably best that you don't come in this section...

It's not that I am not taking this seriously. I truly think there is a God. I would think someone or something had to make all of this. I mean we live on the one planet that is habital, we live with all the things we need to survive, and we have all the things we need to survive.

however, religion is different. Religion is currupt IMO. I believe in God, I believe in my maker, and I think there is one god, not a seperate Father, a seperate Son, and a seperate Holy Spirit. One is my vote.

Sorry if I was off base in what I said before... sometimes I don't think before I speak.. .and sarcasm runs rampant in me.

^ that was a much better reply ^ /:D" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt=":D" />