We are the cause of the current mass extinction. Sooner or later, the ecosystem will fail to sustain us. I’d certainly call this a mess. — Noah Te Stroete

No argument my friend.

A mess that only world unification can cure.

Way too many are still fighting a NWO but if planet ship Earth does not elect a Captain, I cannot see us as able to stop the damaging habits we have collectively allowed ourselves.

We have to get mad and elect a climate Czar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KvZI8BsSxw

Regards
DL

It’s also encroachment of natural habitats due to overpopulation, overfishing, introduction of alien species into habitats that don’t know what to do with them, factory farm runoff into the water supply, strip mining for all of our useless technologies, pollution in the oceans, overuse of antibiotics causing resistant bacteria, and the list goes on.

I’m sorry but no one knows how to fix our problems. Perhaps an alien race will save us (or enslave us).

The ones telling the stories? I believe most of them had more insight than you give them credit for. — Noah Te Stroete

I give them a lot of credit and only go into literal use to engage the fools who are literal readers of myths.

I seek the foolish literalists, as the non-literalists are, as you seem to know, a lot brighter and mostly do not need the correcting that would have them stop using homophobic and misogynous teachings the way immoral literalists do.

Regards
DL

You really have no imagination. As StreetlightX once said, you’re a “fucking retard.” — Noah Te Stroete

I quote you the bible to refute your idiocy and you get upset.

Fuck you.

Regards
DL

I give them a lot of credit and only go into literal use to engage the fools who are literal readers of myths.

I seek the foolish literalists, as the non-literalists are, as you seem to know, a lot brighter and mostly do not need the correcting that would have them stop using homophobic and misogynous teachings the way immoral literalists do. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

That’s good. I just don’t think you have an audience here. I also think your approach is all wrong.

Fuck you. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

We’re all already fucked.

The Serpent in Genesis tempted Adam & Eve, claiming they would gain the knowledge of God. I thought you would know that. — Noah Te Stroete

I thought you did not like literal reading. Are you a hypocrite or a liar?

Get the quote.

Regards
DL

I thought you did not like literal reading. Are you a hypocrite or a liar? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I’m not taking it literally. What makes you think I am?

I’m sorry but no one knows how to fix our problems. — Noah Te Stroete

Yes we do.

We do not have the political will.

Regards
DL

Yes we do.

We do not have the political will. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Really? Explain. I think we all would love to hear the solutions.

That’s good. I just don’t think you have an audience here. I also think your approach is all wrong. — Noah Te Stroete

They crucified Jesus for his goodness. They crucify me for telling the truth.

If you have a tried and proven method that gets better results than I get, and I do get positive results, while knowing that most believers are too obtuse to admit they are stupid or wrong and just run away.

Then again, you are a believer in a god without proof, so I see you as one of the stupid ones.

Who is your God? The genocidal Yahweh?

Regards
DL

I’m not taking it literally. What makes you think I am? — Noah Te Stroete

The quote and lie.

Regards
DL

Really? Explain. I think we all would love to hear the solutions. — Noah Te Stroete

??

I have no solution to our lack of a political will.

If the U.N. can't get the world to fly right, I sure wont have the idea to unite the world.

Regards
DL

Who is your God? The genocidal Yahweh? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Obviously you’re not familiar with me. Maybe if you would branch out from your own inane threads, you would learn something. Yes, I am stupid... along with the rest of humanity. You seem to be the only smart one. Are you Jesus returned?

Are you Jesus returned? — Noah Te Stroete

No. But following his esoteric ways and having suffered my apotheosis, has given me a Christ consciousness.

The fact that you will not name your imaginary god tells me a lot.

Regards
DL

The fact that you will not name your imaginary god tells me a lot. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I didn’t realize I had to give God a name. I guess I will call Her “Bertha”.

No. But following his esoteric ways and having suffered my apotheosis, has given me a Christ consciousness. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Clearly.

Bertha — Noah Te Stroete

If that is your name, good.

If not, see ya elsewhere as it looks like we are done here.

Regards
DL

Ahhhh...so this is what they mean when they say, "We are here discussing philosophy...and religion."

Son-of-a-gun!

If that is your name, good. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Are you sure you’re not Jesus? You’re so wise and messianic.

This thread is led by a Christ-like consciousness. How dare you judge!

It is too tedious to enumerate, but at least of few of the posts in this thread rely on misreadings of the (English translations of the) text. Gen. 1-3 is not a long read. Everyone interested should go read it.

Exegesis is not simple, not even in principle. It it foremost the effort to determine what was meant or intended. That is, to read the meaning out of the text (the Gk. prefix transliterated "ex" meaning out). Eisegesis (Gk. "eis," meaning into) is simply the sin of reading meaning into a text and representing that as exegetic meaning.

First readings, then, ought to be a modest, humble, measured and prudent look at the text itself: first reading irreducibly meaning reading. The metes and bounds of the text being at least tentatively set, you go on from there. The idea being you don't allow yourself to float away into a footless sky of fantasy.

First readings, then, ought to be a modest, humble, measured and prudent look at the text itself: first reading irreducibly meaning reading. The metes and bounds of the text being at least tentatively set, you go on from there. The idea being you don't allow yourself to float away into a footless sky of fantasy. — tim wood

Perhaps it appears I’m guilty of this? Perhaps I am, but I don’t think so. My interpretations are merely my own. To determine what was “meant” by the text is to understand the history that ancient peoples had an oral tradition that culminated in the written word. It is likely that they were recalling their more ancient past. At least it seems obvious to me.

The original Jewish messianic myth did not include anything about the forgiveness of sin. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

So?

That may very well be true, but the early church did not adopt the Jewish messianic myth as whole cloth. In the theology and liturgy of the church Jesus became the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world...

Was Jesus born with Original Sin? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Not in Catholicism, for example. Chritianity is a bit like saying 'asian culture is....' and one must ask `´then 'which one?'

If so, then he could not be the perfect sacrifice.

If not, then he had no human side and was pure god, and god cannot die which, makes the sacrifice a lie. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

The way I got it growing up was not that he was the perfect sacrifice because he ended up killed. In fact I never heard the phrase 'perfect sacrifice'. The idea was that God made himself vulnerable, in the end to torture, but even to human things like desire and guilt and doubt. And when Jesus was crucified he suffered human agony. I suppose it was obvious to me, even as a child, that some people have been tortured much longer than Jesus was, so it wasn't the most horrible suffering even. But it was a deity willing to enter into manifestation, when this deity did not need to. And I suppose I got the idea that perhaps his suffering became universal, like he allowed it to encompass mankind in some greater way, like suffering more that the exact torture and this was the sacrifice. But we all knew he was going to actually die, in fact that's how the story is presented.

So, I wonder if 'perfect sacrifice' is a strawman. It doesn't fit what I was taught. I am not Christian now, nor was I really then either, but how you are presenting it does not fit my experience.

Could these facts be why the Jews have no Original Sin concept in their religion? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I think the differences around Original Sin in Judaism and Christianity are nicely explained here....
https://outreachjudaism.org/original-sin/

If not, then he had no human side and was pure god, and god cannot die which, makes the sacrifice a lie. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

it seems to me this is assuming that the human side is Original Sin, period. The human side does have this aspect, but also other aspect, some of them I mentioned above.

Is that also why Jews rejected Jesus as their messiah, — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Some rejected him. Some accepted him.

the abdication of one’s responsibility for their actions, which is against all moral legal systems? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

This is binary. It's not binary. Obviously Christianity considers people responsible for their actions. Just because there is something that contradicts this, in relation to a phenomenon, does not mean all the other parts of Christianity where one is, clearly, responsible no longer apply.

I could see saying that the idea of Original Sin seems to contradict other ideas about personal responsibility, but it doesn't simply erase them.

Why have Christians embraced such an immoral and illegal concept? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Most organized religions have contradictions. But here's the rub....

whatever the truth is, it will likely seem contradictory, confusing, paradoxical. In science, in spirituality.

Whatever is going on, deep down, in the universe, from any angle, is not going to be set up in some grid like tic tac toe with rules that are easy for

we

fallible

creatures

to just understand.

I hate the concept of original sin, and I could give my take on why it arises. But I also understand why humans are open to these kinds of things.

Was Jesus born without the original sin? I don't know. No stamp on forehead.

But was he sinful in life? According to himself, he was.

"Those who never committed the same sin, should throw the first stone."

Nobody threw a stone. They were all sinners.

Jesus ditto. If he REALLY was into law and order, and sinless, he would have thrown that cobblestone.

Bitter Crank is quite right about the origin of Original Sin (tee hee), but those who think it, or the question whether Jesus was born with it, are unimportant are wrong, I believe. The doctrine itself has had great impact on the history of the West, as silly as it certainly is, by virtue of our enormous capacity, and indeed desire, to be very silly about certain things, religion especially. So from Augustine and Pelagius to Martin Luther and John Calvin (Calvin was especially fond of it) and even to the present, it has had considerable influence. The idea that we are sinners because of what Adam and Eve did according to the Old Testament, and there's not a damn thing we can do about it without God's grace, not to mention Jesus' sacrifice, has delighted many Protestants and Catholics for centuries. I think it has some place in Islam too, but I don't know how that works. The idea that eternal damnation is the result of failure to do and think certain things has served some very well.

As for whether Jesus was born with Original Sin, the answer is of course no. Because God, that's why.

It probably was true - knowing universal strangeness.

The first intelligent humans were likely advised by some governing being.

Of course I am joking, but if I was going to believe in the unlikely, it would take more this format.

What I don't get is, if Jesus can easily be traded for Mike, why are Christians so strict about the name Jesus?

Original sin isn't even mentioned in the BIble, so it certainly doesn't say this about Mary. I was mistaken about Mary being born without original sin; rather, Pope Pius IX declared that she was cleansed of this sin at conception; I doubt anyone but Catholics accept this. Neverthless, my point was that Jesus having an absence of original sin isn't at odds with him having the absence of original sin, since Adam & Eve were also humans who lacked it.

Perhaps it could be rationaled by assuming the Original Sin gene is on the Y chromosome. Jesus didn't get his Y chromosome from a biological human.

940 — Frank Apisa

Thanks for a related message.

Regards
DL