Was Christ a Yogi?

[Shabd Mystic]

I figured I'd save you the trouble ...

Though I'm sure this won't be "individual" enough hopefully it will help you rid yourself of the "pro Paul" beliefs. After that we can exchange "secrets."

Check it out HERE.

[Shabd Mystic]

You see, this is where I disagree. Your individual answer will help me understand you by showing me you have done the research rather than just parroting what you read. For example, let's say someone asks me a theological question about Christianity. I then quote a Christian website and leave no personal additions. Does this show I have thought about the topic and seriously pondered and processed the data to inform my opinion? Or does it show that I can google and have no opinion of my own?

Call me old fashioned, but when I ask someone their opinion I like to see internalised opinion, note just data.

~ PA

Why would you need me to "prove" I've done the research? If I use Einstein's Theory of Relativity to argue a point with you will I need to prove I've "done the research?"

How is that in any way whatsoever a valid "need" and not just a blatant case of what I already said, that you are only interested in winning some sort of Internet ego war?

You can try to dress it up in any way you can dream of but calling it by another name doesn't change what it is.

If you want to learn why I and others have said what we said about Paul then all the information you desire is at your fingertips.

But it seems you have no such desire because if you did you'd be reading the myriad resources.

It instead appears that all you want to do is get into a battle with me so you can somehow "win" something that isn't winnable.

Sorry, but I'm not playing. I guess that means you "win" by default. Hopefully that means this single-sided "competition" is finally over.

.

[+Link of Hyrule]

I figured I'd save you the trouble ...

Though I'm sure this won't be "individual" enough hopefully it will help you rid yourself of the "pro Paul" beliefs. After that we can exchange "secrets."

Check it out HERE.

You're right, that's not really what I was asking. I found similar sites already in my searching. All you've shown me is that you can google. I could do the same. It says nothing about whether you have read, researched, and internalised the data. I'm not saying you haven't, but a personal response world have given me a greater insight into you as a person. That's why I asked the question in the first place!

Why would you need me to "prove" I've done the research? If I use Einstein's Theory of Relativity to argue a point with you will I need to prove I've "done the research?"

How is that in any way whatsoever a valid "need" and not just a blatant case of what I already said, that you are only interested in winning some sort of Internet ego war?

You can try to dress it up in any way you can dream of but calling it by another name doesn't change what it is.

If you want to learn why I and others have said what we said about Paul then all the information you desire is at your fingertips.

But it seems you have no such desire because if you did you'd be reading the myriad resources.

It instead appears that all you want to do is get into a battle with me so you can somehow "win" something that isn't winnable.

Sorry, but I'm not playing. I guess that means you "win" by default. Hopefully that means this single-sided "competition" is finally over.

1- I didn't ask you to prove you did the research. I asked you for a personal response, not a website. This is not an unreasonable question, in my opinion.

2- I'm not playing games, nor was this a competition. The fact that you interpreted it as such says something about you're response.

3- Next time you ask a question about Christianity, I'm just going to link you to a Christian apologetics page. I wonder if you'll think if me as just another clueless Christian who can't thank for themselves and just parrot whatever I'm told.

~ PA

[Habitat]

In all likelihood, if the "free gift" model of Christianity that requires only compliance with the need to "believe" in Christ had not been promoted, we'd have never heard of him, IMO. How many similar characters have arisen through history only to disappear from the written record, can only be speculated upon. The problem is, the subsequent promoters, if they come to the fore, have the opportunity, and if not entirely scrupulous, the irresistable temptation , to modify the "message" to a more popular one. I look at the historical figures of this type that have survived in the historical record, as being of a genre, where what they have in common is not derived at all from their individual or cultural context, but is simply that which is in everyone of us, laid bare in them, but largely or completely obscured in the rest of us. The real "belief" is to grasp, and hold, that you are of the same likeness !

"Leap clear of all that is corporeal, and make yourself grow to a like expanse with that greatness which is beyond all measure; rise above all time, and become eternal; then you will apprehend God. Think that for you too nothing is impossible; deem that you too are immortal, and that you are able to grasp all things in your thought; to know every craft and every science, find your home in the haunts of every living creature; bring together in yourself all opposites of quality, heat and cold, dryness and fluidity; think that you are everywhere at once, on land, at sea in heaven; think that you are not begotten that you are in the womb , that you are young, that you are old, that you have died, that you are in the world beyond the grave; grasp in your thought all this at once, all times and places , all substances and qualities and magnitudes together; then you can apprehend God. But if you shut up your soul in your body (or fail to use your imagination), and abase yourself, and say ' I know nothing; I am afraid of earth and sea, I cannot mount to heaven; I know not what I was, nor what I shall be' ; then, what have you to do with God? Your thought can not grasp the beautiful and good, if you cleave to the body and are evil"

(Hermes Trismegistus)

[Shabd Mystic]

You're right, that's not really what I was asking. I found similar sites already in my searching. All you've shown me is that you can google. I could do the same. It says nothing about whether you have read, researched, and internalised the data.

Please explain to me how my proving to YOU that I have "read, researched, and internalized the data" is in any way in my best interest, or that it should matter to me in the least.

Why should I ever care about "proving myself to YOU?" Who are YOU that makes that anything more than a meaningless exercise that will waste my valuable time?

Why is this so important to you that you absolutely refuse to just drop it after I've told you in many ways that I have no interest in satisfying your desire?

Why do you continue to believe I would ever have any interest in "proving myself" to anybody, but especially to just YOU?

I couldn't care less what you think about me. Why would i ever think i needed to go through all the trouble of saying in my own way what countless people have already said in theirs? What makes you so important to me that I would ever even consider doing such a thing?

I'm not saying you haven't, but a personal response world have given me a greater insight into you as a person.

Here you go again, lol.

I'll just say that the fact that you continue to refuse to believe, without absolute proof (of which only you will decide what will qualify), that I've "read, researched, and internalised the data" has "given me a greater insight into you as a person."

Obviously, I can't just say that "oxygen exists." I have to prove to YOU, and only you, that I've "read, researched, and internalized the data."

Sorry, but if you want to continue this game you'll have to seek a new player. I believe an elementary school might be the best place to find potential participants.

1- I didn't ask you to prove you did the research. I asked you for a personal response, not a website. This is not an unreasonable question, in my opinion.

In my opinion, that's so beyond "unreasonable" that it's landing in the "absurd" neighborhood.

So I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

But somehow I'm not convinced that will be the end of this ...

2- I'm not playing games, nor was this a competition. The fact that you interpreted it as such says something about you're response.

Yes it does. It says I'm mature and reasonable and that I'm not swimming in my own ego.

3- Next time you ask a question about Christianity, I'm just going to link you to a Christian apologetics page.

The "next time" I ever come on a "message board" to "ask a question about Christianity" will surely become the first time (if it's about anything that truly matters to me). And if that day ever arrives where i can't research and find the answer for myself, or I feel I have to come here for help, all i would want is links to different sites where others have answered the question in depth.

The last thing I'd need is the opinion of some anonymous guy or gal on a message board. I don't make important decisions or distinctions based on such ridiculous "cites."

The fact that you clearly feel otherwise indicates how valid your opinions of Paul or Jesus or anything else truly must be.

I hope you're not a lawyer. I doubt you would be much help to your clients if you walked into court spouting off things you "read on an Internet message board." The same applies if you are a scholar or countless other things.

I wonder if you'll think if me as just another clueless Christian who can't thank for themselves and just parrot whatever I'm told.

Why would such a response change anything? I already believe that.

.

[Ealdwita]

And all the time there was me thinking.................

[Star of the Sea]

This explains what the "Word" referred to in the Bible actually is. (And like my earlier post it is also copyright free.)

Hi,

Just wondering about the article you posted and with regards to your comments:

Quote:This great truth or fact is significantly spoken of in the first chapter of the Gospel of John: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made."

If the above was true, then why would you not believe that the rest spoken in the Gospels is truthful?... Why would God make such a huge error in using the wrong word to describe his Logos?

Edited February 19, 2012 by Star of the Sea

[+Link of Hyrule]

Why would such a response change anything? I already believe that.

Naturally. Obviously you have no desire to engage in discussion and anything I say will be twisted to make it look like I'm being unreasonable, so I bid you a good day and best wishes for the future.

~ Regards,

[Cosmic Radiant]

Paranoid Android, I understand your point, about how you want individual proof about all this stuff, and how it cant be on the internet for it to be legit. However, I do not think you truly know what kind of "proof" you are looking for him to provide you. Sure he could tell you of a mystical experience he had the other night, where in his meditations, he transcended onto another plane of existence or whatever, but that will just open the door to "thats not proof! show me more proof!".

You do not want to understand his beliefs and perspectives more, you just want to keep arguing that he can never "prove" anything over the internet.

Also you seem to believe that ANYTHING on the internet is false information, even if its an article about subjects such as these, where theres countless information and logic, where they break down every aspect of religions. I am in total agreement with the OP because I have done my research on what he provided over the years and It all makes sense to me. Seriously, Im not trying to be rude here, but you cant be afraid of the internet. Sure there is false information but it's so easy to find the fake stuff and spot it out. We all know most UFO videos, for example, are fake.

I guess it just takes a leap of faith to open your mind without always being paranoid that everything on the internet is fake.

OH by the way, I'm assuming that you believe everything that you read in your Chemistry, Biology, History, and Psychology books is proven fact. You have no proof that atoms exist and that they contain protons neutrons and electrons. You just read it and think, "oh this is official stuff so its already been proven.". There is a lot of information available now on the internet that our governments and schools will not "officially" teach us. Do some research and think for yourself, "could this be possible?" or "does this possibly make any sense?" Just see what you think about the information, and forget about the "proof", because there is no such thing as proof.

[Shabd Mystic]

Hi,

Just wondering about the article you posted and with regards to your comments:

Quote:This great truth or fact is significantly spoken of in the first chapter of the Gospel of John: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made."

If the above was true, then why would you not believe that the rest spoken in the Gospels is truthful?... Why would God make such a huge error in using the wrong word to describe his Logos?

You really have me confused with this. As I said, the "Word" isn't actually a word (or words). It's not something that can be spoken or written. "Word" is just another name attached to it.

Every religion has a name for it, actually many names. The Bible calls it many things such as "Word," Logos," "Holy Ghost," "Living Waters" and other names. It is literally "music" that can only be heard via meditation. When you start hearing that music it slowly begins to become so powerful that you actually absorb yourself into it.

When you begin hearing it (in the right ear ONLY) it slowly begins to change you in countless ways. All your "faults" begin to disappear, such as anger and greed, etc., and most importantly the ego slowly begins to fade.

That "Word," or "Logos" or "Music" literally takes you to all Heavens after time (when you become "worthy" enough through the loss of all your faults and vices). It's not "imagination" or "unreal" or a "dream" or anything close to that. It is, in fact, so much more "real" than anything you have ever experienced that life becomes rather unreal.

Some have referred to it as the Kings Highway. As you progress you not only begin to lose all your faults over time but they are replaced with wonderful qualities. Also, over time, you gain all sorts of "powers" all the way up to the ability to "raise the dead" (or as some have said, the ability to move mountains).

It isn't anything "occult." It is the exact same thing that all the great Mystics have done. Countless others have done the same thing but you have never heard of any of them because only those designated by God to "teach" the way to go "Home" to Him ever let anyone even know they might have any such "powers."

All "powers" are NEVER to be used. (Unless you are so designated as Buddha or Jesus were.) As they say, you use them, you lose them. They aren't "granted" for anyone to use them. To use them would mean there was ego involved and ego is the only thing separating us from God. if anything they are only granted to "test" you as any "failure" will destroy anything you've accomplished to that point. If you ever see or meet a TRULY humble man (vs. someone who tries to act humble) who has little or no ego, I guarantee he (or she) has all sorts of "powers."

But they are meaningless to anyone pursuing this Path. They are nothing but a distraction to those who obtain them. What you are trying to gain, God realization, is so far beyond any 'powers" granted that by the time you gain them you couldn't care less. All you see is "God' and He is all you care to "obtain." The Mystics of the more recent centuries (such as Kabir, Nanak, Rumi, Sawan Singh, etc., all say the same things. They lay it ALL out in clear language and in great detail.

I realize this sounds downright crazy, lol. Well, at least to most Westerners (though that is changing too) but every single thing on the Path to God is spelled out by the modern day Masters (going back some time now). They tell you what you will see and experience all the way up to the highest Heaven. There is no "imagination" as it is the same identical thing for every person who follows the Path back to God. It's nothing like an "acid trip" that is supposedly a "mystical experience" and that is very "unreal" and completely different every time it happens. What you see, hear and experience is so incredible it defies description. What little all the Masters are able to even try to describe sounds absolutely incredible yet they all say the human mind is incapable of truly describing it.

It is the EXACT same Path Jesus and Buddha and Kabir and Muhammad and Nanak and Moses and many others have taken. The only difference is that the Masters of the distant past all had to describe it using allegory or parables or numerous other ways because it was very dangerous to teach such things and they had to be careful how they taught, and who they taught. That completely defies what Christians are taught to "believe" (and believing what they are told to believe is supposedly essential) but it doesn't rely on "beliefs" as it is all about "experience.".

The funny thing is that 99.9999% of the people who ever read something like this will dismiss it as "crazy," 'ludicrous" or much worse, lol. Instead they'll cling to one formal religion or another (that came out of the very same mystic experiences and were then created by "man" based upon misunderstood teachings of a great Mystic after He died), and convince themselves that such "insanity" won't get you anywhere (or it's a tool of "Satan," lol, as if Satan would "catch" you by making you a Perfect human being who is filled with nothing but bliss, love and compassion).

It's the only spiritual Path (or "faith" as it has absolutely nothing in common with a 'religion" - it is, in fact a science, and a Perfect science) that you can verify every "claim" made via personal EXPERIENCE. There is no "dogma." There is no "believe what I tell you and when you die you'll find out whether it was the truth or all fantasy."

It's very real and can ONLY be achieved BEFORE YOU DIE. In fact, it is very literally "death." You have to "die while living." My "buddy" Paul talked about his own mystical experiences when he said "I die daily.' When you get into a deep state of meditation the soul literally "leaves the body." The soul sees and hears and the soul travels through all the various "realms" or heavens. Paul even described the very same thing though I can't recall the specific quote. He talked about a man who went to the "second or third heaven" (I believe) and he specifically said he didn't know whether it happened "within the body or without" (meaning the guy just "flew off to heaven" or he went there via meditation).

The Bible is LOADED with mystical references because the compilers of the Bible weren't able to recognize they were speaking of mystical things (because they'd never experienced anything like it themselves) with specific quotes. The Gnostic "Gospel of Thomas" is practically 100% mystical and much of it was borrowed by some of the Biblical "authors," while much was left out because it was obviously mystical (and "mystical" was a huge threat to an organized 'church" because it teaches that the ONLY way to God is by reaching the "heaven within you." No "church" or "religion" is needed. In fact, it is counter productive.)

Jesus said the very same thing in some Gnostic texts, such as:

"Seek not the law in your scriptures for the law is life, whereas the scripture is dead. I tell you truly Moses received not his laws from God as writing but through the living word. The law is living word for living God to living prophets for living men. In everything that is life to the law is the law written, for I tell you truly all living things are nearer to God than the scripture which is without life. I tell you truly that the scripture is the work of man, but life and all its hosts are the work of our God. Wherefore do you not listen to the words of God which are written in his works? And wherefore do you study the dead scriptures which are from the hands of men?"

~ Jesus Christ (Essene Gospel of Peace)

Do you think there was any chance that would have EVER made it past the "screeners" who wanted to create a "religion" and put together a "Bible" to support that religion? NO WAY! Jesus is saying here that "scripture" can't save you. He says the same thing all the great Mystics have said, it's basically worthless (in regards to it doing anything "for you"). The Bible hadn't yet been created and here was Jesus saying anything like a "Bible" was worthless.

Of course that was going to get 'thrown out." Of course it was going to be ruled "heretical." Of course "Christians" were going to claim Jesus never said any such thing. If He had, that would mean their "Bible," and the religion attached to it, were "worthless," lol. Any "mysticism" was a HUGE threat. It didn't matter whether or not it was "true." It wasn't seeing the light of day. Their whole business ... I mean religion ... depended on destroying anything that showed Christ's teaching as mystical.

And despite that they were unable to get rid of it all. Not only because they failed to recognize obvious mystical references (or they came up with easy to sell alternate explanations), but because the Dead Sea Scrolls and all the Gnostic texts were discovered last century. And those texts knocked Christianity on its ear as MANY Christians began to question things and to look at things a lot differently. The Christian "church" did a full frontal assault to try to minimize the damage.

Countless Christians are so sold on the whole "you gotta believe in order to be saved" deal that they won't even entertain the possibility that there's a lot more to Christ and His teachings than they'd been led to believe. To even consider such a possibility automatically means you don't "believe" so you just lost out on "heaven," lol. I'm serious when I say that is pure marketing GENIUS. Nothing has ever come close to matching that. Had Paul opened an advertising agency he would have been a very rich man.

Most importantly, this Path I am referring to in no way threatens anybody's "religion," nor are you ever asked to give up your religion. There are numerous Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others who have followed this Path and who are now following it. It doesn't make any demands of you other than to meditate and try to live a clean and moral life. It seeks no "donations" nor do you have give any time to any "church" other than the one you already belong to if you so wish.

Anyway, I digress (and I am totally destroying my thus far valiant attempt to shut up about all this with this post but it was a rather "significant" day and right now I'm just feeling like I don't care - let everyone laugh and tear this apart. At least I will always know I "tried" and so maybe I can finally let go of this incredible desire to give away the "billion dollars" that nobody even believes exists.) So, back to the subject ...

"Word" and "Logos" are the same exact thing. They are both God, literally, and in the only form, along with light, in which He can ever be reached. He can only be reached by "going within," as Jesus tries to tell us in several Biblical quotes. That is where God is.

There is no such thing as a "wrong Word." That's like saying there is a "wrong God." And I don't know what you are trying to say with "using the wrong word to describe his Logos." That might make sense in some kind of "Christian" way, but it makes absolutely no sense to me in the way I was describing it, which is the way you are referring to if you are questioning me about how history's great Mystics (AKA "Sons of God") all referred to it.

If you can explain what you mean I will be happy to try to answer you, but right now I'm lost on your meaning (of course after all this I expect you'd rather "run for cover" in case insanity is contagious ).

.

.

[Shabd Mystic]

Obviously you have no desire to engage in discussion

LOL! Perfect timing. You posted this as i was in the middle of making my last post which took me nearly 3 hours to type (as I am a 2-fingered typist who recently suffered something that really slows even that down). I'd say that post shows how ridiculous your above statement is, but I am certain you will never be able to see it that way.

and anything I say will be twisted to make it look like I'm being unreasonable

There's no twisting at all. You are being unreasonable. You are looking for nothing but some words from "me:" that you can rip apart and ridicule or just disagree with "pleasantly," perhaps. I have absolutely no problem with "sharing" anything I believe with someone I think is sincerely interested in seeing what i think (even if they believe my thoughts are crazy). Once they show they are only interested in a "debate" then I'm done.

It's nothing against "you." It's everything against "debate." I played that game for years and thoroughly loved it. I know it's something I could easily get pulled back into because i so enjoy it. That's not what i want to do. That's about nothing but ego and I am trying hard to avoid things that are about ego.

That's fine for anyone else but it's not fine for me. It runs counter to everything that matters to me now and I am trying to at least hold down the ego and limit it to posts such as this one. Ego basically just means 'self." At it's extremes it's more akin to "egotism" but it's a fine line at times and I am trying to avoid crossing that line. I hope it won't be long before I no longer have any interest in posting "my" opinion about anything, but it's "one step at a time" and the exchange we've had is about the one step I'm trying to avoid.

If you truly are interested in "Paul vs. Jesus" there are countless sources for you. You don't need to hear my 'version" of that for any other reason than to critique it, comment on it, agree with it, disagree with it or however else you wish to bring "you" into it. Whatever your reasons for desiring that, it's just not something i want to do. I have absolutely no reason to take part in that. None.

If you had a desire to 'battle" me or 'attack" me in any way, i just gave you a TON of material. So use that. If you really just wanted to "get to know me" then i surely gave you that as well, and you'll have no reason to attack or criticize anything I wrote. We'll see how that goes.

so I bid you a good day and best wishes for the future.

Thanks, and the same to you. Honestly.

.

[Shabd Mystic]

Paranoid Android, I understand your point, about how you want individual proof about all this stuff, and how it cant be on the internet for it to be legit. However, I do not think you truly know what kind of "proof" you are looking for him to provide you. Sure he could tell you of a mystical experience he had the other night, where in his meditations, he transcended onto another plane of existence or whatever, but that will just open the door to "thats not proof! show me more proof!".

You do not want to understand his beliefs and perspectives more, you just want to keep arguing that he can never "prove" anything over the internet.

Also you seem to believe that ANYTHING on the internet is false information, even if its an article about subjects such as these, where theres countless information and logic, where they break down every aspect of religions. I am in total agreement with the OP because I have done my research on what he provided over the years and It all makes sense to me. Seriously, Im not trying to be rude here, but you cant be afraid of the internet. Sure there is false information but it's so easy to find the fake stuff and spot it out. We all know most UFO videos, for example, are fake.

I guess it just takes a leap of faith to open your mind without always being paranoid that everything on the internet is fake.

OH by the way, I'm assuming that you believe everything that you read in your Chemistry, Biology, History, and Psychology books is proven fact. You have no proof that atoms exist and that they contain protons neutrons and electrons. You just read it and think, "oh this is official stuff so its already been proven.". There is a lot of information available now on the internet that our governments and schools will not "officially" teach us. Do some research and think for yourself, "could this be possible?" or "does this possibly make any sense?" Just see what you think about the information, and forget about the "proof", because there is no such thing as proof.

Great post as it's clear you know of what you speak. Thanks for that. It's great just to hear another person like Habitat who 'gets it." It tends to get tiresome being viewed by everyone as a "loon," especially when you're not going through all this effort for any other reason than you know what a huge difference this all would make to somebody's life.

It's hard to keep doing this when most everybody sees you as "attacking Christianity" and therefore "attacking them." It's wonderful to know there are a few people who understand what I'm hoping to just "give away" (not that it's mine to give, lol) and who can recognize my motivation is sincere, even when it's poorly displayed.

.

[White Crane Feather]

It begs the question of why God-on-Earth would need to be plying the trade of a carpenter, does it not ? The divinity in Christ was realized, ours still requires work, but in principle it is a level playing field, open to all-comers.

Indeed... Or more like a remembrance. god in humanity always attempting to relize god itself. Self reflection is the crux of concousness. We have our christs and our yogis who realize the unity of the spirit thereby guving birth to the concousness of god. We are god saying here I am. A reflection of the great spirit so that the great spirit may observe itself.

[Habitat]

Indeed... Or more like a remembrance. god in humanity always attempting to relize god itself. Self reflection is the crux of concousness. We have our christs and our yogis who realize the unity of the spirit thereby guving birth to the concousness of god. We are god saying here I am. A reflection of the great spirit so that the great spirit may observe itself.

Completing the circle ? Interesting way of putting it,like the creation returning to acknowledge the Source.

[+Link of Hyrule]

Paranoid Android, I understand your point, about how you want individual proof about all this stuff, and how it cant be on the internet for it to be legit. However, I do not think you truly know what kind of "proof" you are looking for him to provide you. Sure he could tell you of a mystical experience he had the other night, where in his meditations, he transcended onto another plane of existence or whatever, but that will just open the door to "thats not proof! show me more proof!".

You do not want to understand his beliefs and perspectives more, you just want to keep arguing that he can never "prove" anything over the internet.

Also you seem to believe that ANYTHING on the internet is false information, even if its an article about subjects such as these, where theres countless information and logic, where they break down every aspect of religions. I am in total agreement with the OP because I have done my research on what he provided over the years and It all makes sense to me. Seriously, Im not trying to be rude here, but you cant be afraid of the internet. Sure there is false information but it's so easy to find the fake stuff and spot it out. We all know most UFO videos, for example, are fake.

I guess it just takes a leap of faith to open your mind without always being paranoid that everything on the internet is fake.

OH by the way, I'm assuming that you believe everything that you read in your Chemistry, Biology, History, and Psychology books is proven fact. You have no proof that atoms exist and that they contain protons neutrons and electrons. You just read it and think, "oh this is official stuff so its already been proven.". There is a lot of information available now on the internet that our governments and schools will not "officially" teach us. Do some research and think for yourself, "could this be possible?" or "does this possibly make any sense?" Just see what you think about the information, and forget about the "proof", because there is no such thing as proof.

Hi Magicka,

With respect, you don't seem to understand what I was asking. I am not asking for proof. I am asking for his personal opinion in his own words. That was it. I even said that once he did that I wouldn't even argue, and even if I disagreed I would still just say "thanks, I disagree but I understand you better than I did before". I am not trying to prolong an argument or to prove that proof is not possible. That's not it at all.

As I said, I do not think this is an unreasonable request. When I'm asked a question about why I believe what I believe I rarely just quote a website or say "it's on the net, look it yourself". More often than not I'll put it in my own words, explain my understanding of it, and then perhaps if necessary offer a helpful link for the other person to do further reading on their own (sometimes even a link with a different point of view for them to get a broader perspective on the question). In other words, I am not asking of him anything different than I ask of myself when posting.

I hope that clarifies my meaning

~ PA

[+Link of Hyrule]

There's no twisting at all. You are being unreasonable. You are looking for nothing but some words from "me:" that you can rip apart and ridicule or just disagree with "pleasantly," perhaps.

You are half right. I did want some words from "you". However, I had no intention of ridiculing it (though I may have simply politely disagreed with it.

I have absolutely no problem with "sharing" anything I believe with someone I think is sincerely interested in seeing what i think (even if they believe my thoughts are crazy). Once they show they are only interested in a "debate" then I'm done.

And who decided that I was only interested in "debate"? It was you, and since you came to that conclusion, then even though it was a wrong conclusion, you just shut down and would not engage my honest and sincere question. I am not interested in debate, I have said this several times. I was not asking of you anything that I don't ask of myself when someone asks me a question about my beliefs. When I'm asked a question about my beliefs, I'm not just going to say - "it's out on google, search yourself". And I'm not going to simply go to google, search a link and then link it and say "read". I'll share my opinion in my own words, explain why I believe what I do. Perhaps I will offer alternative explanations and give my reasons why I accept one interpretation over another. If necessary I will then provide links for further research for them to look into it themselves.

If you had a desire to 'battle" me or 'attack" me in any way, i just gave you a TON of material. So use that. If you really just wanted to "get to know me" then i surely gave you that as well, and you'll have no reason to attack or criticize anything I wrote. We'll see how that goes.

Yes, there's a ton of material - I'd already checked it out before you even gave it to me (believe it or not - not that exact site, but sites like it with similar information). Paul vs Jesus is not a new argument that I had never come across before. I looked into it long ago also. And no, I'm not going to attack you or belittle you with it. I disagree with it, and I have my reasons for disagreeing. I was asking so that I could get a better idea of your opinion. That was all. I'm sorry that I gave off the impression that I was spoiling for a fight or argument, because I think if you never arrived at that conclusion of me, the question would have been resolved many posts ago.

Thanks for the discussion, in any case

~ PA

Edited February 20, 2012 by Paranoid Android

[Habitat]

The problem of mysticism is that 'unity consciousness' is impenetrable by rational thinking, which only recognizes discrimination, difference, and distinction, else it has nothing to process or compare. And that is why mysticism seems like utter nonsense to the modern scientific mindset.

[Shabd Mystic]

With respect, you don't seem to understand what I was asking. I am not asking for proof. I am asking for his personal opinion in his own words. That was it. I even said that once he did that I wouldn't even argue, and even if I disagreed I would still just say "thanks, I disagree but I understand you better than I did before". I am not trying to prolong an argument or to prove that proof is not possible. That's not it at all.

I'll just say that, on the Web over the years, I have said "I agree" or "I disagree" with hundreds of things. When it was a commonly held viewpoint that was a very complex issue with tons of reasons for me feeling that way, not once did anyone on any message board hound me for days to "put into writing the reasons that I felt that way." A link to a Web site that broke it down was always more than enough. If they wanted to go read it and then come back and argue various points then we did that.

I was never required to "write a term paper." Until now, at least. Evidently my saying the same thing many others have said is a big deal to you. Perhaps you'd just like me to cut and paste someone else's work. Therefore it would mimic what I think and it would be placed on this message board so you don't have to go to the trouble of clicking any links.

Or do you need me to restructure the sentences so they can pass a copyright check?

This is an issue that has been bandied about for about 1,700 years and by some of history's greatest minds. I arrived at "my" opinion by reading many of theirs. I don't have a single "original" thought on this idea. Anything I could come up with has already been said by others.

Your obsession with seeing me parrot the opinions of others has gone way beyond "strange."

.

[Shabd Mystic]

You are half right. I did want some words from "you". However, I had no intention of ridiculing it (though I may have simply politely disagreed with it.

And who decided that I was only interested in "debate"? It was you, and since you came to that conclusion, then even though it was a wrong conclusion, you just shut down and would not engage my honest and sincere question. I am not interested in debate, I have said this several times. I was not asking of you anything that I don't ask of myself when someone asks me a question about my beliefs. When I'm asked a question about my beliefs, I'm not just going to say - "it's out on google, search yourself". And I'm not going to simply go to google, search a link and then link it and say "read". I'll share my opinion in my own words, explain why I believe what I do. Perhaps I will offer alternative explanations and give my reasons why I accept one interpretation over another. If necessary I will then provide links for further research for them to look into it themselves.

Yes, there's a ton of material - I'd already checked it out before you even gave it to me (believe it or not - not that exact site, but sites like it with similar information). Paul vs Jesus is not a new argument that I had never come across before. I looked into it long ago also. And no, I'm not going to attack you or belittle you with it. I disagree with it, and I have my reasons for disagreeing. I was asking so that I could get a better idea of your opinion. That was all. I'm sorry that I gave off the impression that I was spoiling for a fight or argument, because I think if you never arrived at that conclusion of me, the question would have been resolved many posts ago.

Thanks for the discussion, in any case

~ PA

It's very clear that you just love to argue. If it isn't about "Paul" then it's about my not wanting to lay out my reasons for believing what I do about Paul.

Maybe this will finally end it.

Regarding everything you've said for days you have been declared the:

I hope that will finally put this to rest. (But, as I've said several times, I seriously doubt it).

.

[J. K.]

I am so glad to hear that JK. I mean that sincerely. I'm sorry if i came across 'harsh" with my comments but I tend to get a bit defensive sometimes with this subject because I get a lot of "superiority" thrown at me in many forms by people who automatically figure that anyone who disagrees with their beliefs about this subject means they have no knowledge of the subject (or at least have less than they have).

I might no longer be a "Christian" but that is no reflection whatsoever upon my love of Jesus or belief in who He truly "was." In fact my love for Him and my bond with Him (or "attachment") is greater than almost any Christian I have ever met. It is so strong and "otherworldly" that it defies my limited capacity to define it, let alone describe it. I am very much a "Christ-ian." I am in NO way a "Christian." That's because the two things are diametrically opposed (though only the rarest Christian will ever be able to recognize that because once they do, they would be very unlikely to continue calling themselves a "Christian" unless it was important "socially" to do so - or for business, etc.).

No offense taken. I don't think that barb-throwing debates are very productive. My preference is discussion with mutual respect for diverse opinions. I find your viewpoint of being a Christ-ian rather interesting, if a bit confusing. Are you saying, in your post as an entirety, that having a relationship with Jesus is solely an individual experience? Jesus indicated several types that following Him involves a group experience.

[+Link of Hyrule]

I hope that will finally put this to rest. (But, as I've said several times, I seriously doubt it).

I give up, Shabd. I don't need childish signs from you to imply something about my motives for posting, especially when you are so wildly off the mark that it is not funny.

[Kazahel]

I found this thread quite interesting in many ways. Thanks Shabd for sharing it.

Jesus said the very same thing in some Gnostic texts, such as:

"Seek not the law in your scriptures for the law is life, whereas the scripture is dead. I tell you truly Moses received not his laws from God as writing but through the living word. The law is living word for living God to living prophets for living men. In everything that is life to the law is the law written, for I tell you truly all living things are nearer to God than the scripture which is without life. I tell you truly that the scripture is the work of man, but life and all its hosts are the work of our God. Wherefore do you not listen to the words of God which are written in his works? And wherefore do you study the dead scriptures which are from the hands of men?"

~ Jesus Christ (Essene Gospel of Peace)

I especially liked that. I'll have to check that out more.

[Shabd Mystic]

No offense taken. I don't think that barb-throwing debates are very productive. My preference is discussion with mutual respect for diverse opinions. I find your viewpoint of being a Christ-ian rather interesting, if a bit confusing. Are you saying, in your post as an entirety, that having a relationship with Jesus is solely an individual experience? Jesus indicated several types that following Him involves a group experience.

Yes, it is truly an individual thing. We come into this world alone and we leave it alone. No matter how many friends, relatives and worldly possessions we have, when death comes, we face it alone.

"Following" Him might have been a group "experience," but Jesus never would have "quit" had He only one disciple. He never would have refused to speak had only one person come to listen.

The way Jesus spoke to His Father was via prayer (meditation). That was done ALONE.

And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone. ~ Matthew 14:23

And in the morning, rising up a great while before day, he went out, and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed. ~ Mark 1:35

Jesus clearly specifies in the Bible that "prayer" is to be done alone. It's not to be done in a '"group." He was talking about "true prayer" which is meditation. That is the ONLY type of prayer where He, or anyone else, could see the Father and speak to Him and be spoken to by Him. Any other type of "prayer" is a completely different thing. (Or what most Christians think of as "prayer.)

"When you pray, don't be like the hypocrites who love to pray publicly on street corners and in the synagogues where everyone can see them. I tell you the truth, that is all the reward they will ever get." ~ Matthew 6:5

True prayer is meditation. That's why it is done ALONE. It's one on one. You and God. Nobody else. True prayer is not reciting a pre-written bunch of words.

But when you pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

~ Matthew 6:7

It's not even words you came up with on your own (though that is better). True prayer is not "asking God for things." He's God. He knows what we want. He knows what's best. He knows our every thought and feeling. He knows them before we even know them. And He knows all the subconscious fears and desires that we aren't even aware of.

True prayer is complete silence. It's meditation.

Be still, and know that I am God! ~ Psalm 46:10

It's stopping the mind completely. It's stopping the thinking about your job, your love life, your ambitions, your failures, your friends, your enemies ... It's stopping your focus on "you." It's shutting up and letting "God speak."

It's, through the practice of meditation, being able to separate the soul from the body and literally enter the "spirit world."

"God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit." ~ John 4:24

THAT is how we worship God. By eliminating the "me" and focusing only on the "He." That is meditation in a nutshell.

"Thou hast showed us that which the eye has not seen, and caused us to hear that which the human ear has not heard. Thou has freed us from death and united us with Life, released us from darkness, and united us with Light." ~ Canonical Prayer Book of the Mandaeans

It sounds simple. Just close your eyes and stop thinking. Try it. Stop all thought. Just for a single minute. Heck, just a half minute. Ten seconds ... There is an old saying from a Great Master that if you could just still your mind for 3 seconds the world would be at your command. Three seconds might be a bit of an exaggeration but it's close and it makes the point dramatically.

That means to completely still it. That means you completely lose awareness of yourself and your surroundings. Eckhart Tolle's entire reason for fame is because he was able to still the mind. And he is a "mystic" of the lowest possible degree. (And barely a mystic at all.) Yet his fame and fortune came solely from his mind being stilled. Nothing else. (And that very fame and fortune is what is going to cost him everything he had achieved. From his behavior and statements of late it is clear that he's already begun to lose it all and that he is very much engulfed by "ego.")

THAT is prayer. That is worship of God. Prayer isn't "asking for things." I've always believed the ultimate prayer "outward prayer" is "Thy will be done." What God wants for me is surely good enough for me. Who am I to tell Him how to do his job?

People hardly pray to Him for His grace, for His blessings, for helping them to merge back into Him. They usually pray to Him for their sons, their litigations, desires to be fulfilled. They never pray to Him for His sake. They only want to make Him their means, an instrument to satisfy their desires.

~ Maharaj Charan Singh

.

[Shabd Mystic]

I give up, Shabd. I don't need childish signs from you to imply something about my motives for posting, especially when you are so wildly off the mark that it is not funny.

Good to hear. I'm glad you're finally going to let it drop. Thank you.

[J. K.]

Yes, it is truly an individual thing. We come into this world alone and we leave it alone. No matter how many friends, relatives and worldly possessions we have, when death comes, we face it alone.

"Following" Him might have been a group "experience," but Jesus never would have "quit" had He only one disciple. He never would have refused to speak had only one person come to listen.

I don't dispute what you say that our relationship with Jesus is individual, nor do I think that group interaction is required for salvation.

However, how would you interpret these verses?

As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also may be sanctified by the truth. "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me. John 17:18-23

To me, this indicates that there is a 'oneness' that we experience as a group.

And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. Matthew 15:18

A 'church' is a a gathering of those who are disciples of Jesus.