by nicolaou 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Exodus 20:4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.
Maybe they were warned aginst doing this so that people didn't use images or statues to worship....something many of the churches need to remember.
actually sokrates was mentioned by others as well, like xenophon.
if there was a nazarene named jesus or similar - nobody knows for sure. king arthur and robin hood are about as historical. but if there indeed was one, he didn't even closely resemble the type in the bible, that's for sure.
evidence from Pliny regarding Christ dating from approx 111-113 AD and then Trajan's reply
Pliny, Letters 10.96-97Pliny to the Emperor TrajanIt is my practice, my lord, to refer to you all matters concerning which I am in doubt. For who can better give guidance to my hesitation or inform my ignorance? I have never participated in trials of Christians. I therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what extent. And I have been not a little hesitant as to whether there should be any distinction on account of age or no difference between the very young and the more mature; whether pardon is to be granted for repentance, or, if a man has once been a Christian, it does him no good to have ceased to be one; whether the name itself, even without offenses, or only the offenses associated with the name are to be punished. Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced to me as Christians, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to whether they were Christians; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed. For I had no doubt that, whatever the nature of their creed, stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy surely deserve to be punished. There were others possessed of the same folly; but because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to Rome. Soon accusations spread, as usually happens, because of the proceedings going on, and several incidents occurred. An anonymous document was published containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ--none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do--these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ. They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition. I therefore postponed the investigation and hastened to consult you. For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting you, especially because of the number involved. For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded. Trajan to PlinyYou observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it--that is, by worshiping our gods--even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age. |
there is a bust of Socrates dating from the 4th century BC
I am utterly convinced that the actual historical Jesus is not the same as in the gospels. The canonization may have erred in choosing four separate gospels written to different audiences over a single amagalmation gospel. There is a book called something like Syntopic Gospel Parallels. It shows the parallel narratives and sayings of each synoptic along the other gospels in columns. The writers are clearly interpeting events, coloring them to make their points and please their audience. Matthew writes to Jewish Christians, Luke is trying to show Christianity is no threat to Rome. An ancient version of the Rutherford letter concerning the Nazis in Germany.
Yet all the gnostics and canonical gospels clearly reveal a single strand of events and sayings. I've read much about historical Jesus throughout my adult life. It was a term paper in college that I selected arbitrarily. Almost every reputable scholar believes in an authentic Jesus. No one knows, however, the exact details of his ministry. Altho the gospels diverge, overall they agree on the important matters.
This past Lent we discussed this in church. Our priest pointed out that anthropolgy shows that primitive cultures do report legends accurately down many generations. We view Jesus through Western eyes but Jesus and the apostles were Eastern. Truth is different in both cultures. Today the lack of sources would be very troubling and we could dismiss Jesus. Viewing in first century thought and technology, he most probably did exist.
Part of the enduring appeal of Jesus is knowing only the essentials. Every culture can adopt a slightly different Jesus. A white one, a black one. Perhaps even a Semite one. Artistis portrayls of Jesus show the span. Early fish and lamb drawings, the MIddle Ages, the icons, the REnaissance, Rembrandt's Dutch middle class family, PreRaphaelite Jesus, PIcasso, Dali's troubles me. Warhol. We are able to project our hopes and fears on Jesus.
There is little hard evidence, but chances are there was a man named Jesus, a preacher/revolutionary who raised the ire of the Roman authorities.
What is more doubtful is the accuracy of the gospels, considering that they were written so long after Jesus' death (and that there are contradictions between them as well.)
Nonetheless, for many the historicity of Jesus is almost irrelevant. Like Buddha and Lao Tzu, for many Jesus serves as a symbol for certain ideas. He's a symbol for principles like compassion, love and sacrifice. The issue of existence is mostly an issue for strict literalists/fundamentalists, but so is everything else in science and history.
Even the existence of Nazareth is highly questionable. There are no historical references to the town before the 3rd century, and there is no prophecy in the OT that Jesus would be from Nazareth as claimed by Matthew. As for the SECT of the Nazarenes, there is certainly both historical and Biblical evidence, and they REJECTED ALL THE CANONICAL GOSPELS.
Blavatsky said:
http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/christianity/Jesus-VariousViews.html
That expression, "Ye are gods," which, to our biblical students, is a mere abstraction, has for the kabalists a vital significance. Each immortal spirit that sheds its radiance upon a human being is a god -- the Microcosmos of the Macrocosmos, part and parcel of the Unknown God, the First Cause of which it is a direct emanation. It is possessed of all the attributes of its parent source. Among these attributes are omniscience and omnipotence. Endowed with these, but yet unable to fully manifest them while in the body, during which time they are obscured, veiled, limited by the capabilities of physical nature, the thus divinely-inhabited man may tower far above his kind, evince a god-like wisdom, and display deific powers; for while the rest of mortals around him are but overshadowed by their divine SELF, with every chance given to them to become immortal hereafter, but no other security than their personal efforts to win the kingdom of heaven, the so chosen man has already become an immortal while yet on earth. His prize is secured. Henceforth he will live forever in eternal life.
It is the acceptation of this doctrine which caused the Gnostics to maintain that Jesus was a man overshadowed by the Christos or Messenger of Life. The early Nazarenes, who must be numbered among the Gnostic sects, believing that Jesus was a prophet, held, nevertheless, in relation to him the same doctrine of the divine "overshadowing," of certain "men of God," sent for the salvation of nations, and to recall them to the path of righteousness. Had not the Christians burdened themselves with the Revelations of a little nation, and accepted the Jehovah of Moses, the Gnostic ideas would never have been termed heresies; once relieved of their dogmatic exaggerations the world would have had a religious system based on pure Platonic philosophy, and surely something would then have been gained.
By the way, Blavatsky founded Theosophy based on ancient Kabbalah, but after her death they were infiltrated by the Fabian Society and corrupted. She had nothing to do with Alice Bailey and Lucis Trust.
Ha! How interesting that you would protect your New Age post with a "side note" about Blavatsky not being linked to Alice Bailey and Lucis Trust ... you believe their lies I see! Yes, I see ... however, you remain one of my favourite posters in JWnet. We have a connection :) Well done old chap I see ... I see. Good night from me ... I am calling it a day and off for zzzzz
No, I do my homework. Madame Blavatsky was an enlightened Saint if there ever was one.
Annie Besant was the first to infiltrate Theosophy. She started the corruption. Then came Alice Bailey and the rest of the Socialists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Besant
But if you want the REAL bad guys, here they are....
You know ixthis, it really isn't that difficult to tell the good guys from the bad. Anybody who wants you to think you are inferior, faulty, unworthy, "sinful", not divine, or who wants to subjugate you, use you, enslave you is from the dark side. The Bible comes to you from the dark side, but in between the lines it gives you the truth, if you care to dig for it, because they stole the Divine truth and mixed it with their lies.
On the other hand, whoever tells you that you are fully vested in the Divine, have unlimited potential, are on an equal par with everyone else, promotes love and the respect of the free will of others, that we are ALL ONE, and that the number one law of the Universe is LOVE, is from the Light. It may not seem so, because we've been suppressed for so long, but if you listen to your own Master that you profess to follow, you will know that what I post is the truth, and that the end of the suppression and domination by the selfish goats is imminent. All Blavatsky does is quote from Jesus' own mouth and then explain to you with real historical evidence how the Church corrupted his message to take all that potential away from you. Good for them, bad for you.
Oh but this is Oh so hard to believe because of that pesky serpent saying "you are gods". Well, Jesus said the same thing!
