Fawzo

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,535

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Fawzo

  1. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted

    I would like to hear from Rabbio on the topic of Judaism influence on some of these Gnostic and other books.

    I think we always have just one side of the coin when we discuss things from just a Christian perspective. I know a number of Jews who read the NT and saw it as very Jewish, but do not come to the same conclusions of the mainstream Christianity.

    Good thoughts Pete. I wonder if there is any mention of a demiurge in the Kabbalah?

  5. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted

    Excellent "demonstration" friend.

    In the following quotation,

    when you read about "the Resurrection", think "The Kingdom",

    for that is what Philip is talking about (imho).

    "Those who say they will die first and then rise are in error.

    If they do not first receive the resurrection while they live,

    when they die they will receive nothing."

    The Gospel of Philip

    Thank you friend!

    I was almost certain you were going to respond with this one from the Gospel of Thomas.

    3. Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father's) kingdom is within you and it is outside you.

    Thanks for the Phillip quote. I do need to reread Phillip. I skimmed through that Gospel way too quickly only once, more interested in where Jesus had his lips than anything else lol

  6. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted · Edited by Fawzo

    My opinion is that Jesus taught about the Kingdom of God/Heaven almost exclusively; which makes sense after reading the OT prophets and their comments regarding the Gentile inclusion in the Kingdom. In my opinion Jesus went to the Jews to "wake them up" in regard to their responsibility of welcoming the Gentiles into the kingdom of Heaven, which they we not doing: "to the Jew first, and then to the Gentile."

    I do not know if Jesus ate with Gentiles, but he ate with others who we just as "offensive" to the religious elite at the time.

    The main unifying Biblical theme (in my opinion) from Gen 3 to the end is the Kingdom of God/Heaven. The theme of the parables (in my opinion) is lost if they are not understood through this Kingdom perspective; for example:

    16 Jesus told his disciples: "There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions. 2 So he called him in and asked him, 'What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer.'

    3 "The manager said to himself, 'What shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I'm not strong enough to dig, and I'm ashamed to beg— 4 I know what I'll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses.'

    5 "So he called in each one of his master's debtors. He asked the first, 'How much do you owe my master?'

    6 "'Eight hundred gallons of olive oil,' he replied.

    "The manager told him, 'Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred.'

    7 "Then he asked the second, 'And how much do you owe?'

    "'A thousand bushels of wheat,' he replied.

    "He told him, 'Take your bill and make it eight hundred.'

    8 "The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. 9 I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.

    10 "Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. 11 So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? 12 And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else's property, who will give you property of your own?

    13 "No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money."

    14 The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. 15 He said to them, "You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of men, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valued among men is detestable in God's sight.

    The Holy Bible : New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996, c1984), Lk 16:1-15.

    I have heard people butcher the meaning of this parable (in my opinion), and apart from the realization that God blesses people in order for them to draw others into the Kingdom, this parable would seem to be justifying and praising corrupt dealings.

    Yes "the Kingdom of heaven is at hand" is a prevalent theme throughout the New Testament. Now hold out your hand and tell me how far away is Heaven.

    In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, 2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand Matt 3:1-2 (KJV)

    From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Matt 4:17 (KJV)

    And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand Matt 10:7 (KJV

    The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: Mark 1:15 (KJV)

    So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. 32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled Luke 21:31-32 (KJV)

    I doubt if any translation or concordance rendering can place heaven two thousand years into the future within the context of these sayings.

  9. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted · Edited by Fawzo

    But I LIKE being Goyem,

    and I don't want anybody cutting on ME! :fear::o:ph34r:

    A deity that is worried about the shape of my penis is not the kind of being I want to spend an an eterenity with, I wondered if he practiced designing it with Soild Woks or Play-Doh before he went into production. I would have liked a little LED light on mine for when the lights are out.

  11. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted

    Ignoring previous comments which would only lead to further disagreement (IMO) and following the now topic.

    If Jesus did say these things and I am not saying he definitely did, then they do follow a theme which also includes the lost sheep and the lost coin. These all show a person (referring to God) actively seeking the return and a welcoming nature to that return. That theme is one of a God ever open and welcoming to those who return or come to God.

    Liberals and Fundamentalists both argue that God welcomes all, even if the terms of that welcome may differing in some church denominations.

    Thanks for the additional points that slipped my mind Pete.

    Jesus spoke to them using this illustration: 4 “Suppose a man has 100 sheep and loses one of them. Doesn't he leave the 99 sheep grazing in the pasture and look for the lost sheep until he finds it? 5 When he finds it, he's happy. He puts that sheep on his shoulders and 6 goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says to them, ‘Let's celebrate! I've found my lost sheep!' 7 I can guarantee that there will be more happiness in heaven over one person who turns to God and changes the way he thinks and acts than over 99 people who already have turned to God and have his approval.” Luke 15:3-7 (GW)

    I don't think God gives a rats hiney whether one is baptized or confirmed, or what denomination one holds to be true. God notices how one treats others and the world we live in and where one's focus spends the majority of it's time and what one seeks.

    Could it be that Jesus was actually telling that parable to deal with the older brother, the older brother representing the Pharisees and the Jews that had a problem with the Gentiles entering the kingdom of heaven/God? And also (but secondary) the returning brother.

    15 Now the tax collectors and "sinners" were all gathering around to hear him. 2 But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, "This man welcomes sinners and eats with them."

    The Holy Bible : New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996, c1984), Lk 15:1-2.

    Cool do you feel this is the major theme that runs throughout the parables and is a major key as stated by the verse? Those sinners and tax collectors were most likely Jews who ate with Christ. Do you know where any Gentiles ate with him?

  12. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted

    Dang it, Fawzo, every once in a while you come forth with an amazing saying! thumbsup%281%29.gifthumbsup%281%29.gif

    Well I'm probably not the first to say it, but I need great sayings like that to keep pace with the company I keep :group:

    Lucky for us when Dad turns on the nightlight he doesn't turn it off until all his children make it home.

  13. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted · Edited by Fawzo

    You are saying the point of the prodigal son story is about the son that left and returned?

    His father said to him, 'My child, you're always with me. Everything I have is yours. 32 But we have something to celebrate, something to be happy about. This brother of yours was dead but has come back to life. He was lost but has been found.'" Luke 15:31-32 (GW)

    In short my answer to your question is Yes.

    The point of the prodigal son to me is about a person who follows the call of the ego which only holds our attention for so long. When the awareness of how much more blissful things are at home hits us, we turn humbly and return home to open arms and rejoin in the Sonship of God where we have everything.

    The desire for more and adventure is the hook the ego lures us away with. Love is the light that leads us home. Not threats of hell and eternal damnation.

  14. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted

    "Might turn" is a present-active-subjunctive verb.

    Active voice indicates that the action of turning would have to be the decision and action of the subject: the ones in this case who hear and see (both participles indicating that they continually do hear and see the message of the kingdom of God) but reject it and act like they do not hear, see, or understand it.

    Subjunctive mood indicates that this turning might or might not happen: it is possible, but maybe not probable, but could happen. The deciding factor is the subject (again active voice): the ones hearing and seeing but not understanding. It is up to them.

    I really do not want to argue about the "fundamentalist" interpretation of this, but would rather learn from you guys what the Lord is showing you through this passage.

    I was thinking about how the simple act of turning one's focus onto God and how that might be all that is needed for "forgiveness" and how this theme should run through the other parables and it does in a couple that came to my mind immediately.

    The Prodigal Son merely had to seek out his father and all was forgiven, and in the the parable of the wedding all those who were invited who had there focus elsewhere were left outside, but those who dropped their common everyday chores and turned their attention onto the bride and groom got a treat.

    This would resonate with my belief system in that forgiveness isn't an external act it's a focus and awareness of the love and glory of the Unconditional Love of God who wills that none should perish.

    Thanks Coolhand for bringing this up.

  15. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted · Edited by Fawzo

    Some great points Hexalpa. I never noticed those incongruities before.

    I always just had a problem with Jesus planting in a rocky, thorny area with paths and weeds instead of finding a nice fertile field. I guess he was a carpenter or mason after all and farming wasn't his thing :)

  16. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted · Edited by Fawzo

    In Mark chapter four we find the parable of the soils/sower.

    4 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water's edge. 2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3 "Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times." 9 Then Jesus said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

    10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that,

    "'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,

    and ever hearing but never understanding;

    otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'"

    13 Then Jesus said to them, "Don't you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable? 14 The farmer sows the word. 15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18 Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown."

    The Holy Bible : New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996, c1984), Mk 4:1-20.

    In verse 13 there is a claim that it is important to understand this parable in order to understand all parables. Regardless of your/mine exegetical approach to Scripture:

    What (if anything) does this parable say/mean to you PERSONALLY?

    In your opininion, is this parable important to understanding the other parables?

    NOTE: I am asking this from a personal and reflective viewpoint, knowing that we all approach Scripture differently,and I respect that, and ask this in attempt to appreciate and understand the different approaches to Scripture.

    "otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'"

    Coolhand I think we discussed before where I had a problem with an Omniscient deity casting seed where the conditions weren't optimal for seed growth. I was wondering if you would enlighten me on a more accurate translation for what the words "might turn" could be rendered as. This might give the parable a new twist for me.

    From other Bible versions I get "return to me" "convert" "turn back" "might return and be forgiven" "Otherwise, they will turn to me and be forgiven " and I always love the way the Message version of the Bible puts scripture

    These are people— <BR style="LINE-HEIGHT: 1em"></SPAN>Whose eyes are open but don't see a thing, Whose ears are open but don't understand a word, Who avoid making an about-face and getting forgiven."

    I think the translation of this text may also point out the gap between Fundalmentalist and Liberals. I would think many liberals would say that forgiveness is just that easy as turning ones focus back on God.

  19. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted

    Oh please, can I answer this one?

    I know that I am not supposed to

    (because Pete is right; only you can truly answer this),

    But I sense that you are really asking

    "am I all alone in this perspective?"

    Let's see, you don't believe Jesus had to die for our sins.

    I don't believe that Jesus DID die for our sins.

    You don't believe in the virgin birth.

    Me neither.

    You say there is no hell?

    Me too.

    No devil?

    Ditto.

    (I don't believe that he rose from the dead, either,

    even though I readily acknowledge that "resurrection"

    is a wonderful mythic theme...

    but you didn't ask that one!)

    If I understand you correctly, you believe that

    "the Christ Spirit" was visited upon "the man Jesus",

    and this was "the most recent such "incarnation"

    (that we are aware of). That's pretty much

    how I see the matter too. Of course, for me

    this isn't dogma, it's just my way

    of talking about something truly incomprehensible.

    So, are you a Liberal Christian, Michael?

    Do you try to live your life in accord

    with the teachings and example of Jesus?

    I think you do.

    That makes you a Christian.

    and the stuff we have just here discussed

    makes you a Liberal Christian.

    Now about those fire flies...

    Woozers, I must be a liberal Christian also then and a liberal Buddhist too boot, or maybe I should just label myself a fundalmentalist ChristBud with a beautiful flower about to spring forth.

  20. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted · Edited by Fawzo

    Interesting philosophical problems you have created. I am equally as interesting in your solutions to these problems.

    I think about the other chracaters that are created during my dream. Quite often it seems as if they have their own consciousness apart from mine. It is true that at times they behave as my thought processes dictate and imagine, but at other times they seem totally independent and behaving in a manner that is totally opposed to my will and desire.

    It might appear that these later entities in effect "sin" against me, but do they or is it even possible that they have the ability to "sin" against me.

    Some portion of God might be in the same psyhcological state. Could God's desire for companionship have lead to a split in the mind of God. I've been trying to have an intervention for him for years now.

    I tried to post but the found the forum went down yesterday. Back now. :D

    So Paul would have distanced himself from :-

    1 Timothy 2:11-15:"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent..." (NIV)

    Ephesians 5:22-24: "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife...wives should submit to their husbands in everything." (NIV)

    1 Corinthians 14:34-35: "...women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says, If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (NIV)

    1 Corinthians 11:7-9:"For a man...is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head." (NIV)

    But then fundamentalist claim Paul wrote all these sayings.

    But I doubt if a wise man would make the same claim. I think the problem comes in with them being funda-MENTAL-ist lol

  21. Liberal Christianity 2

    in Stories & Texts Archive

    Posted

    What specifically are you getting at? If you can articulate a position I will respond to that.

    How can the text mention YHWH specifcally and not be talking about YHWH? Are you serious?

    Might we consider this:

    THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THOUGHT

    There are three elemental laws of all rational thinking:

    (1) the law of noncontradiction (A is not non-A);

    (2) the law of identity (A is A);

    (3) the law of excluded middle (either A or non-A).

    Each of these laws serves an indispensable function in theology.

    The Law of Noncontradiction

    Without the law of noncontradiction we could not say that God is not non-God (G is not non-G). Thus, God could be the devil or whatever is anti-God.

    The Law of Identity

    If the law of identity were not binding, we could not say that God is God (G is G). Without the law of identity, God would not be identical to Himself; He could be something other than Himself (e.g., the devil), which is plainly absurd.

    The Law of Excluded Middle

    Likewise, if the law of excluded middle didn't exist we could not affirm that it is either God or not God that we are speaking about. When we use the term "God," we could be referring to both God and not God. This clearly is meaningless.

    Hence these three principles are necessary for all thinking, including all thought about God. Since theology is thinking about God, theology cannot escape the use of these three fundamental laws of all thought.

    Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume One: Introduction, Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2002), 81.

    If God was all there was then how can there be anything except God? He couldn't be anything other than himself since Himself is all there ever was and or will be.

    How would a deity created anything other? He doesn't have building blocks or even the dust of the earth to create anything with. It would seem as if thought forms are his tools.

    He would be creating in a similar manner as we do when we dream at night. We create whole worlds and communities that exist only in our minds and seem quite concrete and real while focused in them.

    Now if he wasn't really All That Is and Others existed then thats a whole other scenario.