Your technique for evaluating anything is your own business, it has nothing to do with us. Stay in your antiquated box in the dim and distant past.
The Late Great Urantia Revelation
- Thread starter Caino
- Start date
- Status
Your technique for evaluating anything is your own business, it has nothing to do with us. Stay in your antiquated box in the dim and distant past.
What really pissed the Pharisees off the most was their loss of control of the message and the common man. Failing to reform itself Christianity is dying. The world is moving on, the original good news will be received gladly by those who want it.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
What's ironic is your alleged clairvoyance of what I've read.
And yes, apologetics is a defense of a belief system. It's not bare assertion while disallowing such bare assertion from others.
It's the double standard that is at issue. The content can only be considered for veracity AFTER the issue of textual criticism is addressed.
These guys (and you, evidently) want to bypass it all and just say "This is the truth because it's the truth and I say it's the truth and it's written as truth, so everyone else doesn't know the truth and can't challenge the truth and we don't have to offer any evidence that it's the truth or attempt to defend THAT it's the truth or WHY it's the truth, because the UB exists and it's the truth because it exists and it was written as truth by authors that know the truth and it was presented as the truth so we don't have to validate that it's the truth to anyone who would ever question that it's the truth, because IT'S THE TRUTH, da**it, cuz I said so.
It's a traveling carnival of naked declaration. Anyone could pick any written work and make such assertions for any reason.
You're NOT funny. But you ARE some other things. One of them is gullible. Irrational would be another.
(2084.8) 195:10.8 Ecclesiasticism is at once and forever incompatible with that living faith, growing spirit, and firsthand experience of the faith-comrades of Jesus in the brotherhood of man in the spiritual association of the kingdom of heaven. The praiseworthy desire to preserve traditions of past achievement often leads to the defense of outgrown systems of worship. The well-meant desire to foster ancient thought systems effectually prevents the sponsoring of new and adequate means and methods designed to satisfy the spiritual longings of the expanding and advancing minds of modern men. Likewise, the Christian churches of the twentieth century stand as great, but wholly unconscious, obstacles to the immediate advance of the real gospel — the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
You don't have a "technique" for evaluating anything. That's the point. You just declare and assert by presumption and preference.
Plugging in the works of Dr. Seuss would be no different, or Shakespeare.
I'm not in one.
That's not even true if someone cares about the Pharisees and their motives and tactics, etc.
No. Though it's not for lack of attempts to kill it off from both within and without.
Of course the world is moving on. And you don't have any "original" good news. Yes, there are those who will gladly receive your UB tripe. There always are.
Sorry, it's not working. The original gospel was lost in the sudden rise of Paul's Pagan substitute.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
More bare assertion. Same song, bazillionth verse. Nothingness.
Zeke
Well-known member
So which rose first? the Pauline epistles or the gospels? of coarse the possible tampering of the intent is also on the table, if your going by first come first serve Paul would be at the head of the line.
Plus the Pre-Christian's sayings ascribed to Jesus Christ shows the plagiarized possibilities that went on, rising Jesus from the Greek Myth ashes that where also interpolated from prior cultures.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Get over it
Get over it
Your inanity has been addressed......deal or move along per Knight's rules and recommendations. Your dissertations are becoming a waste of time since they are circular, accusatory and condescending in nature....not edifying at all. There's no point in engaging a mentality incapable of an actual dialogue or freedom of thought. You're so encrusted with preconceptions that you can't even use your faculty of imagination for the sake of a fun and exploratory discussion but pull others into a vacuum of negativity and contempt. Sorry.....not gonna be sucked in. People of open minds can engage here in a kind, courteous and civil manner.
For God's sake get over yourself.
Your obsession with harassing us and the subject shows more the dilemma of your own 'psychology' than an accurate portrayal of what the papers are even about...since you're getting your own feathers ruffled up over it creating an enemy that only exists in your misused imagination. Game over.
Those following will now watch you react in your typical fashion and onslaught of word-smithing. Can't let that ego die can ya.
pj
Get over it
Your inanity has been addressed......deal or move along per Knight's rules and recommendations. Your dissertations are becoming a waste of time since they are circular, accusatory and condescending in nature....not edifying at all. There's no point in engaging a mentality incapable of an actual dialogue or freedom of thought. You're so encrusted with preconceptions that you can't even use your faculty of imagination for the sake of a fun and exploratory discussion but pull others into a vacuum of negativity and contempt. Sorry.....not gonna be sucked in. People of open minds can engage here in a kind, courteous and civil manner.
For God's sake get over yourself.
Your obsession with harassing us and the subject shows more the dilemma of your own 'psychology' than an accurate portrayal of what the papers are even about...since you're getting your own feathers ruffled up over it creating an enemy that only exists in your misused imagination. Game over.
Those following will now watch you react in your typical fashion and onslaught of word-smithing. Can't let that ego die can ya.
pj
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Zeke
Well-known member
You do share a common denominator with PPS, you both cling to the Saviour program, but after reading some more of your thought on Jesus the match is not really that close, so I maybe overstating that common factor.
Aimiel
Well-known member
Paul's IS the Original Gospel. Christ Himself revealed The Gospel to someone with the intelligence to not only articulate it well but who could write it out so that it could be understood by anyone, in extreme depth. Paul demonstrated not only severe revelation from The Spirit of Christ (The Holy Spirit) but also expressed it better than most anyone else could.
Galatians 1:6-9
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Certainly while he was with Peter for two weeks, he would have been rebuked, were he preaching something other than The Gospel.
Galatians 1:18
Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
Also, Peter explicitly approved of Paul's Gospel:
Galatians 2:6-9
But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (for he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles) and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
Zeke
Well-known member
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
No. You side-stepped it with your double standard of bare assertion.
Excuses with script-flipping inequitous double standards and bare assertion and declaration from deluded opinion and personal preference is all you have.
You psychopathy is noted, as is your banality of incessant naked declarative rubbish.
You have not ONCE ever attempted to validate or substantiate anything you've ever said, linked, or alluded to with anything more than opinion propagated as truth.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
So... Why have you never substantiated anything you adamantly declare as truth that is merely deluded opinion of a hurt little boy all grown up to become something to prove his worth to himself apart from his failure in "real" life?
Yes, your face has met the mirror of your bare assertions and lack of validation for even one word you've ever spoken.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
You might want to ask freelight, the parrot. All he can do is make bare assertions with no validation as he declares whatever he says to be truth with no support.
You could regurge one for him. Give it a shot.
Let's be liberal and say Mark or Matthew was written around 50, Paul's influence was well established, he was the first great charismatic preacher of the rapidly evolving Christian religion about Jesus. Almost the entirety of the NT is about Paul's conversion experience and his personal faith in Jesus as the risen Christ.
Jesus used families themes and sayings common to many religions that would received his missionaries.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
truth be told.......
truth be told.......
Truth exists by itself no matter what conceptual frameworks are used for relating. Since you're not including an understanding of the cosmology revealed in the papers, your opinions are outside the field so to speak. Until you unbox yourself you can't relate to the greater context.
Truth needs no apology or helps to be. Only when conceptualized, codified, or dogmatized does an entity erect apologetics to defend its own creation.
pj
truth be told.......
Truth exists by itself no matter what conceptual frameworks are used for relating. Since you're not including an understanding of the cosmology revealed in the papers, your opinions are outside the field so to speak. Until you unbox yourself you can't relate to the greater context.
Truth needs no apology or helps to be. Only when conceptualized, codified, or dogmatized does an entity erect apologetics to defend its own creation.
pj
Salvation is by faith. The theology and speculation about Jesus isn't the same thing as his "good news". Christianity drains many an ancient Pagan swamp and barbarian morass.
- Status