Life After Death

[Guest guest]

Hi Fraggle

 

> or, the polish empire failed because they never landed anyone on one of jupiter's moons....

 

Y'know, I've always wondered the real reason for that, and now it's so obvious :-)

 

BB

Peter

[Guest guest]

 

-

EBbrewpunx

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 3:49 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

No offense taken...speak your mind. It is worth noting though that if Jesus hadn't of existed orf the teachings attributed to him didn't...would we have this same knowledge of what love a compassion really means. If we had been vegan from the start I think we would have that knowledge...But a meating world can't I believe...so a reminder was needed. Love and compassion are the basis of Christianity...so when we seek those qualities we are seeking those qualities Christ advocated whether we like it or not.

wellno offensebut i think ya can learn to accept love, compassion, etc without embracing christianity...and i think the argument that "they failed because they weren't truly christian" is sorta..well..spurious...i can say the mayan empire failed because they didn't have ice cream....go ahead..disprove it....:)or, the polish empire failed because they never landed anyone on one of jupiter's moons....

 

Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. The British Empire toppled.. professing a false Christianity.Until people learn, love, compassion etc...all the little power houses in the world will topple. To send an email to -

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 4:16 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Simon

 

> I know Christianity wasn't wide spread. But Christianity has to start with Jesus Christ much like Marxism had to start with Karl Marx, soism had to start with so and so

> etc.

 

OK, possibly quibbling over semantics here, but "Christianity" in the sense of the religion followed by the first followers of Jesus was a Jewish sect, and couldn't be considered Christian in any modern sense of the word.>

 

Yes I believe the word 'Christians' was a nick name given to his disciples about 60 AD.

Without trying to sound too serious or argumentive. I do think it's a little more than semantics to seperate 'a way of life'...from it's source. Since Christ Christianity hasn't decreased.

To send an email to -

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 4:20 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Simon

 

> Christianity usually has to be accepted or it's moral teaching have to be....especiallly in the western world, It's moral teachings topple empires..The Roman Empire

> tried to accept a false Christianity, Catholicism, It toppled. The British Empire toppled.. professing a false Christianity.Until people learn, love, compassion etc...all the

> little power houses in the world will topple.

I hope you're right, 'cos right now the false Christianity in the US seems to be supporting Bush's power rather than diminishing it

 

Thats right...hopefully all falsity will be rooted out in the world.

 

Cheers

SimonTo send an email to -

[Guest guest]

Hi Simon

 

> No offense taken...speak your mind. It is worth noting though that if Jesus hadn't of existed orf the teachings attributed to him didn't...would we have this

> same knowledge of what love a compassion really means.

 

I think we should turn that question around... do you not think it is possible for people to understand love and compassion without reading about it? Personally, I think love and compassion is within all of us, whether or not we read about it in a book.

 

BB

Peter

[Guest guest]

Hi Simon

 

> Without trying to sound too serious or argumentive. I do think it's a little more than semantics to seperate 'a way of life'...from it's source. Since Christ Christianity hasn't

> decreased.

 

I think the discussion is about semantics in that what you appear to mean by "Christianity" doesn't seem to be the way in which the word is used in the modern world, but rather the way the word would have been used by those living in the 1st century CE. Using the same basis, it would be valid to say that all modern Christians are Agnostics... with the common usage of the word "Agnostic", that comment would be an oxymoron, but using the term as it was in the 1st century would be completely true!

 

BB

Peter

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 4:24 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Peter

 

I had 4 posts ready to send..they disappeared on reconnection.

 

That is a good point which EBbrewpunx and I touched upon in an earlier post.

 

Yes...the Vatican being central to that control...Calling it the Catholic/univeral Church....not the Christian Church. It seems to praise Mithiris... I mean Mary more than Jesus most of the time.

Their protrayal of Jesus mockingly being ' that defeated man on the cross look what you lot have done to him'. Do you know of any other great person who is celebrated by parading them in their horrific death. His teachings should be celebrated not his murder..thats their way of trying and throw guilt on people.

 

Are we shown M Gandi for instance with his gun shot wound when we are reminded of him.

 

 

Simon

 

 

 

It's an interesting question as to whether the Roman Empire ever actually did topple... someone, and I foget who right now, wrote a very interesting book how the Roman Empire simply transformed itself into the Catholic Church, and continued to run the world. Very interesting comparisons drawn between the political / legal / ethical make up of the later Roman Empire and the Early Catholic Church!

 

BB

PeterTo send an email to -

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 4:26 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Peter

 

I don't think there's many people who would deny that the teachings attributed to Jesus are generally "good". I think the problem has been created by the doctrine put in place around that.>

 

I would say the teachings attributed to jesus were the best. But your summary is nicely put.

 

Simon

To send an email to -

[Guest guest]

Christianity has started at Pentecost, i.e. at the 50th day after the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ from the death, i.e. at the day when the Apostles, formerly disciples, have received the Holy Spirit and at the same day have started to preach to the public in Jerusalem. They were able to preach in all the various languages after they had received the Holy Spirit, as they didn't lernt such languages. There were 4000 people baptised and they were the first Christian community.

 

Yannissimonpjones <simonpjones wrote:

 

 

 

-

Peter

Monday, April 12, 2004 6:31 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Peter

 

> No I haven't read that. Christianity was being distorted while Christ was on the earth.Christianity is basically loving what is good and right and one another.

 

At the risk of seeming particularly picky... Christianity didn't exist while Jesus was around, so it can't have been distorted during that time. Christianity really didn't start until something like 30 years after Jesus' crucifixion, and it was very different then to what it became of the next few centuries.>

 

I know Christianity wasn't wide spread. But Christianity has to start with Jesus Christ much like Marxism had to start with Karl Marx, soism had to start with so and so etc.

SimonTo send an email to - To send an email to -

Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now

[Guest guest]

Jews celebrate the 7th day Sabbath, when God has made a break after finishing creating the world.

Chistians celebrate on Sundays the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, i.e. in other languages as Greek: KYPIAKH, italian: Domenika, i.e. the day of the Lord.

 

YannisPeter <metalscarab wrote:

 

Hi Yannis

 

> In all the languages I mentioned myself (Greek, Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, the word for Sunday means: Day of the Lord, not day of the sun, that is

> pagan:

 

The important question when considering etymology is whether the name of the day is derived from the fact it is the Christian Sabbath, or whether the fact it is the Sabbath is derived from the name of the day. I suspect it was the former rather than the latter.

 

To suggest that the Sabbath is celebrated on that day because of the name of the day, is a bit like saying your parents were given the names they have because you like those names! The good ole English phrase "putting the cart before the horses" would seem to apply here.

 

BB

PeterTo send an email to -

Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 5:54 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Simon

I think we should turn that question around... do you not think it is possible for people to understand love and compassion without reading about it? Personally, I think love and compassion is within all of us, whether or not we read about it in a book.>

 

Yes I think it is... once we have the desire to. It 's just that I havn't heard of anyone else before Jesus that demostrated in such a way what love and compassion were. I believe the vegetarians before Jesus and during his time had to be compassionate people, but there is no record as far I know of anyone challenging the authorities with what some of us might even call common sense theses days. You know how easy it is for people to be lead astray..killing, hating, eating animals etc.( Though the commonly used bibles Jesus is not don't protray Jesus as a vegetarian...I believe he would of been.

 

Simon

 

 

To send an email to -

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Wednesday, April 14, 2004 5:58 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Simon

 

> Without trying to sound too serious or argumentive. I do think it's a little more than semantics to seperate 'a way of life'...from it's source. Since Christ Christianity hasn't

> decreased.

 

I think the discussion is about semantics in that what you appear to mean by "Christianity" doesn't seem to be the way in which the word is used in the modern world, but rather the way the word would have been used by those living in the 1st century CE.>

 

I agree that the practice of " Christianity" today by many so called Christian may not be as close to Jesus's teachings in his day...but unless we have improved upon them.. that should be a wake up call, not an accepted policy.

My view on Christianity is "love all creatures great and small".....I doubt if Jesus of any other person of compassion would disagree with that.

 

 

>Using the same basis, it would be valid to say that all modern Christians are Agnostics... with the common usage of the word "Agnostic", that comment would be an oxymoron, but using the term as it was in the 1st century would be completely true!>

 

Ok, but lets not use semantics to distract from the over all message.

 

SimonTo send an email to -

[Guest guest]

 

-

ioannis Tsoucas

Thursday, April 15, 2004 12:20 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Christianity has started at Pentecost, i.e. at the 50th day after the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ from the death, i.e. at the day when the Apostles, formerly disciples, have received the Holy Spirit and at the same day have started to preach to the public in Jerusalem. They were able to preach in all the various languages after they had received the Holy Spirit, as they didn't lernt such languages. There were 4000 people baptised and they were the first Christian community.>

 

I would say Christianity started with Christ. It is profane to seperate Christianity from Christs teachings.I wouldn't like to tell Jesus and his early followers( given what that had to go through) that Christianity didn't start with them. I understand it is the Vaticans influence that makes you think in such a way.

 

Simon

Simon

simonpjones <simonpjones wrote:

 

 

 

-

Peter

Monday, April 12, 2004 6:31 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Peter

 

> No I haven't read that. Christianity was being distorted while Christ was on the earth.Christianity is basically loving what is good and right and one another.

 

At the risk of seeming particularly picky... Christianity didn't exist while Jesus was around, so it can't have been distorted during that time. Christianity really didn't start until something like 30 years after Jesus' crucifixion, and it was very different then to what it became of the next few centuries.>

 

I know Christianity wasn't wide spread. But Christianity has to start with Jesus Christ much like Marxism had to start with Karl Marx, soism had to start with so and so etc.

SimonTo send an email to - To send an email to -

 

 

Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now To send an email to -

[Guest guest]

 

-

ioannis Tsoucas

Thursday, April 15, 2004 12:40 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

 

 

Jews celebrate the 7th day Sabbath, when God has made a break after finishing creating the world.

Chistians celebrate on Sundays the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, i.e. in other languages as Greek: KYPIAKH, italian: Domenika, i.e. the day of the Lord.>

 

It seems strange that largest most influential Sunday worshipping church..the Catholic Church...celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ..when it usually depicts Jesus Christ on a cross, wounded and dying! or as a baby in Mary's arms.

The reason the Sabbath was changed to Sunday in Europe...was because of Constantine wanting to merge Christianity with Sun worshipping Pagans religions. What he should of done in my view was try to encourage the Pagans to Christianity by keeping the Sabbath....Jesus is quoted as saying " the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath".

 

Simon

 

 

Peter <metalscarab wrote:

 

Hi Yannis

 

> In all the languages I mentioned myself (Greek, Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, the word for Sunday means: Day of the Lord, not day of the sun, that is

> pagan:

 

The important question when considering etymology is whether the name of the day is derived from the fact it is the Christian Sabbath, or whether the fact it is the Sabbath is derived from the name of the day. I suspect it was the former rather than the latter.

 

To suggest that the Sabbath is celebrated on that day because of the name of the day, is a bit like saying your parents were given the names they have because you like those names! The good ole English phrase "putting the cart before the horses" would seem to apply here.

 

BB

PeterTo send an email to -

 

 

Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now To send an email to -

[Guest guest]

Hi Yannis

 

> Christianity has started at Pentecost, i.e. at the 50th day after the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ from the death, i.e. at the day when the Apostles, formerly

> disciples, have received the Holy Spirit and at the same day have started to preach to the public in Jerusalem. They were able to preach in all the various

> languages after they had received the Holy Spirit, as they didn't lernt such languages. There were 4000 people baptised and they were the first Christian

> community.

 

If that is the case, then your definition of Christianity is very different to most peoples. At that point the followers of Jesus were the Jerusalem Church, a purely Jewish sect who still worshipped their god in exactly the same way as Jews. There is no reason to suspect that they thought of Jesus as an avatar, but rather as a great teacher. After the fourth century, such views were considered heresy by the Church... had the Catholic Church existed at the time (which would, of course, have been impossible), all of those 4000 would have been executed as heretics and Christianity would never have been anything other than a short lived Jewish sect.

 

BB

Peter

[Guest guest]

Hi Yannis

 

> Jews celebrate the 7th day Sabbath, when God has made a break after finishing creating the world.

> Chistians celebrate on Sundays the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, i.e. in other languages as Greek: KYPIAKH, italian: Domenika, i.e. the day of the Lord.

 

Which you have just pointed out refers to the Sun god, rather than to the Christian one... incidentally, as we've already discussed, it is highly unlikely that the resurrection (assuming that such an event happened) took place on a Sunday, as it would have meant Jesus being buried on the Jewish Sabbath, which simply would not have happened.

 

BB

Peter

[Guest guest]

Hi Simon

 

> Yes I think it is... once we have the desire to. It 's just that I havn't heard of anyone else before Jesus that demostrated in such a way what love and compassion were.

 

Pythagoras, Buddha...

 

> I believe the vegetarians before Jesus and during his time had to be compassionate people, but there is no record as far I know of anyone challenging the authorities with

> what some of us might even call common sense theses days. You know how easy it is for people to be lead astray..killing, hating, eating animals etc.( Though the

> commonly used bibles Jesus is not don't protray Jesus as a vegetarian...I believe he would of been.

 

I think it's unlikely that Jesus would have been vegetarian - it would have been very unusual in the culture in which he lived, particularly for a Jew who would have indulged in Jewish feasts at which meat (the passover lamb for instance) is an integral part. I think you're trying to ascribe a 21st century morality to someone living in a time and place where morality was completely different.

 

BB

Peter

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Thursday, April 15, 2004 4:15 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Simon

 

> Yes I think it is... once we have the desire to. It 's just that I havn't heard of anyone else before Jesus that demostrated in such a way what love and compassion were.

 

Pythagoras, Buddha...>

 

Yes but it seems they didn't go and challenge the false teachings of the religious leaders around them in such a way as Jesus did>>>>>>>>

 

 

 

 

> I believe the vegetarians before Jesus and during his time had to be compassionate people, but there is no record as far I know of anyone challenging the authorities with

> what some of us might even call common sense theses days. You know how easy it is for people to be lead astray..killing, hating, eating animals etc.( Though the

> commonly used bibles Jesus is not don't protray Jesus as a vegetarian...I believe he would of been.

 

 

I think it's unlikely that Jesus would have been vegetarian - it would have been very unusual in the culture in which he lived, particularly for a Jew who would have indulged in Jewish feasts at which meat (the passover lamb for instance) is an integral part. I think you're trying to ascribe a 21st century morality to someone living in a time and place where morality was completely different.>

 

Jesus is reputed to have been from the "Essene Jews" which would have had no part in passover lamb.

 

Anyhow....there had to be Knowledge and practicing veggie Jews around for a long time before Jesus's arrival..as the " Vegan Diet" is the essence of the "Six Day Creation".

SimonTo send an email to -

[Guest guest]

Faith is science for someone like me, who wants to know first, what is true and then to accept it.

For the most people faith may be not science, but they are not faithful. They only have a religion and they don't know what it is and they don't ask why.

This is the big difference between conscious faithful persons and the many religious people. The real faithful, according to my discription don't have a religion. They have the revelation of God. This is the correct Christianism and the correct believe or the correct faith, if you want to give a name to it. This is a faith with evidences, not with words like: maybe, if, then, etc.

 

Yannissimonpjones <simonpjones wrote:

 

 

 

-

fartybriivismeisteranushead ta-da!

Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:50 AM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

 

 

faith is not a science. it's speculative and subjective; felt but not proven. if anything is not logical, it's religion>

Is science a faith. it seems so sometimes when theories that are treated as fact>

..To send an email to -

Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now

[Guest guest]

Hi Simon

 

> Yes but it seems they didn't go and challenge the false teachings of the religious leaders around them in such a way as Jesus did>>>>>>>>

 

No - they were pacifists who believed that the way to enlightenment was not through confrontation.

 

> Jesus is reputed to have been from the "Essene Jews" which would have had no part in passover lamb.

 

I think the claim that Jesus was an Essene is very dodgy. If he was an Essene, though, fish would have been a major part of his diet.

 

> Anyhow....there had to be Knowledge and practicing veggie Jews around for a long time before Jesus's arrival..as the " Vegan Diet" is the essence of the "Six Day

> Creation".

 

I think it's necessary to put ourselves in the mind-set of people living 2000+ years ago if we are going to try to understand how they lived. There were a few, very rare, examples of vegetarians, but looking at the development of the Jewish religion, there is no reason to suspect that they interpreted the scriptures in that way - before the exile, they regularly practiced animal sacrifice - the only reason that stopped was because it was forbidden to perform sacrifice anywhere other than at the Temple. I don't really think people who sacrifice animals (and, according to Deutoronomy, this is a required practice) would be too worried about eating a lamb chop.

 

BB

Peter

[Guest guest]

I wish they didn't preach.

 

Jo

 

 

, formerly disciples, have received the Holy Spirit and at the same day have started to preach to the public in Jerusalem. They were able to preach in all the various languages

[Guest guest]

I believe there is a scientific even mathematical element to faith in religious matters, much like those that had faith in building flying machines, landing people on the moon etc.I think you can test praying and get results as I have found for myself.

 

-

ioannis Tsoucas

Thursday, April 15, 2004 6:28 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Faith is science for someone like me, who wants to know first, what is true and then to accept it.

For the most people faith may be not science, but they are not faithful. They only have a religion and they don't know what it is and they don't ask why.

This is the big difference between conscious faithful persons and the many religious people. The real faithful, according to my discription don't have a religion. They have the revelation of God. This is the correct Christianism and the correct believe or the correct faith, if you want to give a name to it. This is a faith with evidences, not with words like: maybe, if, then, etc.

 

Yannissimonpjones <simonpjones wrote:

 

 

 

-

fartybriivismeisteranushead ta-da!

Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:50 AM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

 

 

faith is not a science. it's speculative and subjective; felt but not proven. if anything is not logical, it's religion>

Is science a faith. it seems so sometimes when theories that are treated as fact>

..To send an email to -

 

 

Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now To send an email to -

[Guest guest]

HI Simon

 

I have read several accounts of research into the power of prayer. In one, a group of people was asked to pray for one group of hospital patients. All factors taken into account, there was a success rate 25% higher in the prayed for group. The same applies to other forms of 'intent', not just praying. It's very interesting.

 

Jo

 

 

I believe there is a scientific even mathematical element to faith in religious matters, much like those that had faith in building flying machines, landing people on the moon etc.I think you can test praying and get results as I have found for myself.

 

[Guest guest]

 

-

Peter

Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:32 PM

Re: Re: Life After Death

 

Hi Peter

 

> Yes but it seems they didn't go and challenge the false teachings of the religious leaders around them in such a way as Jesus did>>>>>>>>

 

No - they were pacifists who believed that the way to enlightenment was not through confrontation.>

 

It seems from the little info I have on Jesus he was a fine example of pacifism in his actions and his teachings.It also seems he was confronted more than he was confronting.

 

> Jesus is reputed to have been from the "Essene Jews" which would have had no part in passover lamb.

 

I think the claim that Jesus was an Essene is very dodgy. If he was an Essene, though, fish would have been a major part of his diet.

 

I think the claim that he was a meat-eater is more dodgier. Compassion like that just doesn't come from meat-eaters.

 

> Anyhow....there had to be Knowledge and practicing veggie Jews around for a long time before Jesus's arrival..as the " Vegan Diet" is the essence of the "Six Day

> Creation".>

 

I think it's necessary to put ourselves in the mind-set of people living 2000+ years ago if we are going to try to understand how they lived. There were a few, very rare, examples of vegetarians, but looking at the development of the Jewish religion, there is no reason to suspect that they interpreted the scriptures in that way - before the exile, they regularly practiced animal sacrifice - the only reason that stopped was because it was forbidden to perform sacrifice anywhere other than at the Temple. I don't really think people who sacrifice animals (and, according to Deutoronomy, this is a required practice) would be too worried about eating a lamb chop.>

 

I've been putting myself in the mind set of the writer/writers of the sixth day in the " Sixth Day Creation" for some time now. God/Good, He/She/ they whoever....saw it important that humans and animals should be vegans. Does that not say anything to you about the mind set of those times?

 

Simon

 

 

BB

PeterTo send an email to -

[Guest guest]

Hi Simon

 

> It seems from the little info I have on Jesus he was a fine example of pacifism in his actions and his teachings.It also seems he was confronted more than he

> was confronting.

 

What, like the incident in the Temple where he upturned tables?

 

> I think the claim that Jesus was an Essene is very dodgy. If he was an Essene, though, fish would have been a major part of his diet.

> I think the claim that he was a meat-eater is more dodgier. Compassion like that just doesn't come from meat-eaters.

 

I think, since we're discussing an historical character, if you're going to make claims that he was a vegetarian and an Essene, you really need to provide some serious evidence rather than coming up with generalisations - considering the time and society he lived in, the scriptural evidence (partaking of the passover lamb, sharing out loaves and fishes, etc.), the evidence is very much stacked up against him being either Essene or vegetarian.

 

> I've been putting myself in the mind set of the writer/writers of the sixth day in the " Sixth Day Creation" for some time now. God/Good, He/She/ they whoever....saw it

> important that humans and animals should be vegans. Does that not say anything to you about the mind set of those times?

 

The Bible doesn't say that we should be vegans - that is a very modern interpretation of the English translation of the Bible. The Bible says that we should eat plants - it doesn't say that we *shouldn't* eat animals. That is an inference you have drawn from what is said, and comes purely from a 21st century ethical standpoint which simply didn't exist at the time the Genesis stories were written... perhaps you could come up with some examples of vegetarians anywhere in the world prior to 600 BCE?

 

BB

Peter