History's Troubling Silence About Jesus

[Kulapavana 0]

Source: Axis of Logic

 

History's Troubling Silence About Jesus

 

By Lee Salisbury

Oct 6, 2004, 18:22

 

How many people have never heard about Jesus of Nazareth? Of course everybody has heard of Jesus. The bible tells us his fame spread throughout the lands of Palestine and Syria. This is the god-man / savior of the world who performed miracles only a God could perform: He turned water into wine; fed thousands with a few pieces of bread and fish; walked on water; stilled the raging storm; healed the blind, the deaf, the infirm, the withered hand and the demon-possessed; and raised the dead. His moral teachings are said to surpass anything ever taught. Rejected by his own Jewish people, the Romans brutally crucified him. But, that didn’t stop Jesus. At his crucifixion the bible tells us the heavens and earth affirmed his deity, causing a 3 hour eclipse of the sun over all the earth, an earthquake causing Jerusalem’s temple curtain to be split in two, and graves were opened with many Jewish saints resurrected and appearing to the people in Jerusalem. Within three days, the Son of God, defeated Satan the prince of darkness, rose from the dead, appeared to his disciples, then ascended into heaven. How can anybody not love such a story and want to believe it?

 

The problem sincere, objective-minded inquirers of history have with this astounding story is why the historical record is virtually silent about the Jesus of Nazareth story in the writings of non-Christian Jewish, Greek, and Roman writers. Certainly news of such events, if true, would have spread throughout the Mediterranean world. Yet, the surviving writings of some 35 to 40 independent observers of the first one hundred years following the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus give virtually no confirmation. These authors were respected, well-traveled, articulate, thinkers and observers, the philosophers, poets, moralists, historians of that era. Some of the most prominent figures who make no mention of Jesus are:

 

Seneca, 4BCE - 65CE Rome’s most prominent writer on ethics, philosophy, morals, natural scientist who tracked eclipses & quakes; the alleged correspondence between Paul and Seneca was later exposed as fraudulent.

 

Pliny the Elder, 23-79 CE Natural History 37 books on natural events such as earthquakes, eclipse and healing.

 

Quintilian 39-96CE authored Instituio Oratio 12 books on morals and virtue.

 

Epictetus 55-135CE, former slave who became a recognized moralist, philosopher and wrote about the "brotherhood of man" and the importance of helping the poor and oppressed.

 

Martial 38-103CE Poet, wrote epic poems about human foibles and the diverse characters of Roman Empire

 

Juvenal, 55 - 127 CE Rome’s most powerful satirical poet, wrote about injustice and tragedy in Roman gov’t

 

Plutarch, 46 - 119 CE Greek, traveled Rome to Alexandria, wrote Moralia on morals and ethics.

 

Three Romans whose writings contain minimal reference to a Christ, Chrestos or Christians are:

 

Pliny the Younger, 61-113CE Governor of Bithynia In a letter in 112CE asking Emperor Trajan about prosecuting Christians who "met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honor of Christ as to a god." Some eighty years after Calvary, somebody was worshiping a Christ (Hebrew equivalent for Messiah)! But, nothing is said as to whether this Christ was Jesus, a teacher and miracle working man who was crucified and resurrected in Judea or a mythic Christ of the pagan mystery religions. Even Jesus allegedly said there would be many false Christs, so Pliny’s statement lends little if any credence for Jesus of Nazareth historicity.

 

Suetonius, 69 - 122 CE Lives of the Emperors , a history of 11 emperors; writing in 120 about Emperor Claudius 41-54CE who "expelled from Rome the Jews who under the influence of Chrestus, did not cease to cause unrest." Who is Chrestus? No mention of Jesus. Is this Chrestus a Jewish agitator, one of many false Messiah’s or a mythic Christ? This statement proves nothing for a historical Jesus of Nazareth.

 

Tacitus, 56 -120 CE noted Roman historian, in his Annuals 14-68 CE Book 15, chapter 44 written about 115CE gives the first non-Christian reference to Christ as a man executed in Judea by Pontius Pilate. Tacitus states "Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate." Scholars point out several reasons to suspect this statement was not from Tacitus or any Roman records, but instead a later insertion in Tacitus’ Annuals. #1. Pilate is referred to as "procurator" which is appropriate in Tacitus’ day, but in Pilate’s day the correct title was "prefect". #2. If Tacitus’s comment was written in the early 2nd Century, why didn’t later church fathers who all sought to find proofs for Jesus historicity such as Tertullian, Clement, Origen, even Eusebius (Father of Church History) quote Tacitus? #3 Tacitus is not quoted by any Christian writer prior to the 15th Century. This quotations inaccuracy and lack of use strongly suggest it is a later insertion.

 

The clear and indisputable fact is 80 to 100 years is a suspiciously long time after alleged events of such magnitude for no credible written recognition . Further, the brevity and scarceness of substantive fact in these three writings relative to the claim that this was about a miracle working Jewish Messiah named Jesus who was God in human flesh, crucified, and resurrected clearly calls into question the credibility of these writings.

 

Three 1st Century Jewish authors of great significance are:

 

Philo-Judaeus, 15 BCE - 50 CE of Alexandria, a Greek speaking Jewish theologian-philosopher, personally knew Jerusalem because of family living there. He wrote extensively on Jewish history and religion from a Greek perspective and taught the following concepts all prominent in John’s Gospel and Paul’s epistles: God and His Word are one; the Word is the first-begotten Son of God; God created the world thru His Word; God holds all things together thru His Word; the Word is the fountain of eternal life; the Word dwells in and among us; all judgment is committed to God’s Word; and the Word never changes. Philo also taught on God as Spirit, the Trinity, the virgin birth, Jews who sin will go to hell, Gentiles who come to God will be saved and go to heaven, and God is love and forgives. Yet, Philo, a Jew in nearby Alexandria, who would have been a contemporary of Jesus never once mentions anybody named Jesus nor any miracle worker being crucified and resurrected in Jerusalem, let alone an eclipse, an earthquake, or graves opening and resurrected Jewish saints walking the streets of Jerusalem. Why? Philo’s total silence about a Jesus is deafening!

 

Josephus, 37-103CE a Jerusalem born Pharisee, living in Rome wrote History of the Jews, 79CE and Antiquities of the Jews,93CE. Christian apologists (defenders of the faith) consider Josephus’ Jesus testimony the one sure evidence of the historicity of Jesus. This Jesus Testimony is found in Josephus’, Antiquities of the Jews. Contrary to those Christian apologists, the Jesus testimony is considered by many scholars including the Encyclopedia Britannica’s scholars as "an insertion by later Christian copyists". This Jesus testimony states "Jesus is the Christ, a doer of wonderful works, was crucified, and appeared the third day as the divine prophets foretold".

 

Why is this Jesus testimony considered a later insertion?

 

1. Josephus was a Pharisee. Only a Christian would call Jesus the Christ. Josephus would have had to renounce his pharisaical beliefs to say Jesus was the Christ. Josephus died a pharisee.

 

2. Josephus writing style is to write chapter upon chapter about the most insignificant people and events. The Jesus testimony consists of four sentences. Why would Josephus’ Christ (the Jewish Messiah) deserve only four sentences?

 

3. The paragraphs before and after the Jesus testimony describe Romans killing Jews. The paragraph following the Jesus testimony begins "About the same time another sad calamity put the Jews in disorder". Would the "sad calamity" refer to the appearing of the "doer of wonderful works" or Romans killing Jews? The Jesus Testimony clearly does not follow the preceding paragraph and characteristic of later insertions is out of context.

 

4. Finally, and most convincing had Josephus actually written the Jesus testimony, church fathers in the following 200 years would surely refer to it in fending off critics of Jesus’ being just another myth. But, not once does Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, or Origen ever refer to Josephus’ Jesus testimony. We know Origen read Josephus because Origen’s writings criticize Josephus for attributing the destruction of Jerusalem to the killing of James. The church fathers made no reference to Josephus’ alleged Jesus testimony because it was not in Josephus’ writing.

 

Not only does the Jesus Testimony appear fraudulent, but Josephus’ historical accounts both contradict and omit other New Testament bible stories:

 

1. According to the bible John the Baptist was killed about 30 CE at the beginning of Jesus ministry. In Josephus, John the Baptist is killed by Herod when Herod is at war with King Aertus of Arabia in 34 - 37 CE.

 

2. Josephus makes no reference to the celebration of Pentecost in Jerusalem when allegedly devote Jews of every nation gathered and all received the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in new tongues; a Jewish fisherman Peter is head apostle of the new church; a fellow pharisee named Saul of Tarsus becomes the apostle Paul, or of the church’s explosive growth throughout Palestine, Alexandria, Greece, or Josephus’ city of residence Rome. Peter and Paul’s alleged martyrdoms in Rome about 60 CE is unknown to Josephus. It bears noting that Christian apologists so determined to rely on the veracity of Josephus’ Jesus testimony excuse his later oversights.

 

Is it probable, as the Encyclopedia Britannica asserts that Christian copyists distorted truth by inserting the Jesus testimony? Eusebius (265-339 CE), acknowledged as "Father of Church History" and known to be the emperor Constantine’s overseer of doctrine writes in his The Preparation of the Gospel published by Baker House (a Christian company)on page 619 "it will be necessary sometimes to use falsehood as a remedy for the benefit of those who require such treatment". Eusebius, one of the most influential Christians in church history, condoned fraud as a tool to promote Christianity! The probability of Constantine’s Christianity being a product of fraud is directly related to the desperate need of evidence to support the historicity of Jesus. Without Josephus’ alleged Jesus testimony there is no credible first century non-Christian evidence of a historical Jesus.

 

Justus of Tiberius is the third 1st Century Jewish writer. The writings of Justus of Tiberius have been lost, but Photius, the patriarch of Constantinople 878-886 CE wrote Bibleotheca in which he reviewed the writings of Justus of Tiberius. Photius records "of the advent of Christ, of the things that befell him one way or another, or of the miracles that he performed, (Justus) makes absolutely no mention". Justus’ home was Tiberius in Galilee (Jn 6:23). Justus’ writing preceded Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews 93CE, so it is probable he lived and wrote during or immediately after the alleged era of Jesus, yet remarkably "makes absolutely no mention of him".

 

Rabbinic literature would logically be the one final inquiry for the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. The Bible’s New Testament alleges Jesus is the fulfillment of Jewish prophesy for the Messiah, having been crucified on Passover Day. On that day allegedly Jerusalem had an earthquake, its temple veil was split in two, there was an eclipse of the sun, Jesus is resurrected, even resurrected Jewish saints walked the streets of Jerusalem, a few days later on the Day of Pentecost Jews gathered from every nation to witness the Holy Ghost descending with tongues of fire, and the Christian church growth exploded with both Jewish and Gentile converts, signs and miracles being unleashed in abundance. In 70 CE Jerusalem is besieged by the Roman army and Israel as a nation is destroyed and dispersed. Regardless of Rabbinic rejection of Jesus as Messiah, the historical impact of events surrounding Jesus would logically be noted in Israel’s Talmudic commentaries known as the Midrash. Jewish oral traditions and history recorded in the Midrash were updated and given final form by Rabbi Jehudah ha-Qadosh around 220 CE. Quoting Frank Zindler’s The Jesus The Jews Never Knew " Remarkably, not a single early rabbinic source so much as hints at the events of a 1st Century false Messiah, of the events alleged surrounding Jesus crucifixion and resurrection, or for that matter of anyone identifiable with the Jesus of Christianity."

 

The Holy Land’s historic landmarks do not confirm the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. Local monks, priests, and tour guides pointing Christian pilgrims (donations accepted) to the locations of events described in the Bible can hardly be considered as objective. Again quoting portions of Zindler, "Unbiased confirmation of these locations is severely lacking. Nazareth is not mentioned once in the Hebrew Old Testament. The Talmud mentions 63 Galilean towns, yet never mentions Nazareth. Josephus mentions 45 Galilean towns or villages, yet never once mentions Nazareth. Josephus does mention a Japha which is a suburb of present-day Nazareth. Lk 4:28-30 describes Nazareth having a synagogue and a "brow of a hill whereon their city was built" presumably steep enough to kill Jesus had they succeeded in throwing him over it. But, present-day Nazareth occupies a valley floor and the lower half of a hillside. There is no hill. Further, present-day Nazareth has no 1st Century synagogue ruins. Origen 182-254 CE who lived in Caesarea 30 miles from present-day Nazareth does not mention Nazareth. The first solid reference to Nazareth comes from Eusebius in the 4th Century. The best guesti-mates are that Nazareth did not come into existence until the 2nd Century. This historic evidence strongly suggests why no 1st Century non-Christian Roman, Greek, Jewish historian, or Rabbinic literature mentions a Jesus of Nazareth, i.e. there was no 1st Century Nazareth.

 

Time and space do not allow for discussion of other significant New Testament towns. The historical and archaeological evidence for 1st Century Capernaum (mentioned 16 times in the New Testament), Bethany, Bethpage, Bethabara, and Calvary, like Nazareth is equally unconvincing or even counter-indicative.

 

 

[Kulapavana 0]

"...taught the following concepts all prominent in John’s Gospel and Paul’s epistles: God and His Word are one; the Word is the first-begotten Son of God; God created the world thru His Word; God holds all things together thru His Word; the Word is the fountain of eternal life; the Word dwells in and among us; all judgment is committed to God’s Word; and the Word never changes.

[Guest guest]

Well, does it mean Jesus is just a myth for which millions were killed and maimed? Interesting subject...

[ShegavichaRana 0]

Much less is written about the saints and more is written about the kings and politicians. In the due course of time, politicians are forgotten and saints are remembered. Exactly, same thing has happened about Jesus Christ. He must be a supreme saint.

[mpuri 0]

Read all about him here: http://www.truthbook.com/urantiabook/U122.htm

http://www.truthbook.com/urantiabook/U196.htm

 

There are 76 very interesting papers about his life, more than you knew existed!

[Guest guest]

Urantia stuff is pretty interesting. Clearly the person or persons who wrote it borrowed freely from Indian religious texts, and added to that Judaic and even Christian theology.

 

Reading it, and knowing all three of these religions, it is obvious to me the source works. He took the cosmology and philosophy of the Vedic texts, and mixed that with Judaic deities, and Christian dogma. The Urantia people even claim that Hinduism and Judaism were the best ancient religions on earth (urantia).

 

All in all it's pretty close to the Vedic teachings, although mixed with other concepts and lacking a full understanding of vedic teachings because it was written before there were many good translations available.

[Kulapavana 0]

Uranthia suff seems to be pure fiction

[mpuri 0]

Were written by celestial personalities via a human, the origins are not well known.

 

Some of the stuff does sound like fiction, but I certainly believe in it.

 

The cosmology is actually more detailed and in ways different from that of Hinduism.

 

I've integrated my Hindu background with the stuff in Urantia and enjoy it that way!

[theist 1]

That is an interesting perspective to me. Much the same as I feel about many of the stories in the Purana's.

 

But why do we need to assume literal truth anyway. It may be or it may not be. But what is the essence of the Urantia book? I have never read it so don't know.

 

I am not saying read and look for hidden meanings. That would result in utter chaos. But Prabhupada has told us to "take the essence" and not bother about what is allegory and what isn't.

 

Our speculations on the matter are not needed as the Essence is self revealing.

[Kulapavana 0]

the stories in the Puranas are accepted by great sages and manifestations of Lord Krishna like Lord Chaitanya. Urantia books are just "channeled" stuff.

 

I know a bit about the akhasic records and their transcription, both current and historical. They are only remotely similar to the "channeled" stuff. Overall the value of such records range from gem quality to pure garbage. It takes a truly self realized soul to tell the difference.

[mpuri 0]

Yes I agree, that's what I tend to do as well, I look for the essence indeed.

 

The essence of the Urantia Book in my words:

 

God is the Creator/Father of all that is, he resides in us, participates in our lives, for that reason we are all brothers & sisters and we need to live accordingly.

 

Please visit www.truthbook.com or www.urantia.org for more if you will.

[mpuri 0]

Kulapavana what is channelling? What is inspiration? By what technique or experience were the Vedas received?

 

Please read a few pages of the Urantia Papers or other such 'new' revelations to actually judge.

 

Check out the following links for a very small sampling of the treasure that the Urantia Book is:

 

 

 

1) http://www.ubfellowship.org/newbook/ppr048_7.html

2) http://lightson.net/inspiration.htm#AFRAID

[Pankaja_Dasa 1]

 

 

we already have www.vedabase.net perfect knowledge full.

 

If your tryin to be or learn I really suggest study fullness knowledge not partial. Just my opinion.

[mpuri 0]

Sure that's some fantastic stuff and I love it.

 

If you consider that perfect and complete then that's all you need, I can't argue with that!

 

 

[theist 1]

 

God is the Creator/Father of all that is, he resides in us, participates in our lives, for that reason we are all brothers & sisters and we need to live accordingly.

 

 

I like it.

 

[Kulapavana 0]

"what is channelling?"

 

you open your mind to disembodied entities on an astral plane. these entities can be ghosts, Yakshas, Rakshasas, Nagas, etc. they use your gross and subtle bodies to carry out their wishes, like writing a book inspiring others to let them use their bodies. I hope you see the risks...

 

 

 

"what is inspiration?"

 

inspiration can come from many different sources: from bodily lust to divine influence. you judge by the results.

 

 

"By what technique or experience were the Vedas received?"

 

in our present age only by direct disciplic succession. and as far as I know that how it was received by us mortals even in Satya Yuga.

 

[mpuri 0]

Thanks!

[AncientMariner 0]

That is exactly the same thing I experienced with Urantia Book. As much as I love Srimad Bhagavatam the cosmology in Urantia Book is even more detailed in ways and is a source of incredible depth of knowledge. I suppose there is a possibility it could be an elaborate hoax but even if it was an elaborate hoax it is such a good hoax that I would have to admire it still as being a great hoax. I am same as you, I integrate the best of both cosmologies and it is source of endless spiritual enjoyment. The thing I really like is that it brought me back in touch with my Christian heritage. In ways I turned to Hinduism out of philosophical differences with modern Christian theology. Urantia book has helped me come to peace with some of those theological differences.

[Guest guest]

The article at the beginning of this thread uses the argument that because Jesus was not mentioned by too many non-believers of the time, then he must not have really done all those things the believers said he did, or that He was not really God-man. But this is a faulty argument. Non-believers, whose hearts are covered by a desire to not see God, are certainly not going to notice Him when he comes. Thats just a given. It's kind of like "avajanti mam mudha..." (Bhagavad Gita: "Fools deride me when I come in human form...")etc. But there is an extreme amount of liturature from eye witnesses attesting to the life of Christ and the writtings of the apostles who were personally instructed by Christ and students of these apostles who were instructed by them etc. This apostolic tradition (or disciplic succession) still truly exists and the True Orthodox identity of Christ is still known and kept alive. Fools deride Him when he took human form and they still do. This is not a new concept.

 

Sometimes people who are using these same arguments to support their own "faiths" (i.e. it is "bonafide" because of disciplic succession) can't allow these same arguments to be used by other faiths so they use the arguments of non-believers to support their perjudice.

 

[Also: I think it is interesting that certain non-Christian groups that have surfaced after Christ's time use this concept of "disciplic succesion". My speculation is that it was borrowed by them from Christian influence. (I wouldn't be surprised if this post gets deleted by the moderator for writting that here /images/graemlins/smile.gif)]

[Kulapavana 0]

I strongly believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person in every sense, but there is a lot more to his story than most Christians know, or want to know.

 

I posted this article mainly to show how complicated are the issues connected with early Christianity. Most Christians for example belive the Gospels were written by the Apostles, which of course is not true. The first two centuries of Christianity are the most misunderstood and least appreciated history for most Christians. Yet, they also hold the key to understanding the real message Jesus tried to convey.

 

"I think it is interesting that certain non-Christian groups that have surfaced after Christ's time use this concept of "disciplic succesion". My speculation is that it was borrowed by them from Christian influence."

 

LOL! that sure shows the depth of your historical knowledge.

[mpuri 0]

AncientMariner I agree, there's a synthesis occuring here.

 

I personally feel that God is never going to stop revealing his beautiful self to us in a myriad ways and through various individuals including esteemed disciplic gurus like Srila. And that also includes all kinds of books/publications that are inspired or even channeled.

 

I don't personally believe in disembodied souls and the like, especially if one tries to stay in Krsna Consciousness, no soul with evil intent can even come close. If channeling is so bad then any text or book in which God 'spoke' to the receiver could be considered channeled.

 

The Urantia Book, A Course in Miracles and books like 'A conversation with God' are all pieces of a puzzle that help us understand a little bit more of the puzzle.

 

Thanks for your comments!

[theist 1]

 

"what is channelling?"

 

you open your mind to disembodied entities on an astral plane. these entities can be ghosts, Yakshas, Rakshasas, Nagas, etc. they use your gross and subtle bodies to carry out their wishes, like writing a book inspiring others to let them use their bodies. I hope you see the risks...

 

 

Yes this is a real risk. We on the grosser side sometimes imagine that just because someone is not presently in a material body then he must be in full knowledge. Not so. Krsna consciousness doesn't just happen when we die and then close up again at birth. Subtlely embodied beings can be just as much in illusion as the grossly embodied beings or even more so if the so-called grossly embodied is really a transcendentalist.

 

When a cheater dies he remains a cheater only now with perhaps even greater facility to cheat humans.

 

Plus there is the possibility that the human is just faking the whole thing and promoting their book and seminars.

 

Then again that doesn't mean that higher and benelvolent beings or even God himself cannot speak through someone to communicate a message as well.

 

How to tell the difference? Caitya-guru, the Lord in the heart. There simply is no substitute. We personally have to know God. No substitute for reality.

 

Why did Krsna reveal Himself to Arjuna? "Because you are My devotee and friend..."

 

 

 

 

"what is inspiration?"

 

inspiration can come from many different sources: from bodily lust to divine influence. you judge by the results.

 

 

Yes, if we are not inspired by the Lord we will be inspired by so many other forces fighting for attention to exploit us.

 

So we are basically helpless and pray to the Lord for His ever protection and to lead us to Him and to inspire us to continue the journey homeward.

 

We have no other safe shelter.

 

 

 

"By what technique or experience were the Vedas received?"

 

in our present age only by direct disciplic succession. and as far as I know that how it was received by us mortals even in Satya Yuga.

 

 

Perhaps someone will explain to us Thakur Bhaktivinode's vision of sahaja-samadhi.

 

[theist 1]

If we read Krsnadasa Kaviraja's description of why and how he was inspired to write we will get some understanding. This is only one little verse of course.

 

TRANSLATION Adi 8.79

As a wooden doll is made to dance by a magician, I write as Madana-gopäla orders me to do so.

 

PURPORT

This is the position of a pure devotee. One should not take any responsibility on his own but should be a soul surrendered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who will then give him dictation as the caittya-guru, or the spiritual master within. The Supreme Personality of Godhead is pleased to guide a devotee from within and without. From within He guides him as the Supersoul, and from without He guides him as the spiritual master.

[Kulapavana 0]

there is a huge difference between receiving personal inspiration or even divine vision of transcendental pastimes through Lord in the Heart and receiving Vedas in the same manner. It is simply not done that way. The Urantia books effectively claim to be on the level of the Vedas, yet their origin is very dubious. A skilled writer and philosopher (on gross or subtle level) could have easily made such a presentation, motivated by any of the obvious reasons, including a desire to help others.

 

Yet, if this book truly inspires you in your spiritual life - it certainly is valuable, even if it is just fiction. However, I would NOT put it in the same category as the Vedas.

 

[theist 1]

 

there is a huge difference between receiving personal inspiration or even divine vision of transcendental pastimes through Lord in the Heart and receiving Vedas in the same manner. It is simply not done that way.

 

 

Well I don't know anything about the Urantia book and its origin. But I do disagree with the above statement.

 

I would say that the ONLY way to receive the Vedas is from the Lord in your heart. For one thing one's spiritual master should be the external manifestation of that Lord in the heart so their voice is one. It is not that the guru is speaking on an external level and the Supersoul is internal and inaccessable. They are both internal. But that internal is becoming accessable by the Lord's mercy as the spiritual master. It is also a fact that you cannot HEAR the spiritual master without the Lord giving you the proper understanding of what he is saying from within.

 

Not everyone in the audience is hearing the spiritual master as I am using the word hearing. Everyone is certainly being benefited by the sound vibration, even the insects I don't mean that.

 

I may not be understanding what you are saying correctly, but it seems you may be speaking about the formality of accepting guru and hearing from him vs. the free for all situation where everyone is just shutting their eyes, listening to their minds chatter and thinking that its coming from God. I am not sure.

 

Sorry if I missed the point.