[ness31]

No disrespect to Annatar but he definitely has a brand of Christianity, and I can’t identify with it. Maybe you guys are just on another level and I don’t have the tools to comprehend what you’re saying?
If it really were about the book of John I might have half a chance, but everyone quotes so many extra sources that I can’t comment as I’m not that widely read.

Most of the time, this thread has zero to do with the Bible and what’s actually contained therein.

Christians, Jews and Muslims are the only religions claiming to possess the one and only truth, an extremely vain position for a spiritual religion to take and a source of great trouble and a lot of hurt.

I couldn’t agree more.

The Golden Rule is an ethos that should be applied to all humanity and not only to the ingroup as abrahamics have it.

Again, I agree. But your issue is with religion and not the Golden Rule itself. You made an argument that the Golden Rule by its language or framing was exclusionary. That’s the only bit I pulled you up on; that’s the bit I wanted scriptural backing for.

That’s it!

[ness31]

Bottom line is, abrahamism engages in 2 major errors:

1) It demands of people to worship text which is the very definition of materialism & idolatry. It is even worse than religious art, because even religious art is not worshipped as the Bible itself is.
2) It excludes out-group people thereby demanding of them to alter their identity before they can gain access to heaven. Goodness is about actions, words and deeds and not about confessional identitarianism.

I do not see abrahamic religions staying relevant without overcoming these 2 major issues.

This is an edit to your original post -

But I think you could make strong arguments there, yes.

I don’t think the Bible is worshipped or idolized. It’s often misinterpreted, taken out of context or simply disregarded for other theological texts. Same can be said for the Koran and the Torah.

So in a round about way we’ve returned to a critique of the Pharisees and Sadducees and their modern day counterparts like Imams, Rabbis and …Priests? Maybe not priests…maybe a bit higher than your garden variety priest

[noemon]

No disrespect to Annatar but he definitely has a brand of Christianity, and I can’t identify with it. Maybe you guys are just on another level and I don’t have the tools to comprehend what you’re saying?
If it really were about the book of John I might have half a chance, but everyone quotes so many extra sources that I can’t comment as I’m not that widely read.

Most of the time, this thread has zero to do with the Bible and what’s actually contained therein.

I couldn’t agree more.

Again, I agree. But your issue is with religion and not the Golden Rule itself. You made an argument that the Golden Rule by its language or framing was exclusionary. That’s the only bit I pulled you up on; that’s the bit I wanted scriptural backing for.

That’s it!

I identify with his brand of Christianity, which is traditional orthodox Christianity really as is most of my Greek environment.

His statement, that I called vain, about Jesus being the only path to the truth is found in John in several verses. I personally do not believe that Jesus could have said such a thing, certainly not in the way that most people would understand it anyway, it is far more likely that the Apostles and Evangelists added extravagant statements to make their missionary work among illiterate & superstitious peasants who might have needed a bit of a nod to change their ways, a bit easier. Even if he did say such a thing, it should be viewed from such a lens(the lens of Logos after all) but I do not think it should be taken for granted by pious people, certainly not in this context, but only in the context of love. Believe in my love, rather than confess yourself as a christian identity. Just like many other Biblical statements are not taken for granted. Loving Jesus is one thing, this is quite another.

Moreover, Jesus also said:

This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men” ".

Jesus as a spiritual being was highly attuned to the error of proclaiming "the truth of men and books" as doctrines and commandments.

He was against it.

About the Golden Rule, it is found in Matthew in its proper non-exclusionary form, but then it is contradicted by John:

As many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God’s children, to those who believe in his name.

Notice, John is making a statement of his own, which he later justifies by attributing it to Jesus:

Remain in Me, and I will remain in you. Just as no branch can bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine, neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in Me. 5I am the vine and you are the branches. The one who remains in Me, and I in him, will bear much fruit. For apart from Me you can do nothing. 6If anyone does not remain in Me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers. Such branches are gathered up, thrown into the fire, and burned.…"

In any case, I find this militant exclusionary vanity which is reinterpreted as such by consecutive Christian catechists as wrong.

[ness31]

About the Golden Rule, it is found in Matthew in its proper non-exclusionary form, but then it is contradicted by John:

John 1:12 wrote:
As many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God’s children, to those who believe in his name.


Notice, John is making a statement of his own, which he later justifies by attributing it to Jesus:

John 15:5 wrote:
Remain in Me, and I will remain in you. Just as no branch can bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine, neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in Me. 5I am the vine and you are the branches. The one who remains in Me, and I in him, will bear much fruit. For apart from Me you can do nothing. 6If anyone does not remain in Me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers. Such branches are gathered up, thrown into the fire, and burned.…"




In any case, I find this militant exclusionary vanity which is reinterpreted as such by consecutive Christian catechists as wrong

I think this gets back to what I was saying about the Golden Rule being an ethos.

The other two scriptures were for the initiated, you know, in-house ‘shop talk’ to disciples. But yes, I agree with the militant exclusionary stuff. It never sat well with me, even as a child, and you know, children have a fabulous bullshit detector when it comes to religion.

[annatar1914]

This is the way of the liberal bourgeoisie mind. The way of the post christian post-truth and post-morality relativistic modern Western world, to define Christianity out of existence. To retain only what doesn't offend the pride and vanity and maintains the illusion of self sufficiency in relation to a God one does not want to believe in. He doesn't owe us anything. Our intelligence cannot save us, our works cannot save us, we cannot earn it. It's a free gift, given to whom He wills without respect to persons. I think that's what angers us the most

[noemon]

Matthew 15:8-9: This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.

[annatar1914]

Matthew 15:8-9: This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.

There are the commandments of men, which come from our vain imagination. Then there are the commandments of God, which He can give us the grace to observe. We try to add our commandments to His, of course.

[noemon]

There are the commandments of men, which come from our vain imagination. Then there are the commandments of God, which He can give us the grace to observe. We try to add our commandments to His, of course.

The commandments of God are not written in parchment but on our Spirit that is accessed only via Logos.

'Vain' you said, is there anything more vain than proclaiming that your particular interpretation of John, allows you to proclaim all other religions as invalid?

Is that not your vain imagination in full overdrive?

[annatar1914]

The commandments of God are not written in parchment but on our Spirit that is accessed only via Logos.

'Vain' you said, is there anything more vain than proclaiming that your particular interpretation of John, allows you to proclaim all other religions as invalid?

Is that not your vain imagination in full overdrive?

Men and their opinions change. What is written down tends not to change. Vanity comes from trying to make as if our finite and limited reason is the Logos. But:

The Logos is a Person. And predictions of His coming were made, and then fulfilled. That wouldn't be testable and observable reality if it hadn't been written down.

He said: " I Am the Way, the Truth, and The Life, no man comes to the Father save by Me".

Rather suspiciously convenient if some people say He didn't actually say that.

[noemon]

Men and their opinions change. What is written down tends not to change. Vanity comes from trying to make as if our finite and limited reason is the Logos. But:

The Logos is a Person. And predictions of His coming were made, and then fulfilled. That wouldn't be testable and observable reality if it hadn't been written down.

He said: " I Am the Way, the Truth, and The Life, no man comes to the Father save by Me".

Rather suspiciously convenient if some people say He didn't actually say that.

What is "by me"?

By capitalizing his name? -a name that he would not even understand?, by simply taking up an identity like a woke or LGBTQ person? by buying a forgiveness paper? by proclaiming a hollow devotion to a person, but not the deeds of love they taught, and doing so for the sole purpose of disenfranchising and insulting others as invalids? That is what is vain hubris. That is precisely what is taking the lords name in vain.

Or is 'by me' actually by 'my love'? By listening to what "I teach, which is to love".

And you show your love for him and others by using the lords name in vain to call every non-christian person an 'invalid', while hiding behind a parchment you barely understand? This is precisely why parchment must not ever be worshipped because it allows people to use it for malicious purposes and the malevolence becomes exponential if said book is worshipped as an idol. While the goodness of it will happen anyway, regardless if a book is idolized or not.

Logos is granted to us to make sense of life.

Good words, good deeds, good thoughts.

Not evil thoughts about others, manifested via bad deeds of bad words.

[ness31]

This is the way of the liberal bourgeoisie mind. The way of the post christian post-truth and post-morality relativistic modern Western world, to define Christianity out of existence. To retain only what doesn't offend the pride and vanity and maintains the illusion of self sufficiency in relation to a God one does not want to believe in. He doesn't owe us anything. Our intelligence cannot save us, our works cannot save us, we cannot earn it. It's a free gift, given to whom He wills without respect to persons. I think that's what angers us the most

What would you have us do? Fight another crusade? It doesn’t have to be all fire and brimstone in the same way people of faith shouldn’t be bullied into wearing a pride jumper.

[annatar1914]

What would you have us do? Fight another crusade? It doesn’t have to be all fire and brimstone in the same way people of faith shouldn’t be bullied into wearing a pride jumper.

@ness31 :

Did I say anything like that? Or anything that could infer that?

Part of the whole reason for this thread is the appearance of the total decline of traditional Orthodox Christian beliefs in the world, not earthly success. And furthermore this was predicted.

[noemon]

What would you have us do?

Good words, good deeds, good thoughts.

By not doing to others what you would not want done upon you. Exclusion as much a part of that as any other deed that human do not wish upon themselves.

By loving other people and by thinking of ways to make people happy.

That is what is being in Jesus both according to Jesus and according to John. Following the truth. You follow the truth by using Logos to achieve it so that only the logical interpretation that matches Love springs out the text.

Certainly not by finding new creative ways to create "us vs them" categories.

[ness31]

@ness31 :

Did I say anything like that? Or anything that could infer that?

Part of the whole reason for this thread is the appearance of the total decline of traditional Orthodox Christian beliefs in the world, not earthly success. And furthermore this was predicted.

A little, yeah

Considering you feel our downfall was prophesized it seems like you haven’t quite come to terms with it and begrudge those destined to fulfill their role. Maybe I’m just reading you wrong..

Just out of curiosity, did the other thread already cover in detail what everyone means by The Logos?

[annatar1914]

@Potemkin , @Verv , and friends:

The critical thing to note is the interesting phenomena of secularized post-Christians, Western or Westernized, who feel the need to crown their apostasy and inner rejection of that religion with demands for those few faithful Christians to follow along in an obvious distortion of what was originally believed. We have a " Jefferson Bible" in existence as an illustration of this, not a " Jefferson Koran", after all.

And so it is that Islam, bent on worldly success and certain of it in fact, will overcome the flabby and senseless final phase of the modern age, at least in the regions of the World where it all began. It's already happening.

[ckaihatsu]

Laments for the Fall： Constantinople and Tenochtitlan in counterpoint, with Eleni Kefala

[Patrickov]

And so it is that Islam, bent on worldly success and certain of it in fact, will overcome the flabby and senseless final phase of the modern age, at least in the regions of the World where it all began. It's already happening.

This sounds almost like you have secretly converted to Islam.

[noemon]

Just out of curiosity, did the other thread already cover in detail what everyone means by The Logos?

Jesus: "I am the Logos and Logos is me, you cannot find the Father save by me, the Logos".

One thing is for certain, Logos is not an ephemeral identity a person wears like a jacket.

It is the faculty of Reason that distinguishes man from the animals, the ability to think & conceive from the Nous/Spirit/Mind so that noema/meaning can be discerned and thus become one with the Logos to achieve noemosyni*/intelligence to gain noesis/nirvana.

The faculty of Thought is Infinite. Identity is nothing. Nirvana is not achieved by merely proclaiming oneself as a Buddhist.

Jesus: "Do not trust the words, commands, and scriptures of men but follow me, the Logos to find Agape"

Logos: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

Agape: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agape

the love of God for man and of man for God

It is in the context of Love that Jesus has 2 hypostases. God & Man.

*Translation of noemosyni via google translate:

intelligence or [noimosíni] Ο30 : 1a.(psych.) the set of human cognitive abilities, i.e. perception, memory, association, imagination, attention and intelligence, and in particular the ability to adapt to new situations and the ability to perceive similarities, differences and relationships; intelligence: Intelligence test, to ascertain the degree of intellectual development of a person. Intelligence index, derived from intelligence tests. Person with high / low IQ. Person with superior / inferior / high / low ~. I appreciate someone's ~, I don't consider him capable of understanding simple things. (info) artificial* ~. b. superior intelligence: Great scientists are distinguished by their ~. 2. (for an animal) having higher instincts: H ~ of the dog / the cat / the horse.

[annatar1914]

This sounds almost like you have secretly converted to Islam.

@Patrickov :

Then you haven't been paying attention. On the contrary, my suggestion is that Islam is a good candidate for being the end times one world false religion of Antichrist, in the later days before Christ's return to judge the living and the dead.

[Patrickov]

Then you haven't been paying attention. On the contrary, my suggestion is that Islam is a good candidate for being the end times one world false religion of Antichrist, in the later days before Christ's return to judge the living and the dead.

Islam is too repulsive to confuse enough people and fulfill this purpose.