Mangling others' religions

[tayla]

Is it justified to interpret someone's scriptures differently than those the scripture belongs to?

For example, the New Age teaching that Jesus was a guru who lived in India, and that he was teaching a form of eastern religion.

No he didn't and no he wasn't.

Seems to me, we have to understand people's religious claims from the perspective of those who believe and practice the religion. And, we have to understand and interpret people's scriptures from the perspective of how those who believe these books to be scripture understand them.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

No one owns God's Word.

We all are responsible for our own approach to them, how to see what is contained within and how to live them.

Regards Tony

 

[SalixIncendium]

...the New Age teaching that Jesus was a guru who lived in India, and that he was teaching a form of eastern religion.

I've never heard this one. Where did you find it?

 

[tayla]

I've never heard this one. Where did you find it?

I rubbed shoulders with new agers when I flirted with the new age movement. I heard it all the time.

 

[Martin]

There's a thin line between re-interpreting religious texts, and misrepresenting them.

 

[LuisDantas]

Is it justified to interpret someone's scriptures differently than those the scripture belongs to?

For example, the New Age teaching that Jesus was a guru who lived in India, and that he was teaching a form of eastern religion.

No he didn't and no he wasn't.

Seems to me, we have to understand people's religious claims from the perspective of those who believe and practice the religion. And, we have to understand and interpret people's scriptures from the perspective of how those who believe these books to be scripture understand them.

That is a good starting point, but it can only go so far.

Scriptures, unlike a proper religion, are static. Each given piece was written at some specific time and bound by the language and circunstances available at the time. We should definitely take that into consideration.

One consequence is that scriptures are among the most fragile and less significant of religious resources, because they become obsolete from the minute they are created, while the doctrine that they attempt to support must go on.

The very best scriptures are also those that best allow for personal understanding and varied interpretations, because those are required features for a scripture to endure.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Jews have dealt with this type of appropriation for nearly two millennium.

 

[Terry Sampson]

I've never heard this one. Where did you find it?

I first encountered it in the Spring of 1971, when I was doing my "hippie traveling to and in India" thing and came across "The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus" in a bookstore in New Delhi.
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ - Wikipedia [The "lost 18 years"]

 

[Terry Sampson]

There's a thin line between re-interpreting religious texts, and misrepresenting them.

I just thought it was standard practice in arm-wrestling culture. Sure seems to be here in RF, IMO.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I first encountered it in the Spring of 1971, when I was doing my "hippie traveling to and in India" thing and came across "The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus" in a bookstore in New Delhi.
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ - Wikipedia [The "lost 18 years"]

This is interesting. I never came across this.

So if one chooses to believe that Jesus traveled to India, Britain, or wherever during the 18 years the NT doesn't really discuss, why would those who think he just worked as a carpenter for those years be bothered by it? Yes, it changes the dynamic, but isn't the message still the same?

I mean, I really wouldn't consider this "mangling" of a religion, would you?

 

[exchemist]

Is it justified to interpret someone's scriptures differently than those the scripture belongs to?

For example, the New Age teaching that Jesus was a guru who lived in India, and that he was teaching a form of eastern religion.

No he didn't and no he wasn't.

Seems to me, we have to understand people's religious claims from the perspective of those who believe and practice the religion. And, we have to understand and interpret people's scriptures from the perspective of how those who believe these books to be scripture understand them.

You can understand another's perspective without necessarily sharing it, though.

As for interpretation, I disagree. We are all entitled to question other people's interpretations of scriptures and to develop our own.

 

[BSM1]

I first encountered it in the Spring of 1971, when I was doing my "hippie traveling to and in India" thing and came across "The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus" in a bookstore in New Delhi.
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ - Wikipedia [The "lost 18 years"]

The Urantia Book covers this subject extensively (and in a manner that makes total sense).

 

[Terry Sampson]

1. So if one chooses to believe that Jesus traveled to India, Britain, or wherever during the 18 years the NT doesn't really discuss, why would those who think he just worked as a carpenter for those years be bothered by it?
2. Yes, it changes the dynamic, but isn't the message still the same?
3. I mean, I really wouldn't consider this "mangling" of a religion, would you?

Ha! There's

• (a) challenging, in part or in whole (ipoiw), the meaning of the Scripture we have,
• (b) denying, ipoiw, the reliability of the Scripture we have,
• (c) rejecting, ipoiw, the applicability of the Scripture we have,
• (d) affirming the applicability of some parts over other parts of the Scripture we have,
• (e) and someone thinks the Scripture we already has needs more stuff to address 18 "lost" years?

Have you ever checked out the rage reviews that the Mormons got and still get over their Book of Mormon"?
To be frank, I can no longer remember what the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus claimed, but it either added nothing to the "little" we have or proposed stuff that radically changed the meaning and purpose of what we already have. If it adds nothing, thanks but no thanks, I have enough to mess around with without someone adding to my plate. On the other hand, if it adds stuff that changes the meaning or purpose of what we already have, yikes.

Can you imagine the Pope (or some other Christian leader) announcing the obligatory performance of yoga or indulgences for pilgrimages to heretofore unknown religious sites in India?

Personally, since I can't even remember any of the claims regarding the 18 lost years, I'm not going to get excited over someone deciding to add such claims to their "canonical" chronology of Jesus' life. But I happen to know a good number of folks who are really annoyed with the Mormon claim that Jesus came to the Americas and I'm pretty sure a lot of them would have to be straight-jacketed and put on a short-term or long-term hold in a lock-up facility if they were pressed to accept Jesus' guru-following years in India.

As far as I am concerned, as long as Jesus' message is the same AND the essential claims about Jesus remain the same--to wit: a Jewish Zaddik, sent by the Father, crucified, entombed, and resurrected--the rest is of substantially less or little important to me at this time. Although the Quran's claim that Jesus spoke from the cradle and breathed life into some clay birds that he made does seem to me to be a tad bit over the top.

 

[Terry Sampson]

The Urantia Book covers this subject extensively

Vaguely remember the title but never read it. I suspend judgement pending a critical reading. However, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book says: "The book and its publishers do not name a human author. Instead, it is written as if directly presented by numerous celestial beings appointed to the task of providing an "epochal" religious revelation." So, Urantia probably won't ever be at the top of my reading list. If and when I'm in a mood to take a walk on the wild side, I'll read some of wizanda's or PopeADope's posts.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Is it justified to interpret someone's scriptures differently than those the scripture belongs to?

For example, the New Age teaching that Jesus was a guru who lived in India, and that he was teaching a form of eastern religion.

No he didn't and no he wasn't.

Seems to me, we have to understand people's religious claims from the perspective of those who believe and practice the religion. And, we have to understand and interpret people's scriptures from the perspective of how those who believe these books to be scripture understand them.

It is my belief that the religions of the world and their sacred scriptures belongs to humanity and that no one group has ownership, a trademark or a monopoly which others must abide by. All have the human right to view each religions Holy Books according to their own understanding and each has the right to investigate truth for himself and come to his own conclusion.

If Christians followed that rule then they would have had to go along with the Jewish priests and reject Christ.

 

[BSM1]

Vaguely remember the title but never read it. I suspend judgement pending a critical reading. However, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book says: "The book and its publishers do not name a human author. Instead, it is written as if directly presented by numerous celestial beings appointed to the task of providing an "epochal" religious revelation." So, Urantia probably won't ever be at the top of my reading list. If and when I'm in a mood to take a walk on the wild side, I'll read some of wizanda's or PopeADope's posts.

Those that prejudge usually are the last to know...just sayin'. It's not a "New Age" tome or some esoteric cult writing. Do your self a favor and read some of the 2250 odd pages. You can actually skip the first 600 pages and not lose the thread.

 

[BSM1]

Vaguely remember the title but never read it. I suspend judgement pending a critical reading. However, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book says: "The book and its publishers do not name a human author. Instead, it is written as if directly presented by numerous celestial beings appointed to the task of providing an "epochal" religious revelation." So, Urantia probably won't ever be at the top of my reading list. If and when I'm in a mood to take a walk on the wild side, I'll read some of wizanda's or PopeADope's posts.

BTW...you're touting a book from an obscure Indian writer that is dubious at best, but you reject out of hand any other book so written?

 

[leov]

Is it justified to interpret someone's scriptures differently than those the scripture belongs to?

For example, the New Age teaching that Jesus was a guru who lived in India, and that he was teaching a form of eastern religion.

No he didn't and no he wasn't.

Seems to me, we have to understand people's religious claims from the perspective of those who believe and practice the religion. And, we have to understand and interpret people's scriptures from the perspective of how those who believe these books to be scripture understand them.

religions existed in time and place, so they understood only within that time and place within language and custom.

 

[Terry Sampson]

BTW...you're touting a book from an obscure Indian writer that is dubious at best, but you reject out of hand any other book so written?

T-w-e-e-t! Foul !!

I wasn't "touting" anything.

• I've never heard this one. Where did you find it?

• I first encountered it in the Spring of 1971, when I was doing my "hippie traveling to and in India" thing and came across "The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus" in a bookstore in New Delhi.

but you reject out of hand any other book so written?

• I'm 71 years old, have an aortic aneurysm that could pop any day, expect to have surgery in January which could kill me, my wife has me doing chores when I'm not messin' around here in RF, and you want me to read 1,650 pages of a book by celestial beings before I go? LOL! Do you think I'll get anything from the reading that will change my life for the better in the little time I have left? Or do you think I might wait and have a talk with the CBs and maybe get ready then for my next drive-by on earth?

 

[BSM1]

T-w-e-e-t! Foul !!

I wasn't "touting" anything.

• I'm 71 years old, have an aortic aneurysm that could pop any day, expect to have surgery in January which could kill me, my wife has me doing chores when I'm not messin' around here in RF, and you want me to read 1,650 pages of a book by celestial beings before I go? LOL! Do you think I'll get anything from the reading that will change my life for the better in the little time I have left? Or do you think I might wait and have a talk with the CBs and maybe get ready then for my next drive-by on earth?

I think none of us knows how much time we have left, and, yes, I think any knowledge changes our life for the better. At 70 I realize that I only have a good twenty twenty-five years left so I not going to waste a minute by *****in' about about what might have been...just sayin'.