psychoslice
Veteran Member
Yes i can agree with that, thank you.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Resurrection of Christ: Literal fact or spiritual reality?
- Thread starter Dawnofhope
- Start date
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
That is true... however I would hesitate to hold us in the same regard as Jesus.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Why, do you see Jesus as an idol that you can never reach ?.
Untenable to whom, I have to ask?Most of Christendom accepts that Christ was physically resurrected....but JW's do not....Peter said he was raised "in the spirit".
Thank you Deeje for all your considered responses. I really do like those Emojis and haven't made the leap yet to the new era. I see now how JWs have a different view of the resurrection to other Christians. So now I know your views and you know mine.
Its been quite an experience considering all the responses to this thread and I feel its been an enlightening experience. Its left me wanting to graciously accept the beliefs of those such as your beautiful self and not debate so much. That doesn't mean to say I might not be fired up again in a few days.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Interesting, but I cannot agree, you are only quoting what you have read, its not from within you.
godnotgod
Thou art That
Try looking at the question from a psychological perspective, first a projection of the ego in what is one of the Five Egotistical States, that of Idolatrous Love:
1. APPARENT LOVE OF OTHERS BY PROJECTION OF THE EGO
This is idolatrous love, in which the ego is projected onto another
being, ie; 'Jesus'. The pretention to divinity as 'distinct' has left my organism and is now
fixed onto the organism of the other. The affective situation resembles that
above, with the difference that the other has taken my place in my scale of
values. I desire the existence of the other-idol, and am against everything that
is opposed to them. I no longer love my own organism except in so far as it is
the faithful servant of the idol; apart from that I have no further sentiments
towards my organism, I am indifferent to it, and, if necessary, I can give my
life for the safety of my idol (I can sacrifice my organism to my Ego fixed on
the idol; like Empedocles throwing himself down the crater of Etna in order
to immortalise his Ego). As for the rest of the world, I hate it if it is hostile to
my idol; if it is not hostile and if my contemplation of the idol fills me with
joy (that is to say, with egotistical affirmation), I love indiscriminately all the
rest of the world. If the idolised being rejects me to the point of forbidding
me all possession of my Ego in them, the apparent love can be turned to hate.
from: Zen and the Psychology of Transformation, by Hubert Benoit
...and then see the image thus projected as the idolater himself, projected onto the cross of life's sufferings and his final redemption, resurrection and ascension into his own heaven. 'Jesus' is a universal symbol of the divine nature within man himself, but is in denial of. Man is literally the divine nature itself, playing a superb game of Hide and Seek within man, while pretending not to be the divine nature. I realize that is a hard pill to swallow, but give it some time, and it may gel for you.
godnotgod
Thou art That
My own research has led me to the following current assessment:
'Jesus', or rather Yeshua, was a real man, a Jewish mystic of the sect of the Nazarenes, which is an Essene. Yeshua's original teachings did not believe in blood sacrifice, a virgin birth, nor a bodily resurrection. These doctrines were taken from Mithraism and cleverly overwritten by Paul onto Yeshua's teachings for the express purpose of converting tens of thousands of pagans into the new religion (!)*
Paul and the Mystery Religions
The writers of the Bible tell us that 'Jesus' lived in Nazareth, but we have 18 years of silence until he burst upon the world, along with the fact that we have zero evidence of a 1st century 'Nazareth'. Instead, what actually existed was the Nazorean Essene temple atop Mt. Carmel, a family monastery just 10 miles from modern day Nazareth where Yeshua is alleged by modern Essenes to have lived and taught. As Yeshua most likely took a vow of poverty and never made a profitable living from his carpentry work, he instead most likely donated his labor to the Nazorean monastery. This particular sect was a mystical sect, but had connections to the Therapeutae Essenes in Greece and Egypt, who were healers, the probable source of his education as a healer, this sect having been sent by the Buddhist King Asoka to the West. So he was llikely connected to the Far East, and to the Buddhist monastery at Hemis in the Himalayas, where the monks called him 'our beloved St. Issa', which means 'savior'.
The Lost Years of Jesus: The Life of Saint Issa - Notovitch
...but you will have to make up your own mind, of course. Personally, I am convinced when everything is taken into account altogether.
*The Church did much the same thing in Mexico when it 'adopted' Tonantzin, the Aztec Goddess of Fertility, and renamed her 'Our Lady of Guadalupe Hidalgo' as a device to convert several million Indios into Catholicism. Remember, the Indio culture was matriarchal, and so the Indios simply followed where their beloved Goddess dwelt.
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Clearly you think you can read peoples minds.......
If you read a few of my posts you will see that I rarely quote on matters of faith.
I can not recall ever seeing....
"He is there, as is the Holy Spirit, when I turn to God"
....quoted anywhere... But if I did I would confirm it.
I have just Googled that phrase and nothing remotely like it is listed amongst all the billions of pages.... It seems to be original to me.... which seems rather a shame, as it is true.
No. The only thing said to be allegorical in the Bible is in Gal 4:21-31. We know Sarah and Hagar were literal, historical people. However there are many more from the OT. The most famous one is probably Nathan's confrontation with David about his adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah---2 Sam 12:1-7.
IMO most if not all of the OT is an allegory of either the work of Jesus or the life of a Christian or both. I have just stated a study of what may be the most beautify allegory of the work of Christ in the entire Bible. If you are interested, ask me in about a week.
Parables have the same goal(teach a spiritual truth) but must be interpreted differently. Usually a parable takes something we are familiar with---sowing a field. In them we must determine what the different elements symbolize, and they must be consistent throughout the Bible. There is one exception.
Jesus give us this principle by interpreting his first 2 parables for us---The parables of the sower.
In them he makes the substitutions for us: All the people of His day would have seen a farmer sowing seed in his field. The sower is Jesus(Mt 13:37), the field is the world(Mt 13:38), the good seed is the sons of the kingdom, Christians.
Here is the one exception, which I don't see as an exception---In Luke 8:11, the seed is the word of God. There is a theorem that says, "things equal to the same thing are equal to each other." That means Christians are the word of God. This is reinforced in 2 Cor 3:2-3.
Hope this helps.
It may be vague for you today... but apparently it wasn't vague at all for the people of their time. It certainly wasn't vague for me at age 28.
Ben Avraham
Well-Known Member
I caught you! Israel had the monopoly on that if you read Exodus 4:22,23. God Himself said, "Israel is My Son; so, let
My Son go that he may serve Me. Tell me, do you have a Bible? If so, don't forget to read Exodus 4:22,23.
It can and is if you understand the NT. Jesus was literally incarnated,, lived died and was resurrected, unless you have evidence those events are not true. You can't just wave your hand and dismiss them.
Ben Avraham
Well-Known Member
Can you show me an eyewitness for the resurrection of Jesus? Because, even the angel of Matthew who came down from heaven to remove the tombstone, he saw that the tomb was empty. An empty tomb is no evidence of resurrection but that the occupant was raised from there when there was no one around.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
What is your evidence from Tanakh that God is not in the miracle birth business? Do you want a list of miracle births from Tanakh to help you?
I don't like having Gentile myths that are similar to BOTH testaments, but that invalidates NEITHER testament. Your question is moot! God says in Tanakh His ways are neither yours nor mine, but higher.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
If it "caught on" in our culture, you'll have to further explain:
Prophecies of Jesus that have come true, even in the past century
Changed lives
Miracles and other resurrections in BOTH testaments, etc.
Ben Avraham
Well-Known Member
Nothing can be a miracle to the Creator of the Universe. So, God is not in the miracle birth business. A miracle by definition is something beyond the natural power of man, not of God.
Ben Avraham
Well-Known Member
Well! Can I have an eyewitness for an evidence that Jesus resurrected or you can't produce one? Yes, I have evidences that Jesus did not resurrect. The fact that he was literally incarnated, no problem; we all have been. Literally, each one of us is incarnated as we are born. To resurrect, one must return from his eternal home in the grave and this is impossible if you read II Samuel 12:23; Psalms 49:12,20; Isaiah 26:14; Job 7:9; etc.
It caught on because it was the recipient of Divine assistance and confirmations.
The Gospels have been preached to all the Nations, the Jews have returned to their homeland, and the stars have fallen from heaven.
That's the most important aspect of Christ's resurrection to me. His teachings could enable the blind to see, the lame to walk, and the dead rise from their graves of disbelief and walk the spiritual life.
That's is true but to what extent they are stories of historical truth as opposed to allegory is the question that concerns me.