What wisdom? The wisdom to know that the serpent spoke to Eve? The wisdom to know that God flooded the entire earth? There are some Christians who are convinced that those stories are fact. There are other Christians who believe those stories are allegory.
That's not wisdom, that's confusion.
Of course, atheists do not get all their knowledge about the Bible from the Bible itself. They also have the wisdom to get knowledge about the Bible from non-Biblical sources. One example is the knowledge that the great exodus is a fabrication. Another is that the Gospels, which are written as first-person accounts and believed by many Christians to be first-person accounts, could not have been first-person accounts.
The wisdom that atheists gain from reading and understanding the Bible is the knowledge that Judaism and Christianity are the products of people trying to start a new religion based on ignorance and superstitious beliefs with which they hope to educate, enthrall and control people. That wisdom can be extended to knowledge about other religions like Islam, Hinduism, Paganism, Mormonism, Scientology, et al.
Some "Christians" are evidently in total darkness where the Bible is concerned, as Jesus pointed out. Matthew 13:10-15; 15:9. So that would put them on equal ground with Atheists, wouldn't it? Both clueless. How did Jesus describe the situation?
So, in short:
We all (Christians, and non Christians) are less perfect as we would probably hope we were
So, we all have certain things wrong and certain things right. Even when it comes to the Bible
So:
It's not just "is the Atheist willing to learn (and unlearn)?"
It's also "is the Christian willing to learn from the Atheist (and unlearn)?"
No one is perfect, and no one gets everything right.
Even those who walked with, and were taught by Jesus, didn't get everything right, at the time, but they grew.
Let me ask you these questions then. Assuming the text in red is true. If Jesus is God's son, and came to earth from heaven, to teach truth from God...
1) Would those he taught, who listened to him, and got the sense of it, know the truth?
2) Would those not grasping what Jesus taught, or not having an interest in Jesus or his truth, know the truth?
3) Would those in #1 who teach others what Jesus taught them, help others to know the truth, and would that passing on of truth continue, as long as those person valued the importance of Jesus words (Matthew 28:19, 20)?
Assuming the text in green below is true Sai Baba said that He is the Father of whom Jesus was talking.
Quite something what I have been witnessing for 10 years.
But now back to your questions.
1) No, they would not know The Truth, unless they got God's Grace, which is very rare. Sai Baba gave me glimpses of The Truth, for which I am eternally grateful. So, I think the same happened to the disciples. They saw the light, but that does not mean that they are the light.
2) If they have another Master, like Sai Baba then it is possible they know The Truth, but seldom it happens overnight (see explanation above 1).).
3) There is a huge difference hearing the Teaching from a Master like Jesus (Sai Baba) or hearing it from a disciple/devotee. A real Master can Grant experiences, but a disciple can't grant these (but God could of course). But those devotees sharing their experiences might ignite the small flame in others, and make them enthusiastic, which one day might lead to "knowing The Truth" maybe. IMO, only God knows how this really works.
If Jesus' words in verse 20 of Mathew 28, and Matthew 24:14 are true...
4) Would people living before the end of the world, who listen to and grasped the message of that good news of the kingdom, know the truth, as taught by Jesus?
5) Would they be the only ones who knew the truth, while those who failed to listen to, grasp, or believe the message would be in darkness where truth is concerned?
6) Would those who are not necessarily dismissing Jesus, but who hold a different teaching to what Jesus taught, also have the truth?
7) If persons believe that Jesus is not the only one who came from God to teach his truth, but the teachings of these persons are in stark contrast, or conflict with Jesus' teachings, can both be truth?
IMO:
4) Listen and grasping the message to me still means "Bookish knowledge". Know the Truth means being Self Realized, that's another story. We also know that Jesus told in parables many times. With deeper levels of understanding. Self Realized means you understand the highest level.
5) Christianity/Jesus/Bible is not the only means to come to "knowing The Truth". IF others follow another path, they might also reach The Truth
6) I think it is important to not dismiss Jesus. Those who follow a different path leading to Self Realization might reach The Truth too.
7) I was taught that realizing The Truth needs more than just reading. God's Grace is very important. So even if the Teachings differ, both can still reach The Truth (God's Grace does not differ). When teachings are in stark contrast the same applies. All the major religions have LOVE at it's core.
29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
*) Even in Hinduism there is 1 God ... different names, but still 1 God. Also in Islam)
30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
*) Very clear that you shall love God with mind also (meaning no monkey thoughts, just God thoughts; hence better no telepoison (tv) etc I think.
31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
*) Very clear..."the second is like", might mean it's of the same importance as the first. Love your neighbour as thyself. So if you don't love yourself, you can't love God or neighbors.
*) Very clear..."there is no other commandment greater than these" (so also not the 10 commandments I think)
Oh, many Christians say that only they are Christians. I once wrote a thread here on RF titled 'They are not Christians!' which was the response I got from a priest when I mentioned another Church. !!
Just tell me which Church you go to, that might help.
The foundation of the hundreds of kinds of "Christianity" is mentioned by the apostles - 2 Thessalonians 2, verse 9 in particular, is one place it is described.
I identify as Christian. Read my profile.
You keep sending me off to read stuff somewhere else!
You don't get it.......... I know all sorts of Christians and they all believe that they are Christians. You're telling me that it's you, you are one of the real Christians. So you need to tell me more about that, really.
However, in order to know if someone is Christian, one has to know what a Christian is. I hope you do know. See the Spoiler in the OP.
Yeah, but wealthier Christians point out that Jesus wasn't against them having some wealth.
Do you have any wealth? Do you own anything? Anything at all?
Oh, I read your 'spoiler alert', which was filled with all sorts of unsubstantiated claims, and stand by what I wrote. Christians obviously have just as much difficulty deciding how to interpret holy texts as atheists do. Which really just goes to show how worthless religious texts are for imparting any sort of genuine truth.
I don't think my post was so vague as this claim you made here.
However, just in case others hold the same view you hold to, it is important to get this question on Christian, and Christianity cleared up, because unless we do, we would just be talking past each other, and that would make no sense.
The claim by scholars living in the 19th, 20th century, roughly 2,000 after the fact, is this... Early Christianity (c. 31/33–324)
Early Christianity is generally reckoned by church historians to begin with the ministry of Jesus (c. 27-30) and end with the First Council of Nicaea (325). It is typically divided into two periods: the Apostolic Age (c. 30–100, when the first apostles were still alive) and the Ante-Nicene Period (c. 100–325).
Christianity in the 1st century covers the formative history of Christianity, from the start of the ministry of Jesus (c. 27–29 AD) to the death of the last of the Twelve Apostles (c. 100) (and is thus also known as the Apostolic Age).
Note : The so-called Apostolic Fathers were preceded by what they term the Apostolic Age. We know therefore that the foundation of Christianity was built with Jesus earlier followers. Not just the twelve, but hundreds of faithful followers - both men and women. Acts 2:1-4, 40-47
If one accepts the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, and later church fathers, it seems to me, it would be hypocritical to reject the writings of the apostles... as well as Jesus, on whose teachings those are based.
What Jesus' earlier followers said about the apostasy:
2 Peter 2:1
However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These will quietly bring in destructive sects, and they will even disown the owner who bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves.
2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7-10 3 Let no one lead you astray* in any way, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness+ gets revealed, the son of destruction 7 True, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who is right now acting as a restraint is out of the way. Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation+ of his presence. 9 But the lawless one’s presence is by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders* 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth in order that they might be saved.
Paul Barnett says, "Believers in the era following that of the apostles probably suffered a greater intensity to turn aside from Christ than did their predecessors.
Views of the early church fathers
Paul Barnett says, "Believers in the era following that of the apostles probably suffered a greater intensity to turn aside from Christ than did their predecessors. They ... were vulnerable to Jewish reprisals as well as action from the state. Details of the pressure applied to Christians to apostatize is given from both Christian and non-Christian sources ... It is understandable, therefore, that the postapostolic literature should contain many warnings not to apostatize." The following warnings not to apostatize come from the translation provided by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson in the Ante-Nicene Fathers.
Apostolic Fathers
Main article: Apostolic Fathers
The Apostolic Fathers were Christian theologians who lived in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD, who are believed to have personally known some of the Twelve Apostles, or to have been significantly influenced by them. Their writings, though popular in Early Christianity, were ultimately not included in the canon of the New Testament once it reached its final form. Many of the writings derive from the same time period and geographical location as other works of early Christian literature that did come to be part of the New Testament, and some of the writings found among the Apostolic Fathers' seem to have been just as highly regarded as some of the writings that became the New Testament. The first three are considered the chief ones; Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp.
Clement of Rome
Main article: Pope Clement I
His epistle, 1 Clement (c. 96), was copied and widely read in the Early Church. Clement calls on the Christians of Corinth to maintain harmony and order. Outside of the canon of the New Testament, it is the earliest extant epistle from a Church Father.
Ignatius of Antioch
Main article: Ignatius of Antioch
Ignatius of Antioch (also known as Theophorus) (c. 35 – c. 110) was the third bishop or Patriarch of Antioch and a student of the Apostle John. En route to his martyrdom in Rome, Ignatius wrote a series of letters which have been preserved. Important topics addressed in these letters include ecclesiology, the sacraments, the role of bishops, and the Incarnation of Christ. He is the second after Clement to mention Paul's epistles.
Hence, the so-called Apostolic Fathers witnessed the rising of the apostasy, and some of their teachings were already being affected.
By the third century, apostate Christianity bloomed. Rise of Christendom In the beginning of Christendom, early Christianity was a religion spread in the Greek/Roman world and beyond as a 1st-century Jewish sect, which historians refer to as Jewish Christianity. It may be divided into two distinct phases: the apostolic period, when the first apostles were alive and organizing the Church, and the post-apostolic period, when an early episcopal structure developed, whereby bishoprics were governed by bishops (overseers).
The post-apostolic period concerns the time roughly after the death of the apostles when bishops emerged as overseers of urban Christian populations. The earliest recorded use of the terms Christianity (Greek Χριστιανισμός) and catholic (Greek καθολικός), dates to this period, the 2nd century, attributed to Ignatius of Antioch c. 107. Early Christendom would close at the end of imperial persecution of Christians after the ascension of Constantine the Great and the Edict of Milan in AD 313 and the First Council of Nicaea in 325
The earlier followers of Christ - living not 2,000 year after, but during the actual period - identified as Christian. The origin of that term is based on what is mentioned here - mentioned in the OP. Christians - Wikipedia Christians are people who follow or adhere to Christianity, a monotheistic Abrahamic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. The words Christ and Christian derive from the Koine Greek title Christós (Χριστός), a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term mashiach (מָשִׁיחַ).
While there are diverse interpretations of Christianity which sometimes conflict, they are united in believing that Jesus has a unique significance.
The only relation between the early Christians, and Christendom, is that they believing that Jesus has a unique significance.
Apart from that, there are significant differences between the Christian, and "Christians". One is based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. The other is based on doctrines of apostate Christianity.
If we understand a Christian to be based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, then it is not being consistent, when one disregards the meaning, and applies it however they want. This is also hypocritical.
What I mentioned in the OP is not unsubstantiated, but supported by the evidence here presented. If we do not agree on this, we are not on the same page, and cannot discuss this subject.
You provided nothing substantial to dismiss it, but only confirmed what was said, in my original post.
Oh, many Christians say that only they are Christians. I once wrote a thread here on RF titled 'They are not Christians!' which was the response I got from a priest when I mentioned another Church. !!
Just tell me which Church you go to, that might help.
Help with what exactly?
It won't help you understand what a Christian is.
One first must understand and appreciate what a Christian is, for church identification to make a difference, and mean anything of value.
Didn't Jesus pave the way? If we appreciate that, then we will look to identify with that way. Is that what you are seeking to know?
You keep sending me off to read stuff somewhere else!
You don't get it.......... I know all sorts of Christians and they all believe that they are Christians. You're telling me that it's you, you are one of the real Christians. So you need to tell me more about that, really.
Oh wow. That indeed will take a long time.
I'll simplify it though.
Jesus paved the way by teaching the truth, about his father, and how to live to please God..
He made disciples, and sent them out to preach and teach about the kingdom of God.
He commanded his followers to continually do this until he comes, and he promised to be with those who do.
To follow this course, would be to follow Jesus's example, and teaching.
Do you agree?
Oh, my profile is just above this post. You don't have to go anywhere. Just as I can see in your profile, you identify as deist, you can easily read my profile.
Yeah, but wealthier Christians point out that Jesus wasn't against them having some wealth.
Do you have any wealth? Do you own anything? Anything at all?
You really shared a lot of opinions. One of them seems to be, you should never tell anyone that what they are saying or doing is not right, because you don't think any man knows what is right or wrong... except Sai Baba. Is that accurate?
Help with what exactly?
It won't help you understand what a Christian is.
One first must understand and appreciate what a Christian is, for church identification to make a difference, and mean anything of value.
Didn't Jesus pave the way? If we appreciate that, then we will look to identify with that way. Is that what you are seeking to know?
I only ask simple questions, such as asking which congregation, group or church you might go to.
If you don't go to church then that's fine by me.
Oh wow. That indeed will take a long time.
I'll simplify it though.
Jesus paved the way by teaching the truth, about his father, and how to live to please God..
He made disciples, and sent them out to preach and teach about the kingdom of God.
He commanded his followers to continually do this until he comes, and he promised to be with those who do.
To follow this course, would be to follow Jesus's example, and teaching.
Do you agree?
No. G-Mark describes how Jesus joined with the Baptist's mission/campaign against Temple and Priesthood greed, corruption, hypocrisy and its money-go-round.
His main call was for 'Mercy and not sacrifice'.
So..... No..... I cannot agree.
Oh, my profile is just above this post. You don't have to go anywhere. Just as I can see in your profile, you identify as deist, you can easily read my profile.
So much for your OP Spoiler.........
{19:24} And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. {19:25} When his disciples heard [it,] they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
Not at all, so it's good you checked this. I obviously have not been clear. I try to be more specific this time. I give here 1 example:
When you see someone do something wrong, which is also harmful to others, then it's maybe best to tell them, unless more harm would follow
(example: Seeing a strong rapist raping someone, and you are weak, then better not tell the rapist, but get a strong person to stop him raping)
*) So, this example makes it clear to me, that there is never 1 rule for all circumstances.
*) In general it's good IMO, to not tell others their feeling/faith is wrong (this is different from actions !!!)
*) If someone hurt others because they say "God tells me to hurt you" then it is good to stop them hurting others
Also, I think that generally the main focus should be to "discover our own mistakes, rather than focus on mistakes others are making"
You totally misunderstood what I meant (I am not aware I was so bad in explaining myself). I try to be more clear now.
1) All humans have a conscience, that can be used to know the difference between "right and wrong".
2) Conscience when used to discriminate "right and wrong" in yourself is relatively easy
3) Conscience when used to discriminate "right and wrong" for others, is more difficult. Especially when it come to their feelings/faith.
When conscience is used to cleanse our own thoughts, words and deeds, then it's easier to discriminate between "right and wrong"
Once we cleanse our own mistakes, we will be more equipped to help others. A blind man is generally not the best help for another blind man
(Note: of course another blind man probably better understands you, when you are blind, but of course there are exceptions)
No, that is far from accurate.
1) All humans have a conscience, so "any man has the ability to know what is right or wrong".
2) Not all men use this ability of course; some even try hard to suppress their conscience
3) I believe that Sai Baba is a Poorna Avatar, having Omniscience (Notice that I do not claim to know, even though I spend 10 full years with Sai Baba)
4) So, of course I believe (not know) that Sai Baba knows what is "right or wrong", as He has Omniscience (all knowing) at His disposal.
5) I also believe (not know) that Jesus knew what is "right or wrong", especially when He declared "I and the Father are one"
Normally that is my argument too. Today I did not even think of this
An interesting thought just comes into my mind right now.
IF the Bible is true, so, what Jesus said is true, meaning The Truth is simple, and even children can understand
THEN a Christian (or Jesus follower) making things over complicated, professes he does not know The Truth yet
Not even needed to debate about it, or give proof, because he gave evidence of it by making things complicated
Normally that is my argument too. Today I did not even think of this
An interesting thought just comes into my mind right now.
IF the Bible is true, so, what Jesus said is true, meaning The Truth is simple, and even children can understand
THEN a Christian (or Jesus follower) making things over complicated, professes he does not know The Truth yet
Not even needed to debate about it, or give proof, because he gave evidence of it by making things complicated
Well......... Yes.
An RF member has told me before that he holds a degree in theology, that he is ordained, but will not tell more because he would not give more info about himself to us RF folks, and quoted Jesus about 'Casting pearls before swine' etc.
Well......... Yes.
An RF member has told me before that he holds a degree in theology, that he is ordained, but will not tell more because he would not give more info about himself to us RF folks, and quoted Jesus about 'Casting pearls before swine' etc.
Interesting that someone with a theology degree uses the words:
"I don't want to cast pearls before swines"
Because
Recently quite a few with theology degree made frontpage news
Having behaved like "swines" for decades raping little children
Maybe they were hoping their innocence would rub off on them
(As Jesus said that Children are the ones to enter God's kingdom)
