Ask a Prophet

[Shermana]

Beings lacking in sound reason often resort to attacking other beings when their reason fails them. You have demonstrated this truth.

Indeed, they often say things like "You're not interested in learning" and "You're not willing to understand" as a response to questions they don't want to answer.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Prophet are you seeking followers? Its a question

 

[F0uad]

Who were the prophets before you and which religion are you presenting or promoting?

 

[Quagmire]

What is the sound of one hand clapping?

Guess that was it.

 

[Prophet]

I have also had periods of time in which profound realizations occurred continuously. Whenever I attempted to convey these realizations in words, I lost the insight I had from many of them. Perhaps you should spend more time sitting in your fully self-aware state and less time preaching at or debating with others.

Seems to me you think Enlightenment is something you just catch glimpses of out of the corner of your mind when you are meditating. I assure you I can be fully self-aware standing with my eyes wide open. It is not action or debate that is capable of pulling me from my state. It is attachment.

So in your honest opinion, you are correct in every single one of the debates that you engage in? There is nothing to be learned from others and nothing can possibly convince you that you may be incorrect in some instances? That's like saying, "Nobody is more humble than me!"

There is plenty to be learned from others who disagree with me, but I am not learning truth from them. I have spent a lot of time online probing a lot of people, figuring out the patterns that usually go along with insane groupthink in many worldviews, often finding them repeating among people who disagree vehemently. As far as me being so deluded that I cannot tell if I lost an argument or not, I've had a lot of debates here. Show me where I err.

I don't think that you are crazy or that you don't have genuine insights to share. I just fear that you may have fallen victim to delusions of grandeur. I'm wary of individuals who believe that they have all the answers to the absolute questions of reality, and that those answers can be meaningfully conveyed through language (which itself is relative to a particular social context).

So, you can't actually demonstrate anything wrong with anything I say, but you want to call me possibly deluded anyway. This is one approach. *shrug*

Others before me like Socrates, Jesus, and Siddhartha Gautama also believed that they had uncovered the absolute questions of reality and, since they taught others, they must have also believed that those answers can be meaningfully conveyed through language. What of them? Were they as deluded as I?

 

[Shermana]

Jesus apparently did some "Future telling" too. So he wasn't like you, as you describe yourself at least.

 

[Rocky S]

Jesus apparently did some "Future telling" too. So he wasn't like you, as you describe yourself at least.

opcorn:

 

[Prophet]

Jesus apparently did some "Future telling" too. So he wasn't like you, as you describe yourself at least.

No. You cannot demonstrate that Jesus did anything like this. All you can demonstrate is that an ancient book you put an irrational amount of faith in has Jesus doing these things. It seems as if the possibility that the Bible may have Jesus saying and doing things that he never said or did never occurs to you.

It occurs to me because often while reading the gospels I find Jesus saying enlightened truth in one sentence and speaking laws of men as if they belonged with divine truth in the next. For example, Matthew 5 has Jesus saying:

"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery."

This garbage is inserted in Jesus' most profound teaching in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus would not have said this, in my opinion. This goes double for the future telling prophecies you bring up.

 

[Shermana]

Oh, well then by what logic do you have that you say that Jesus was like you if you can't prove he said or did anything that's written? I totally believe in the process of examining manuscripts for interpolations and looking at contradictions and changes in writing style, and I even share the view that the writings on divorce may have been redacted. There's some manuscript evidence like in Matthew 19:9b that shows there was in fact some editing going on with the Divorce issues. But as for the prophecy issues, there's pretty much no manuscript-related reasons to disclude those parts.

I also assume you think the parts where Jesus said that the prophets spoke about him were added too?

So please explain why you think Jesus was like you even though you admit you have no idea what he actually taught or said? Do you think all the things that agree with what you believe are the right parts? Do you think all the parts where he talks about the importance of Mosaic Law was added as well? Then he wouldn't be Jewish Messiah.

 

[Prophet]

Prophet are you seeking followers? Its a question

No. I am seeking equals.

 

[Storm]

No. I am seeking equals.

You have more than you think.

 

[Prophet]

Jesus said a lot of very intelligent things. When the Bible has Jesus saying nonsense, unintelligent things, it gives me reason to be suspicious. When these unintelligent things Jesus supposedly said can be transparently used to solidify the religious establishment power of "truth via agreement" it gives me even more reason to be suspicious that the truth was tampered with.

The divorce passages sticks out to you upon examination of the scholarship behind the source materials. It sticks out to me before I even see any scholarship because I understand the great majority of Jesus' teachings while no sense can be made of his supposed teachings on divorce.

 

[Prophet]

Reposting in a more palatable form for my friends, the moderators.

Religous establishments have murdered prophets (like Jesus and Socrates) since the beginning of religious establishments. If they fail to dispose of the bearers of truth, their power structure and belief system of "truth via agreement" (aka doctrine) will be outshone by actual truth as the Enlightened Ones spread their message.

The motivations of those affiliated with religious establishments for dismissal of my words without debate are age old.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

You have more than you think.

^ What she said

 

[Prophet]

^ What she said

This sentiment is strongest amongst people who won't debate me.

 

[Storm]

This sentiment is strongest amongst people who won't debate me.

Hubris is not worth debating.

 

[Prophet]

Hubris is not worth debating.

Yes, I know this. One bearing hubris wouldn't realize if he was beaten.

You should demonstrate where I have been beaten in debate and demonstrated complete unawareness of it. This would support your accusation making it into a complete argument rather than just a bare ad hominem attack as it stands.

It does not seem you are willing to take this step with me. Instead, you take the shortcut of assuming that my belief that I've not been defeated in debate here is delusional.

What exactly are the standards for becoming a staffer on RF anyways? They do not seem to be very selective based upon the reasoning I've seen demonstrated often here by more people than just you.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Your ego fooled you into making this pointless thread, the futility of which any rational foresight would have seen coming. Or do you reject foresight along with the future?

Now your ego still has you entrenched in your own futile thread, bashing your head against a wall, trying to claim a meaningless victory to take away as a trophy.

What exactly are the standards for being a prophet and enlightened being anyway?

 

[Prophet]

Your ego fooled you into making this pointless thread, the futility of which any rational foresight would have seen coming. Or do you reject foresight along with the future?

Now your ego still has you entrenched in your own futile thread, bashing your head against a wall, trying to claim a meaningless victory to take away as a trophy.

What exactly are the standards for being a prophet and enlightened being anyway?

I suggest you read the Bhagavhad Gita (if that is a Scripture which you respect) which tells us clearly that the immortal enlightened Brahman is at the core of all beings, making your question about standards for prophethood nonsense as any true standards for such are non-exclusive.

But if you must have a standard, it is sentience. I don't know how helpful that will be. I certainly wasn't born of a virgin. I certainly have sinned in my life.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

You think citing the Baghavad Gita helps your case for prophethood?

The word prophet doesn't appear in any pagan vocabulary for which I thank god.