janic wrote: This is smear speech which has no historical reality
Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44, 2-5 (I underline certain words)
"Nero produced as accused and delivered to the most refined torments of people, hated for their depravity, whom the crowd called" Chrestiani. "This name comes to them from Christus, whom, under the principate of Tiberius, the procurator Pontius Pilate had delivered to the punishment; repressed at the time, this execrable superstition once again burst forth, not only in Judea, the cradle of this evil, but also in Rome, where all that is frightful and shameful in the world converges and is spread [...] They were found guilty, less of the crime of arson than of hatred for mankind (odium humani generis). "
This passage is often cited as "proof" of what the supposed Christians were. It's as if history only recognizes thugs in a demo, seen by the political authority in place. Were there any pseudo "Christians" who could have matched this description? it is possible as in any type of society.
Already, there would be an antinomy with the speeches made by the Christ Jesus in question who preached the exact opposite.
Then Christ Jesus did not preach separation from Judaism, but integration into this community.
Furthermore Tacitus is a Roman who sees these sects from an outside eye and in Rome competition with his gods was difficult to admit, (the Caesars being considered, by themselves as demi-gods) and therefore these accusations are of the kind "
when you want to kill your dog you say he has rabies And Nero was not very clear in his head!
Still sure of the bashing speech? obviously people of the time also practiced it ...
We humans hardly show originality and imagination, except to destroy us.
janic wrote: No new system (not specifically in religion) starts in glory, if only because it disturbs other systems already established
Do you know Krisnamurti?
it is as if I were asking you: do you know Jesus or Moses or Buddha? I listened to some videos, and I find it very interesting, rather imbued with human wisdom too and the tie suits him well.
he is "new" and has not known, to my knowledge anyway, stoning.
A Jesus of the biblical genre would also be considered as a sage of the same ilk as K. and as in France the killing by stoning, gibbet or guillotine is no longer authorized, that resolves the question.
Jesus is supposed to bring peace (in fact he also says the opposite which is very biblical and allows to actuate different jacks).
You should study the texts before criticizing them (in the sense of having a critical look at the subject). The term peace is used about 300 times in all the texts, showing its various applications and you only remember a single quote which signals that any difference in perception of the famous truth automatically creates division and the notion of sword ( under the military domination of the Romans and recalling the judgment of Solomon) is telling on this subject.
The reality, if we are to believe these historical testimonies, is that this movement was obviously not intended to establish peace between men.
see above!
Besides, if we believe the Bible, Jesus does not preach for Christians but for Jews.
Absolutely!
It was Paul who, seeing that it didn't work too well, had the sublime idea of exporting religion.
not really, if you reread the texts Paul sends his listeners back to the synagogues, not to Christian churches, nonexistent for that matter.
Again there is mixing and confusion. Our country, and a few others, believe that peace can only exist under the thermonuclear threat, a funny peace and above all a fragile peace under the sign of terror.
Doesn't K speak of fear which dominates individuals more than love or real peace. So effectively not subjecting oneself to consciences leading to consciences leads
automatically to find themselves in conflict with their opponents, which does not mean resolving these conflicts by violence.
Orphee wrote: Being stuck doesn't mean anything here
For me it makes sense: being stuck means that you try to validate your environment by not leaving the framework that you have forged.
This is also what I say and underline each time!
But the biblical text also teaches that chasing a demon allows ten others to take its place.
janic wrote: We are all, without exception, chained to something: a conviction, a societal choice, to our children and other family, there is no shortage of channels. After each one chooses or undergoes those which suit him best.
Confirmation, thank you We can also consider that, after becoming aware of our own channels, we can break free.
Easier said than done because the society in which we are, favors sheep rather than rams (see the thread on the strategy of manipulation of peoples) and these chains are rather threads of spider web and which is almost impossible to undo, except to delude yourself.
[quote = "Orphee"] About 30 years ago, after having gone from classical Protestant to "Pentecostal" then "Evangelical" then "Adventist", [*] I understood that there was a problem: either we hides behind others and we say to ourselves that, inevitably, by looking at the conviction of others we must be on the right path, or we realize that honesty consists first of all in opening our eyes and acting according to our conscience.
janic wrote: So your reaction is more understandable. Cuckold three times in a row and even four, it leads to a practice that makes deaf or homosexuality.
Your experience is interesting in itself and quite classic of disappointments in the chain ... precisely. Or act according to his conscience (but conscience of what?) It is the lot of each assuming a non-hypocrisy in relation to it. [/ Quote]
Big ERROR doctor Watson! I am not cuckold but HAPPY to have learned by changing church.
One does not prevent the other ! cuckolds do not like to live with what makes them unhappy and 4 times in succession, does little to encourage to marry in other weddings.
If I had to evaluate my religious experiences, classical Protestantism will only have given me the basics, Pentecotism will have allowed me to see how manipulation could distort reality, evangelism will have been a sweet and pleasant period even if a little naive, as for Adventism I was lucky to have a very interesting preacher and very archeology oriented (in addition it allowed me to drop the meat which I always wanted).
Good for meat!
In short, I have absolutely no regrets and especially not to have taken a different path.
Great life experience, that's how you build your own personality. Indeed, you must never look back, the future is before you.
Not understanding how homosexuality came to appear ... do you ask yourself questions when you get this wrong?
On the contrary, there is a logic in the succession. First a particular union, followed by a change in the same genre, followed by a third and a fourth and there could have been as many as Protestant or other religious movements (Jesus being considered as the spouse of the church, you have to remember it anyway.) When you stop getting married, there is only individual self-satisfaction (masturbation of the spirit in this case) and there is no more that to replace the unfaithful with what will avoid this rupture and therefore with its similar which echoes (which can be very satisfactory however)
Janic wrote
S: I feel, unfortunately, that your speech, in the passages above, denotes a 180 ° turn, but does it not go from Charybdis to Scylla and fall back into the same faults?
Turn ? I am absolutely not an atheist or a believer.
Klein calls it immanence or transcendence, and there is hardly a middleman.
I am perfectly aware that religions allow the manipulation of the individual but, paradoxically, they occasionally allow him to extract himself from them and to surpass them, simply because they tackle aspects that a narrow materialist will not consider .
Agree with that and that Einstein will summarize as follows: "
Science without religion is lame, religion [*] without science is blind »
[*] in the noble sense of the term.
On the other hand, a major personal discovery will have been to note that the religious are often materialists ... and the materialists religious in disguise.
Because they are human beings, not Greek or Roman gods, nor superman
It is not a play on words There are those who believe and do not want to leave it.
Get out of what? Materialism? We use computers, the web, the car, the telephone which are the most materialistic aspect of our society and who wants to get out of it? Neither you nor I who continue to use it! But in the face of illness, suffering, death, all of this crumbles suddenly and brings us back to the wisdom of Solomon where "
all is vanity and pursuit of the wind »
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
