Ask and daqq will plainly tell you what he is talking about.
Originally Posted by daqq
Why then did neither of you two Messiah deniers confirm the Testimony of Messiah which I pointedly asked you both to either confirm or deny? It is clear that you love your phony dogmas and creeds over and above the Testimony of Messiah. By ignoring what was posted you have both denied Messiah and whosoever denies him before men, well, supposedly the two of you already know the answer to that, right? I guess it is the lake of fire for the both of you.
You misunderstand. It isn't simply your post I'm ignoring (I don't even know what post you're talking about), it's you that I am ignoring. It's blind luck (if luck is the right word for it) that I even saw this post of yours!
- its also fair to read as much of a thread that you can, at least a good portion of it, the OP and more to see what the dialogue has included and what its direction is concerning the subject - before posting to stay in the groove of the discussion flow. It appeared you just honed in on a few posts that 'triggered' your impassioned retorts - I don't know if you surveyed the whole thread or not.
I gather that understanding the original languages, at least in order to 'intuit' the truest meaning of words is essential of course. But you know...there are so many reputable "greek scholars" on the NT manuscripts...have any come to see things the way you do? I know the belief that the canon is only contained in a mere 66 books compiled by man, but I don't hold to that belief - surprise! :angel: - in your study of apocryphal, inter-testamenal works and other non-canonical goodies,...haven't you found complimentary insights into the logos of God? I think there is revelation of God outside of formal canons,....you cannot put the INFINITE in a box, and that is that
I go on being a happy heretic :jolly: - while I can entertain any number of propositions, dogmas or religious belief-concepts, I have no dogmatic investment in any of them, besides universal truths of reality, being and existence itself....which are Self-evident, as the One I AM
Ok, I recall certain 'nomina sacras' in the NT in other places, which are of particular interest, but I'm not well versed in reading Greek letters, and you did not 'translate' the above word-forms, so I cannot tell if what you propose is valid or logical, granted the context of your proposition. Some cannot read the greek text in greek, so it would be helpful if you could provide a complete English inter-linear translation then specify what is significant about it, and why your 'translation' would appear more tenable.
Okay, this is pretty awesome, I love studying the various 'names' of 'God',...but as a student of universal spirituality, I'm also aware that there is an aspect of 'God' that has no 'name', is beyond naming
- we're doing a commentary on the GoT, and are up to saying 50 now. - I chime in and expound starting on page 10 :surf:On the GoT (Gospel of Thomas) reference -
Here is Layton's translation of GoT saying #12 -
LAYTON
(12) The disciples said to Jesus, "We are aware that you will depart from us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to him, "No matter where you come it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist."
I know Peter, James and John were considered pillars of the Jerusalem Assemly, but not sure if you're assuming 'James' and 'Jacob' are both interchangeable names? We would also note that James the Lord's brother was head of the Jerusalem 'church', and even though Paul claimed to have spent some time with James, it appears Paul later developed his own gospel to the Gentiles, and a greater division and tension became between the original apostles of Jesus and Paul, and eventually Paul's version of Christianity won in popularity as the original Jewish Nazarane followers of Jesus (the Way) dispersed with the disintegration of Jerusalem. - mixed opionions there, but just noting
For those interested in our Gospel of Thomas thread go here
And we would be reminded again, that the divine announcement of Sonship commences with the bestowal of the divine Spirit, the 'unction' granted is significant AT THE BAPTISM, the mantling of the divine-logos upon the man Jesus. However you term, reference or symbolize it,...is the Spirit-Power of 'God' Almighty, the Most High, the creative & prophetic WORD, upon and working THRU the Lord Jesus that is essential here. All power is from 'God' ALONE. Pure Incorruptible Divine SPIRIT. - soul-bodies are but vessels, containers for the spirit, light, energy and consciousness of 'God'. Understading this metaphysically is all that is essential, - for His is the kingdom, the glory, the power and dominion FOREVER. God works thru the power of his creative and prophetic LOGOS. 'God' is bringing to pass his word and will thru his Anointed, his agency in both heaven and earth.
Yeah, you will find that everywhere you read "James" in your English translations the name is actually either Ιακωβ, (Yakob) or Ιακωβος, (Yakobos, or one of the other case-form endings, Yakobon, and so on). Ιακωβ without a case ending is what now still appears in the genealogies, such as Matthew, and as far as I know most all English translations still render that form as Jacob, (because it is in a genealogy and they cannot get away with changing it to "James"). It is the same name but it certainly was not "James" in the first century. Also Paul says that Kepha was accounted to be a pillar, not Peter. Therefore it is much more likely that it was Peter whom Paul stood against when he found fault, not Kepha, so it is a mistake to assume that Peter is Kepha because Paul would never stand openly against one whom he has just informed us was considered a pillar of the congregation. Peter learned something we all must learn the hard way, that is, to look into the mirror at the mountain staring back at you; and say to the mountain, "Get thee behind me Satan", and have faith like a mustard seed, and it shall be done for you, (and no doubt you will begin to bear fruit in that day, "a little one", lol). Also the one who bore the stake or cross of Messiah, Shimon Kurenaio, he is the father of Rufus and Alexander; and the mother of Rufus is the mother of Shaul who becomes Paulos, "a little one", (hehe). I suspect there will be many MADites at the pearly gates expecting to find Paul, but instead meeting up with Peter; and not a few Messianics at the pearly gates also, expecting to find Kepha, or Petros, and yet it will be Paul who greets them, (I speak foolishly). Then there will be those who simply ate everything that the Master put before them on his holy table; and I suppose that Petros-Paulos will greet them, (though I may sound as if a fool my boast is in Messiah by way of his Testimony).
- I'll look for some older Paul threads, or leave it open to begin a new thread on Paul, when time or interest permits. I think sharing on him from our more eclectic, peculiar or liberal progressive views could be stimulating Ah,....possibly so
Peter was the original apostle to the gentiles actually, before Paul 'assumed' that position for him, and there were tensions between Peter and Paul (see Galations, etc.). But surprises in heaven will probably be many, since everyone has their own ideas or beliefs, and these will be modified or challenged by new findings along the way, especially what the afterlife or spirit-world is like.
We've had threads on Paul, and I've usually taken a more critical, skeptical look at Paul and sharing resources oriented that way, as if Paul sought acceptance among the Jerusalem community in so many ways, then kinda took the ball and ran with his own gospel, based on his own revelations assumabely from Jesus. But this all depends on what his mission was, target-audience and what he was trying to communicate about Jesus, or his mystical Christ teachings, since it was more 'gnostic' in orientation on some levels, and fairly 'eclectic' in other ways, since he seemed to merge different religious concepts, allegorical themes and so on, centered in a 'new creation' or 'new man'....being "in Christ", there being a divine mystery involved here, and religious experience, even the 'resurrection' being 'spiritual',...our aspirations being to "put on immortality". (initiations and mystery school symbologies)
The Jerusalem Assembly were more focused on maintaining the bulk of their traditional orthodox Jewish customs with some innovations, so typically many of the Jews rejected Paul and his later developing 'gospel', or resolve, synthesize or synergize his teachings with the original apostles as do some Messianic groups today. However the Ebionites despised him, and we have modern 'Ebionites' so to speak that believe Paul is anti-Christ, a ravenous wolf of the tribe of Benjamin, one even spoken against in the book of Revelation, etc. But much of this depends on how we interpret Jesus teachings himself, and what he taught to his original 12 apostles, if it was indeed still rooted in fundamentals of Judaism with some innovations brought in by Jesus, and if/when Paul deviated from that and innovated his own 'religion' so to speak based mostly on his own personal revelation. Paul in this sense is a 'hot potatoe' which I can go anyways on, depending on what specifics or context we're considering, since I accept many of his allegorical, or purely gnostic/spiritual teachings, because they apply 'universally'. Paul a few times also admits where he is sharing his own opinion, and disclaims it being 'of the Lord', and there is almost half of the writings that are attributed to him as being 'pseudographical'
A few good primer resources on the Paul issues, which are more pro-Jesus/con-Paul are -
Jesus Words Only
The Paul Problem (Bet Emet Ministries)
Then,
Paul and the origins of Chrisitanity (atheist critique)
.........Just like you to "daqq" up the commentary :crackup:
I agree with some of the tension-points between Peter and Paul going on at various levels, and that Paul's writings can be interpreted as 'pro-torah' or 'anti-torah', throw in all his other peculiar doctrines and you have a potpourri of goodies to nibble on.
Sure, 'God' can use any vessel but some persons are more 'controversial' as to their actuall calling and apostleship, if it was really God-appointed or more self-appointed, because taking the Bible as a whole (OT & NT) requires synthesizing/synergizing all the various books, different authors & dispensations, so its a rather diverse assortment of books, open to various translations.
From what I've seen on 2 Peter,...it seems to be more a 2nd century production, and not authored by Paul who was long dead,...but I guess one scholarly guess is as good as another on some of the books in the Bible
It would be interesting if Paul's letters were not included in the canon, but we would also note that Marcion despised most of the OT, and used mostly some of the gospels and Pauline letters for his first NT canon (considered the first 'canon' made in a formal sense), then the greater catholic church followed suit in forming the present day canon with variations. Marcion was against the stern, wrathful, war-lord like god 'YHWH' of the OT, and saw that the God and Father of Jesus was the true God, a different being altogether. How Paul factors into things puts an interesting spin on the whole historical development of the NT canon. In fact a thread on Marcion may be a good segway into Early Christianity and similar Gnostic movements within the first 4 centuries. (I'm one of the few liberal 'gnostics' on the board, as we've had some and engaged previous threads on the subject. My affiliation as a 'gnostic' is very liberal, as one interested in 'gnosis' as a key to inward enlightenment and the dawning of esoteric truths in one and all traditions).
Nowadays we have the 'holy bible' as being both the OT & NT lumped together, but this is entirely a Christian innovation, and its 'canon' is what is traditionally assumed as well. Since I'm not a believer in 'inerrancy of scripture', I wont toot that horn too much, and 'sola scriptura' is also with its limitations and imperfections, since know no matter how inspired and useful religious writings are, no book can contain or circumscribe the INFINITE. All you get is what is "channeled" thru various prophets and mediums, serving as scribes...and that what you have with a 'bible', and that goes for a 'bible' in all or any religious cult or tradition. At best religious writings can serve to point, approximate, symbolize, analog and describe God, eternal verities or divine mysteries, but these things are inwardly realized as a matter of personal religious experience, that goes beyond words, space or time. When cult-ure, tradition, names, words, forms dissolve in infinity, all souls attuned to 'God' experience the same sublime eternal reality, as pure Spirit.
But lest I go on