freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
How can anyone or anything be hidden from what is omniscient ? I gather were you might be going with this,...but perhaps rewording the 'metaphor' might add some perks here?
Last edited:
If you are an "OTHER" you are not my brother
- Thread starter Robert Pate
- Start date
How can anyone or anything be hidden from what is omniscient ? I gather were you might be going with this,...but perhaps rewording the 'metaphor' might add some perks here?
Hedshaker
New member
If you want to get 'technical' about it.....'God' is recognized as 'other' in the OT......describing his 'holiness', being unique, one of a kind, separate,....so hey....we who are 'other' are kinda in God's category- after all, we are his offspring
Well, if you really want to get 'technical' about it..... God beliefs and spiritual beliefs and notions of infinity do not actually reflect reality, they reflect personal beliefs, which are so vast and varied one would have to be extremely lucky to adapt the correct belief even if there really is one, which is by far not assured. Only reality reflects reality. Technically, truth and reality cares not one whit about beliefs. It remains what it is. Always has and always will
It makes more sense to me to go directly to those who use the word “Other” in their TOL icons. When we spill our guts to others instead of the person we should actually be talking to, communication can easily get toxic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation_(psychology)
Triangulation is a situation in which one family member will not communicate directly with another family member, but will communicate with a third family member, which can lead to the third family member becoming part of the triangle. The concept originated in the study of dysfunctional family systems, but can describe behaviors in other systems as well, including work.
Triangulation can also be a form of "splitting" in which one person plays the third family member against one that he or she is upset about. This is playing the two people against each other, but usually the person doing the splitting will also engage in character assassination, only with both parties.
You almost have to first become accountable for your own projections on to others before you can do something about it.
When we Christians sin, we are hiding ourselves from God. When we sin by doing evil, we are crying out for God even though we are severely confused and temporarily lost.
Violence is a dysfunctional method of dealing with our own unexamined suffering.
I simply think I am more transparent to myself than you are.
Most of my jobs involved recognizing and working with the positive intention that lies beneath all human beings’ actions. And many of these people were deemed disposable to society because most people felt they themselves were “working too hard” to recognize them or to minister to them.
Projection is fairly well established these days as a normal human impulse. Jesus spoke of it 2,000 years ago.
I’m glad that there are some people around whose gift to Creation is to study the inner life of others. And I am also grateful to those who feel a calling to work in a hospital burn unit healing the bodies and the souls of those unfortunate people.
We need to find our God-given gifts and use them to help usher in the Kingdom of God on earth.
glorydaz
Well-known member
No, but you sure do like to think that. It's because you esteem yourself more highly than you do anyone else. :chuckle:
I am never afraid to be accountable for my own stupidity, spiritual pride or hypocrisy. I am able to live life more honestly that way.
Anytime I read a post like yours, I cannot get reactive and cruel because I am blessed by Jesus to see the truth in any and all criticisms of me.
I DO love myself and I remain proud of my accomplishments, but I also have a deep sense of empathy that allows me to celebrate the humanity in just about everyone else.
Ben Masada
New member
If you are referring to the apostles of Jesus, that's not true. Read Acts 11:26. Paul, after a whole year in Antioch preaching about Jesus as Christ, the Nazarenes converted by the Apostles, especially Peter started being called Christians. Paul had overturned the synagogue of the Nazarenes into a Christian church.
The term used at Antioch was Messianist. It is mistranslated as Christian.
Messianist = all those who trust and learn from The Messiah.
Ben Masada
New member
Are you implying that I should take your word for it instead of what has been written in the NT? Ask other Christians if they prefer to be called Messianists instead of Christians.
I am neither implying that you should take my word for it nor comprehend it. I have a cupboard under my stairs that has more light than you.
There is some merit to what you say:John 1:41 KJV
41. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.
John 1:41 Transliterated
41. Heuriskei houtos proton ton adelfon ton idion Simona kai legei auto, "Heurekamen ton Messian (ho-estin methermeneuomenon Christos)!"
"We have found the Messiah, (which is with-hermeneutic-interpretation, Christos)!"
And Young's goes even a step further with the understanding of Christos:
John 1:41 YLT
41. this one doth first find his own brother Simon, and saith to him, 'We have found the Messiah,' (which is, being interpreted, The Anointed, )
And since there is no article with Christos it may even be understood as "Anointed One".
John 1:41 KJV
41. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.
John 1:41 Transliterated
41. Heuriskei houtos proton ton adelfon ton idion Simona kai legei auto, "Heurekamen ton Messian (ho-estin methermeneuomenon Christos)!"
"We have found the Messiah, (which is with-hermeneutic-interpretation, Christos)!"
And Young's goes even a step further with the understanding of Christos:
John 1:41 YLT
41. this one doth first find his own brother Simon, and saith to him, 'We have found the Messiah,' (which is, being interpreted, The Anointed, )
And since there is no article with Christos it may even be understood as "Anointed One".
Christos means anointed, but the Greeks used the term in relation to all their idols. Messiah is a transliteration of the Hebrew mashiach and is specific. Anointed of Yah.
The correct translation of John 1:41 is; ....we have found the Messias, which is, being translated, the Messiah.
Can you show any place in the Hebrew where mashiyach has the definite article?
Daniel 9:25 interestingly 9:26 does not so it proves the point. (Just noticed the link is NKJV so doesn't have it) NIV has ''the Anointed One''.
John 1:41 has the definite article, but John 4:25 does not.
Bearing in mind the mis-translations that place Christ instead of Messiah in the NT there would be a few more Matt 16:16 and :20 being two.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
the rest of the story......
the rest of the story......
Apples, oranges? :crackup:
It only appears in Antioch that believers in Jesus were first called 'Christians', but the original apostles and disciples of Jesus in the Jerusalem Community,...didn't necessarily take on that 'name' that came about in Gentile communities influenced by the gospel of Paul. Paul was not fully accepted by the original apostles as much as the writer of Acts would have one believe, as his conflict with Peter and the repeated attempt at his life for preaching against the Jewish law and customs attests. He was about run out of Jerusalem and stoned to death on a few occasions.
The pillars (James, Peter and John) held to most of the fundamentals/customs of Judaism with some innovations/modifications wrought by Jesus). We might also note that there were some called 'Chrestians' and followers of 'Chrestus' or 'Chrestos' in some accounts, so these groups may or may have not been followers of Jesus, but some other messianic figure or 'concept'.
A good deal of the period from 70 AD to the 2nd century are left in obscurity, as the evolution of the followers of Jesus took on its own nuances and developments, to the point that so called 'Christianity' by the 3rd century onward was quite different than what the original apostles in Jerusalem held to, morphing into its own religion.
But perhaps we digress
the rest of the story......
Apples, oranges? :crackup:
It only appears in Antioch that believers in Jesus were first called 'Christians', but the original apostles and disciples of Jesus in the Jerusalem Community,...didn't necessarily take on that 'name' that came about in Gentile communities influenced by the gospel of Paul. Paul was not fully accepted by the original apostles as much as the writer of Acts would have one believe, as his conflict with Peter and the repeated attempt at his life for preaching against the Jewish law and customs attests. He was about run out of Jerusalem and stoned to death on a few occasions.
The pillars (James, Peter and John) held to most of the fundamentals/customs of Judaism with some innovations/modifications wrought by Jesus). We might also note that there were some called 'Chrestians' and followers of 'Chrestus' or 'Chrestos' in some accounts, so these groups may or may have not been followers of Jesus, but some other messianic figure or 'concept'.
A good deal of the period from 70 AD to the 2nd century are left in obscurity, as the evolution of the followers of Jesus took on its own nuances and developments, to the point that so called 'Christianity' by the 3rd century onward was quite different than what the original apostles in Jerusalem held to, morphing into its own religion.
But perhaps we digress
Luke was the writer of Acts.
All the Apostles and brethren accepted Paul completely and understood he had a new dispensation.
Galatians 2:7 KJV - Galatians 2:8 KJV - Galatians 2:9 KJV -
Ben Masada
New member
That's what happens when posters don't quote what they post. They expect us take their word for it. And about the light in the cupboard under your stairs, they remind me that you have never read the Essay of Mark Twain about the Jews. Here it is for your eyes only:
THE ESSAY OF MARK TWAIN ABOUT THE JEWS
"If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one percent of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of star dust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way.
Properly the Jew ought hardly to be heard of, but he is heard of, has always been heard of. He is as prominent on the planet as any other people, and his commercial importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk.
His contributions to the world's list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine, and abstruse learning are also way out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers.
He has made a marvelous fight in the world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it.
The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed suit, and made a vast noise, and they are gone. Other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it has burned out, and they sit either in twilight now, or have vanished.
The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?
Mark Twain