Assisted Suicide?

Assisted Suicide? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Chaingang -> Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 9:18:12 AM)
"Ancient text offers revelations about Judas" http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/04/06/gospel.judas.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories Manuscript indicates disciple betrayed Jesus -- at his request

fergus -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 9:22:40 AM)
They proposed that notion in "The Last Temptation of Christ" also. fergus

Arpig -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 9:41:49 AM)
It is really old hat. it was also implied in Jesus Christ Superstar. It has always been rather clear to me from reading the canonical gospels that Jesus was in on the deal so to speak. remember, if he wasn't killed, then he wouldn't have fulfilled the prohesies. There is an apocryphal Gospel of Judas that claims that it was in fact Judas who was crucified, and that it was a conspiracy to fake jesus' death and resurrection.

windchymes -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 1:43:59 PM)
I guess no one REALLY knows for sure. Except God.

NakedOnMyChain -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 8:21:47 PM)
I find this part very interesting... quote: A "Gospel of Judas" was first mentioned around 180 A.D. by Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon, in what is now France. The bishop denounced the manuscript as heresy because it differed from mainstream Christianity. The actual text had been thought lost until this discovery. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that Christianity was mainstreamed yet at that point in history. That was the age of ten different ideas for every minor Christian tenet. The facts were still very rough, and solid ideas weren't formed yet. The Council of Nicaea didn't even take place until 325 AD, Constantine's time. The four main gospels hadn't been "approved" yet. In many areas it was still common practice to blend pagan ritual with Christian ideology to further patronage, and I believe quite a bit of France is included. I may be mixing my eras, but what I seem to remember about that period is a vast mixing of beliefs and philosophies within Christianity. It might have been deemed heretical by some, but they should have checked their facts before typing up an article claiming "mainstream" Christianity's denunciation of an important document in an age of schism.

michaelGA -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 8:29:23 PM)
i hated that movie and refuse to watch it again...ever. it was stupid

PrinceSitri -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 8:53:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang "Ancient text offers revelations about Judas" http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/04/06/gospel.judas.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories Manuscript indicates disciple betrayed Jesus -- at his request The notion is not a new one, and was entertained in some Gnostic circles. It certainly fits in with Jesus' provocation of both the spiritual and secular authorities, and his refusal to accept their offers of leniency after he'd all but forced them to condemn him to death. His point, I guess, was to emphasise that he - as the Messiah - was a spiritual leader and not, as the Jews had been expecting, a politcal one who would physically overthrow Roman rule. It also set him apart from all the other pretenders to messiahship and gave the new creed one hell of a kick-start.

PrinceSitri -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 9:13:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NakedOnMyChain I find this part very interesting... quote: A "Gospel of Judas" was first mentioned around 180 A.D. by Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon, in what is now France. The bishop denounced the manuscript as heresy because it differed from mainstream Christianity. The actual text had been thought lost until this discovery. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that Christianity was mainstreamed yet at that point in history. That was the age of ten different ideas for every minor Christian tenet. The facts were still very rough, and solid ideas weren't formed yet. The Council of Nicaea didn't even take place until 325 AD, Constantine's time. The four main gospels hadn't been "approved" yet. In many areas it was still common practice to blend pagan ritual with Christian ideology to further patronage, and I believe quite a bit of France is included. I may be mixing my eras, but what I seem to remember about that period is a vast mixing of beliefs and philosophies within Christianity. It might have been deemed heretical by some, but they should have checked their facts before typing up an article claiming "mainstream" Christianity's denunciation of an important document in an age of schism. By 180 A.D. what was to become the mainstream Church was already well-organised around a firm set of beliefs, and was claiming the right to decide what was, and was not, heretical; it almost certainly represented a majority of Christians. The "vast mixing of beliefs and philosophies" you refer to occurred outside of this proto-Church among the Gnostics, who could match neither the organisation nor the simple clarity of belief of their opponents, and who were consequently in a slow decline. The Council of Nicaea simply recognised the de facto position already established by the Church, set it in stone and nailed shut the Gnostic coffin.

Lordandmaster -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 9:30:27 PM)
In other words no one really knows for sure... quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes I guess no one REALLY knows for sure. Except God.

Arpig -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 9:32:25 PM)
Oh Lord NOMC, where to begin.... quote: I don't believe that Christianity was mainstreamed yet at that point in history correct, which means it ahd not yet been subverted and corrupoted by the greco-roman establishment quote: That was the age of ten different ideas for every minor Christian tenet. Because Christ himself was vary vague about tenets, he specifically preached an individual relatonship with God with out the need for the intercession of priests (the blasphemy for which he was killed by the way) quote: The Council of Nicaea didn't even take place until 325 AD, Constantine's time The Council of Nicea was called to quash the Arian heresy and to firmly establish the emporer as Christ's representative on earth and any and all viewpoints and opinions that conflicted with that aim were quashed along with the Arians quote: In many areas it was still common practice to blend pagan ritual with Christian ideology to further patronage, and I believe quite a bit of France is included. you mean like subverting the pagan Yule for christmas and easter, a direct theft from the pagans, the name itself is a bastardisation of the name of a saxon earth godess (if you don't believe me read the Venerable Bede, he said so). The list goes on and on...the early christians subverted the great pagan festivals in order to facilitate the absorption of the illiterate paesantry, to whom the festival and its traditional trappings meant more than to which faceless deity it honoured I am sorry, but modern Christianity has next to zero resemblance to what Jesus himself preached, even in the 4 very carefully edited gospels that were declared canonical. He was a revolutionary and a cumunalist who taught that there is an individual connection between each person and the godhead, and that there was no such thing as a "Church"...to whit... "wherever two or more of you are gathered together in my name, that is the house of the lord" I am afraid that you and I will never agree on these details, since I happen to try to follow the teachings of the Christ (which are amazingly similar to those of Zoroaster, and to the Bahai) rather than those same teachings as filtered through the Greco-Roman political structure. Christaianity as it is practiced today, while a very worthwhile religion, has almost zero to do with what its purported founder preached and practiced. I recommend the following book as a basic starting point for your exploration of the truth of the growth and development of the Christian church http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0156001411/102-5227799-3052167?v=glance&n=283155 I also recommend King Jesus, by Robert Graves. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374516642/qid=1144383762/sr=1-9/ref=sr_1_9/102-5227799-3052167?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 A somewhat hard to read but very clear exposition how the gospel stories very clearly mirror and suborn the various near eastern myths (including the resurection...Adonis. whose name is hebrew for Lord, was resurected every spring) The accepted canonical gospels were written by greek theosophs several hundred years after the fact, and each was written so as to promote the religio-political aims of the local community. As divinly revealed inspirational literature they may have some doubtful value, as history they are nearly useless, however as an early example of political propoganda they are invaluable. I would appologise to those who hold them to be the "gospel" truth, but the truth is those four books were decided on because they presented the least problems for the powers that were in their aim to put an end to the very real threat that Jesus' communalist, millenarian teachings posed to the power structure of the day.

slavejali -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 10:00:45 PM)
A few things I this are a shame regarding new information as it comes to light regarding established religion are: 1. It could make the followers of said religion dig their heels in even more in false beliefs, seeing the new information as discrediting their entire belief system, so instead of adapting to the new information as a gift and moving forward into a more true relationship with the person their religious beliefs have stemmed around, they instead get more stuck in false beliefs and further away from their ideal. 2. It could make the followers of said religion totally give up their beliefs in anything greater than themselves. "Themselves" being a limited perception of existance. You see that play out with atheists a lot. They may have had something to do with religion in their younger days, it hasnt made sense to them, or they have encountered some hypocrysy, or they have found the information put forward by a relgion is contradicting information of the modern age they have come across and so they come to the conclusion its all a bunch of bullshit ie. throw the baby out with the bathwater. I think great people have walked this planet, and do today, people who have amazing insights into humanity and into the whole general scheme of things. Wish people would stop fighting over the semantics and mechanics and just realise we are all brothers and sisters walking the path of life, smiling at the guides that come our way no matter what country they are from, or what language they speak, or what culture their teaching addresses the issues of. (blah blah blah)[:)]

NakedOnMyChain -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 10:05:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig you mean like subverting the pagan Yule for christmas and easter, a direct theft from the pagans, the name itself is a bastardisation of the name of a saxon earth godess (if you don't believe me read the Venerable Bede, he said so). The list goes on and on...the early christians subverted the great pagan festivals in order to facilitate the absorption of the illiterate paesantry, to whom the festival and its traditional trappings meant more than to which faceless deity it honoured I am sorry, but modern Christianity has next to zero resemblance to what Jesus himself preached, even in the 4 very carefully edited gospels that were declared canonical. He was a revolutionary and a cumunalist who taught that there is an individual connection between each person and the godhead, and that there was no such thing as a "Church"...to whit... "wherever two or more of you are gathered together in my name, that is the house of the lord" I am afraid that you and I will never agree on these details, since I happen to try to follow the teachings of the Christ (which are amazingly similar to those of Zoroaster, and to the Bahai) rather than those same teachings as filtered through the Greco-Roman political structure. Christaianity as it is practiced today, while a very worthwhile religion, has almost zero to do with what its purported founder preached and practiced. I recommend the following book as a basic starting point for your exploration of the truth of the growth and development of the Christian church http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0156001411/102-5227799-3052167?v=glance&n=283155 I also recommend King Jesus, by Robert Graves. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374516642/qid=1144383762/sr=1-9/ref=sr_1_9/102-5227799-3052167?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 A somewhat hard to read but very clear exposition how the gospel stories very clearly mirror and suborn the various near eastern myths (including the resurection...Adonis. whose name is hebrew for Lord, was resurected every spring) The accepted canonical gospels were written by greek theosophs several hundred years after the fact, and each was written so as to promote the religio-political aims of the local community. As divinly revealed inspirational literature they may have some doubtful value, as history they are nearly useless, however as an early example of political propoganda they are invaluable. I would appologise to those who hold them to be the "gospel" truth, but the truth is those four books were decided on because they presented the least problems for the powers that were in their aim to put an end to the very real threat that Jesus' communalist, millenarian teachings posed to the power structure of the day. Perhaps you ought to click on my profile. I think somewhere my having an opinion on the subject and my being Christian were confused. It clearly states that I'm a pagan. True, I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church. I had my differences and I left. I've been a publicly practicing Wiccan for six years now. Furthermore, I know what the council of Nicaea was all about, and it wasn't just Arianism. These were the lessons that were drilled into my head during years of Catholic schooling and further private research because I find the topic interesting. To you and Prince Sitri both, I was merely commenting that I found that passage from the article to use an odd and slightly inappropriate turn of phrase. My facts may not have been completely solid, but I do know that "mainstream" Christianity was not the popular idea then that many think it was. If we're going by the "one true" Christian belief structure, it rules out all those who didn't adhere to it, and they were many. I'm including them in my opinion.

FangsNfeet -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 10:19:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang "Ancient text offers revelations about Judas" http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/04/06/gospel.judas.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories Manuscript indicates disciple betrayed Jesus -- at his request Why would Jesus need someone to tell authorites where he was staying? If that was the case, he could have simply walked into the front door infront of the mass populace. He didn't need Judas to aide in his crusifiction.

PrinceSitri -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 10:36:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NakedOnMyChain To you and Prince Sitri both, I was merely commenting that I found that passage from the article to use an odd and slightly inappropriate turn of phrase. My facts may not have been completely solid, but I do know that "mainstream" Christianity was not the popular idea then that many think it was. If we're going by the "one true" Christian belief structure, it rules out all those who didn't adhere to it, and they were many. I'm including them in my opinion. The article was quoting Irenaeus, an early bishop of the 'proto-Church' and an enemy of all things Gnostic (especially the Valentinians, the most numerous Gnostic 'sect' at the time of his writing). The fact that his brand of Christianity had not yet achieved a position of pre-eminence did not prevent him - or indeed any of the other bishops of the period - regarding the Gnostics as heretics and saying so!

NakedOnMyChain -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 10:48:50 PM)
That's true.

Arpig -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/6/2006 11:56:22 PM)
actually your paganism, or otherwise is irrelevant to my reply, I simply responded to your observations, and while i probably came across as preachy and confrontastional...sorry I'm a an asshole ( I am training to take lessons from Ron [;)])

PrinceSitri -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/7/2006 6:26:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig actually your paganism, or otherwise is irrelevant to my reply, I simply responded to your observations, and while i probably came across as preachy and confrontastional...sorry I'm a an asshole ( I am training to take lessons from Ron [;)]) Who's Ron?

Rule -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/9/2006 9:16:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet Why would Jesus need someone to tell authorites where he was staying? If that was the case, he could have simply walked into the front door infront of the mass populace. He didn't need Judas to aide in his crusifiction. I somehow doubt they would have paid Jesus the thirty pieces of silver.

Rule -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/9/2006 9:19:46 AM)
Like Arpig when I first read the Bible in 1986 I firmly concluded that Judas acted on Jesus' order. So the gospel of Judas merely confirmed what I already knew to be true.

MHOO314 -> RE: Assisted Suicide? (4/9/2006 9:31:20 AM)
As always you test our humaness---I have wrestled with this concept, just like the Holy Grail theories etc---not because of My faith, for we are pagan and well grounded in the universe--BUT man's hmm determination to always "seek the truth" and in this case the dogged determination to get to the bottom of this "jesus" person--it concerns Me what it will do to the billions of people who believe that he was superhuman or godlike and he gets discovered to be something less---can this religion adapt to him being merely a prophet, with human DNA--that became a legend---how will that affect people? Will it drive the hopelessness that may lead to mass destruction?

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125