Freethinker (General)

by David Turell , Saturday, December 04, 2010, 15:27 (4912 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained


> I actually think that much of the NT could be read as literal truth. It is fairly cut and dry as to when it is speaking in terms of a parable and when it is speaking historically. Bear in mind that I am not getting into whether or not Jesus was divine, or whether Mary's conception was immaculate. -> That a man named Jesus live, I do not doubt. That he was a good, wise, and righteous person is not really in doubt for me. Did he bring people back from the dead, cure the sick, etc. I don't know. I personally have a couple of contrasting views on that topic. First, I do believe it is possible for one person to cure another person, at least to some extent. There are too many unrelated reports, from different areas and cultures, amounting to the same thing for me to dismiss it out of hand. 
> 
> There are also other parallels to older, more esoteric teachings, and even some hints that Jesus was teaching his followers deeper 'mysteries' than what he was teaching the layman. The rising of Lazarus and Jesus after three days in the ground(three days dead) are both seeped in esoteric philosophy, and have little if anything to do with coming back from physical death instead referring to a spiritual enlightenment. 
> 
> Another key thing that is often overlooked is in Timothy(or maybe it was 2 Timothy) it says "All scriptures are inspired of God and beneficial.." And the important not here is that it does not say the Bible, the OT, the NT, the Koran, the Cabala, the Vedas, or any other specific text, but that they are ALL inspired of God and beneficial. -Thank you for these explanations. You obviously develop a large amount of philosophy of life from the NT, and certainly there is much historical fact.
> 
> If you want to get into specific details though, please be a tad more specific in your question. But I would ask that you please focus the questions on the Bible text and not a specific religion. I don't really care about nor pander to the various religious groups, and am in fact quite thoroughly disgusted with them.-Your last paragraph indicates some degree of irritation in my questioning. I meant in no way to be annoying. My background in the NT is essentially gospel related, and I am appreciative of your explanations of the value you receive from all of the NT. I constantly struggle with the prejudical reasoning I have: the Gospels were written from heresay 60-80 years after the fact. The one contemporaneous comment about a living Jesus in Josephus' writings appears to be a forgery. Like you I have always felt that a Jesus-like person lived and taught. But immaculate conception with a virgin sounds like a miraculous fairy tale invented to convert non-believers to a religion of Jesus, because his teachings alone weren't converting the non-believers. But his teachings are marvelous, and I try to live as he suggested in his life. Thank you for showing me a glimpse of the values in the NT, beyond the Gospels, from which my prejudice has blocked me.