Ubenedictus:
the Bible was written across different genres of literature, it was never meant to be literally correct in all things, you'll find therein the understanding of the ancient writers, different traditions with sometimes bloated figures etc, these are "flaws" that I believe are there in the writing text...

though I hold strongly to the inerrancy of its message taken as a whole, the story of a merciful God saving humanity.

PastorAIO:


Thanks LoJ. Can you please tell me how you access my early posts. I can only go so far back at the moment by looking at my previous posts.

LoJ:

Ohh I never answered this question.

it is actually very easy. You go to your profile, then you click on your posts. usually the previous 9 pages of your posts are available. What I do is that, I change the number of the page on the link on the browser. Instead of 1 (standing for page 1), I would write 240 for instance. It will then lead to page 240/239 of your previous comments.

I am not yet done readin them, I am just very busy at the moment. I can only glance quickly and go back to my regular activities.

PastorAIO:
If facts are not Truth, and if our knowledge is not Truth but a perspective biased formulation then how can be go about discovering and applying the truth in our lives.

I think that while our various concepts and ideas cannot be the Truth itself, they can have varying compatibility to the Truth.

An ideology that is compatible with the Truth can persist for a while and be supported by the Truth.

Therefore, all our theories and ideologies should really be seen as working hypotheses. They should be adhered to for as long as they seem to work and discarded once they are found to no longer be effective.

A free man should not be a slave of any ideology.

PastorAIO:

I have no ultimate conception of God. A concept is something that is created in the human brain and God is not in the human brain. I say that I have no Ultimate Concept of God yet being human I do form concepts and understandings of God based on my experiences. However time and time again my concepts and thought forms are always being shattered by Reality. So now I am prepared that God will confound whatever it is that I think of him or define as him.

I am not familiar with the Grail Message though i have read of Wolfram Von Eschenbach. Both the arthurian legends and the tales of Parzival.

PastorAIO:
Same thing said differently, 10 years apart.

LoJ:

I actually read that and it was so enlightening.

We usually suppose, once we have found a higher truth, or should I say a "new fact" to use your terminology, that we have uncovered the whole truth. And in the face of a new higher truth or other aspects of it, we tend to reject it and stagnate. What was once an instrument of freedom, becomes the object of our new slavery.

Hermes: Philosophy hath three parts, that is to say, Sol, Luna and Mercury. Of those being joined together, father Hermes knew how to make tincture.

In the philosophy of Yoga, all matter in the universe arises from the fundamental substrate called Prakriti. From this ethereal Prakriti the three primary gunas (qualities) emerge creating the essential aspects of all nature—energy, matter and consciousness. These three gunas are tamas (darkness), rajas (activity), and sattva (beingness).All three gunas are always present in all beings and objects surrounding us but vary in their relative amounts. We humans have the unique ability to consciously alter the levels of the gunas in our bodies and minds. The gunas cannot be separated or removed in oneself, but can be consciously acted upon to encourage their increase or decrease. A guna can be increased or decreased through the interaction and influence of external objects, lifestyle practices and thoughts.

PastorAIO:


I still see no reason for the special status given to it. What makes it different from any other book, or any other text? What makes it different from any other artifact that man has made, or from any other natural thing in the world. Does it speak more of God, or better of God, than the stars in the heavens, than the Mountains and the seas, or trees and winds? I would say No!

Ubenedictus:
the special status is because it is inspired, God inspired ancient men to put down for us his love story...God's will to save humanity by giving us his son.

it is that belief that makes the Bible special, it is inspired to reveal God's saving plan and his redeeming love.

PastorAIO:


Is it the only inspired thing in this whole world? That's my point.

Ubenedictus:
nope, but for the Christian faith, it is the inspired text par excellence.

PastorAIO:


This is circular. I asked why is it special.

You say because it's inspired

I say is it the only inspired thing.

You say it's inspiration is par excellence.

Is that a special kind of inspiration separate from , say, the inspiration that led men to say that god is a trinity?

PastorAIO:


Every system in the world whether it be our cognitive systems, our sociopolitical systems, physical systems, or whatever, can exist in one of three phases and shifts from one phase to another.

The first phase is Inertia or Rigor.

The next phase is Dynamism or Vivacity.

And then there is Sheer Potentiality.

PastorAIO:


I still see no reason for the special status given to it. What makes it different from any other book, or any other text? What makes it different from any other artifact that man has made, or from any other natural thing in the world. Does it speak more of God, or better of God, than the stars in the heavens, than the Mountains and the seas, or trees and winds? I would say No!

Ubenedictus:
the stars of the heavens may tell us there is a God, but they do not tell us who he is. the Bible does.

of course the Bible speaks more of God, in a way no other does... there are not very many religions that have their God dying for them. nor many that speak of the relationship between God and his creatures in the same way. it tells us who God is.

it creates its own world view different from any other.

but more so the very truth that it is inspired...its entire idea is God presenting to man the truths about himself and us. I know you'll say that is circular and maybe it is... but if you hold that God has specifically prepared a text to give you the truth about himself and others would you treat it like any other text where man puts down a truth he may have discovered about God.

for the Christian, the Bible is what God says of himself... that is totally different from what a man may have discovered about God. here it is God who takes the initiative using human instruments, culture....not man.

PastorAIO:




For me personally, I like to define Truth as That Which Is And Always Is The Case.

PastorAIO:


How specific does an intended message have to be? i.e Can a double entendre be intended? In which case the intention is not one point or the other but the contemplation of the possibility of both points.

On the other hand in communication how accurately does received understanding reflect intention. You say what you mean but do I get what you mean? Or did you mean what I Understood?

These and many other interesting questions can be addressed to the issue of communications.

PastorAIO:
Intentions:

I can speak with the intention of making a specific point.

I can speak with the intention of obfuscation and hiding a point.

I can speak with the intention of expressing the possibility of a number of options. For instance, in a joke. My intention is to make you think I'm making one point but with the punchline you realise that the point is actually different. I can't think of a joke right now to illustrate..... I'll be back with one.

Image123:
^it's not exactly a new perspective. The statement is 'ambiguous' if i'm permitted to use that word. Actually it's a play of/on words by the all seeing, all knowing Creator. The two meanings are true and applicable. Many will say that Jesus is Christ, and will deceive many. Other manys will say they are the Christ i.e the messiah, and many will be deceived. Also add that Jesus had not just the immediate audience in mind when He spoke/abi na spake. He seemed to have a future audience, even yet in our future, in mind. He's the unparalleled, really, the One who created grammar, the Word personified.

PastorAIO:

A great possible example here:

Image123:


You'd be okay soon in Jesus name. amen

PastorAIO:




For me then, The Logos is the 'blueprint', the Original copy of, Firstly, the entire Universe, and Secondly of ourselves and the course of our Lives.

It is often translated as 'Account' in English, however, An account of something is often derived from the original something. e.g. An account of this morning's events is given AFTER this morning's events have occurred, and the account can be an accurate account or it might not be an accurate account.
The use of the word Logos in religion/philosophy is NOT a derived Account. No! In fact it is the events that are derived from the Logos.
So to stay with our example above, This morning's events are derived from An Account of the events, and furthermore this morning's events can be an accurate or inaccurate depiction of the Account.

Let me put it like this: The entire history of the Universe is derived from the Logos/Account. History can be a true and accurate representatlon of the Logos/Account or it can derail and be a poor representation.

So imagine God creates first a Plan, An Account, A Logos, and then from this Logos a world is created by derivation.

Then imagine that the World deviates from the original plan and is no longer an accurate derivation of the Logos.

Or to bring it down to a Microcosmic level, Imagine that a man/woman in the course of his/her life deviates from his/her Logos and is no longer an accurate derivation of the Plan. Imagine that this is a cause of grave discontent for the person. This is the situation of Humanity and the World today. And the only way to relieve oneself of this state of discontent is to re-align oneself with the Logos.

PastorAIO:
So how come the inaccurate derivation from Logos can occur.

We have to look into the 'anatomy' of humans.

It is believed that there are two aspects to the human Being. One part is Adamant and the other part is Malleable. The Adamant part is often called the Higher Soul while the Malleable part is called the Lower soul.

The Higher Soul is connected directly with Divinity and through it we perceive the Logos.

The Lower Soul is connected to the Senses and through it we perceive the physical world around us and we get influenced through it by our physical environment/society etc....

The perfect situation would be for the Lower Soul to mold itself and take the form of the Higher Soul, however with most of us this is not the case. Rather it gets influenced and molded by the physical environment, the opinions of others in society, the fears and insecurities brought about by the limited and subjective perception of the Senses. This is what causes it to deviate from the Adamant Higher Soul. This is the cause of unnecessary suffering and the reason why we need Religion.

Religion is to Re-ligere, Re- bind the Lower Soul to the Higher Soul.

PastorAIO:
I believe that in the parlance of the Gospel according to John the Lower Soul is what is called Sarx (translated into english as Flesh), and the Higher Soul is what is called Pneuma (translated into english as Spirit).

John 3:6
6That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.c 7Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘Youd must be born again.’ 8The winde blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Or to keep the Greek terms intact that passage should read....

That which is born of Sarx, Sarx is what it is, and that which is born of Pneuma, Pneuma is what it is.

This shows us that there are definitely two distinct parts of the human 'anatomy', or the human 'being'.

Also earlier in the passage, verse 3, Jesus says...

3Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”


That means that Sarx cannot perceive divine things but rather can only be aware of the information it gets from the '5 senses'.

On the other hand, in order to perceive divine things we need the Pneuma. But the Pneuma must be activated. Only then can we hear the Logos.

Logos (pronounced /ˈloʊɡɒs/, /ˈlɒɡɒs/ (UK), or /ˈloʊɡoʊs/ (US); Greek λόγος logos) is an important term in philosophy, psychology, rhetoric and religion. Originally a word meaning "word," "speech," "account," or "reason,"[1][2] it became a technical term in philosophy, beginning with Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), who used the term for the principle of order and knowledge.[3]

In Stoic philosophy, which began with Zeno of Citium c. 300 BC, the logos was the active reason pervading the universe and animating it. It was conceived of as material, and is usually identified with God or Nature. The Stoics also referred to the seminal logos, ("logos spermatikos" or the law of generation in the universe, which was the principle of the active reason working in inanimate matter. Humans, too, each possess a portion of the divine logos.[23]

By the word of the LORD were the heavens made and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth

Philo (20 BC - 50 AD), a Hellenized Jew, used the term Logos to mean an intermediary divine being, or demiurge.[5] Philo followed the Platonic distinction between imperfect matter and perfect idea, and therefore intermediary beings were necessary to bridge the enormous gap between God and the material world.[25] The Logos was the highest of these intermediary beings, and was called by Philo "the first-born of God."[25] Philo also wrote that "the Logos of the living God is the bond of everything, holding all things together and binding all the parts, and prevents them from being dissolved and separated."[26]

In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

PastorAIO:
Ifa verses are full of humour and the whole range of human experiences and emotions...

But the bible in contrast seems so two dimensional and even caricaturish.
So too the stories of Socrates. Much is done to depict him as laughing, joyful even at the point of death.

Jesus, on the other hand, if he is not flogging money changers and rebuking men and spirits and expressing ire, he is weeping for Jerusalem etc etc... Jesus wept

And these two traditions are the 2 pillars of Western European culture. Greek Socratic philosophy and Christianity.

I wonder what this can tell us about western culture.

PastorAIO:
..I wonder what this can tell us about western culture.