Was Judas the first Liberal?

[Ecurb]

All this means is that you don't know the ancient source of Jesus' efforts which became Christianity and later devolved into Christendom. Somehow this gets past the educated.

The very thing which is now called the Christian religion existed among the ancients also, nor was it wanting]rom the inception if the human race until the coming if Christ in the flesh, at which point the true religion which was already in existence began to be called Christian. -ST. AUGUSTINE, Retractiones

I didn't realize Augustine was such a heretic. The essence of Christiainty is the notion that Jesus was God Incarnate, and that he died to create a New Covenant and save us from our sins. If the passion and the resurrection are irrelevant (as some of us already believe) that surely puts a monkey wrench into the entire Christian faith.

Also, St. Augustine thought St. Ambrose was a strange, possibly bewitched dude because he read silently, without moving his lips. So you can't always go by what he says.

By the way, are you familiar with the Gospel acc. to Judas, a Gnostic bit of apocrypha. In it, Jesus asks Judas to facilitate his death, so he can throw off his earthly form and return to his spiritual home. He promises Judas spiritual bliss for playing this role, althugh he admits that it will tarnish Judas's earthly reputation. Here's a link to a New Yorker article about it (which I haven't reread):

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006 ... us-laughed

So perhaps Judas was a self-sacrificing liberal, willing to suffer personal shame for the good (salvation) of the world. As to Judas' notion that Jesus should sell the perfume to help the poor, that's a false dichotomy. There are plenty of other ways to help the poor; one of them, according to the Bible, is to have one of your disciples betray you, get crucified, and grant poor people eternal life. A little earthly poverty and suffering is weak sauce in comparison.

[Sy Borg]

Jesus, if he existed, was an early liberal, and certainly not the first.

After millennia of brutality in the Middle East, JC suggested that people treat other with kindness and understanding. In no way does that equate to conservatism. Quite the contrary.

Man made Christianity or what Kierkegaard called Christendom is concerned with what people DO. Christianity or what Jesus taught is concerned with what we ARE. What we do vs what we are. Is there even one person on this site who has pondered the implications of this basic philosophical question?

The basis of your complaints does not lie in the readership but he who posed a dodgy, loaded "question". Of course, it was never a philosophical question but a definitive statement that brooks no opposition, but couched as a question. The OP shoehorned politics into an unrelated myth in a basic and non-philosophical manner. Oh well, these days a lot of Americans live for politics in this way. Not for me.

As for concern about what we ARE, we humans have a rather inaccurate idea of who and what we are, which is inevitable since we are inside looking out at something of which we are part, even if it seems separate.

As per another post, consider how much is true that seems counter-intuitive, that we would not believe was true if we hadn't observed or measured the phenomena:

Dark energy.

Dark matter.

Gravity and spacetime.

Abiogenesis.

The evolution of minds.

Quantum strangeness.

That space is not actually empty.

That the atoms that comprise us are mostly empty.

At all times trillions of neutrinos are passing through your body.

It is impossible for us to actually touch anything due to forces at the atomic level.

At all times a column of air above you is pressing down with the the weight of a car - about a kilogram per square centimetre.

Under our attractive coverings are blood and guts and microbial colonies that comprise the real you.

We are surrounded by a cloud of microbes that is more distinctive than fingerprints.

We see only a tiny slice of EM energy, and we especially have minimal capacity to sense the magnetism that's all around us.

We hear only a tiny percentage of what is around us.

We feel only a fraction of what is possible to feel.

We smell very little of what is around us.

Not to mention that we are currently hurtling through space at over 2 million kph.

In other words, we are simply part of this huge planet, and it appears that we are change agents, although still thoroughly controlled by the Earth's and Sun's dynamics. We humans ain't as big or important as we think we are. Not yet. We have the choice to anthropocentric, to focus on social and political games, or we can spare a thought for our actual existential situation, things that matter more than human social dramas.

[Nick_A]

Sy Borg

The basis of your complaints does not lie in the readership but he who posed a dodgy, loaded "question". Of course, it was never a philosophical question but a definitive statement that brooks no opposition, but couched as a question. The OP shoehorned politics into an unrelated myth in a basic and non-philosophical manner. Oh well, these days a lot of Americans live for politics in this way. Not for me.

Socrates — 'Give me beauty in the inward soul; may the outward and the inward man be at one.'

I'm old school philosophy and still agree with Socrates. The inner man defines what we are while the outer man defines how it is indoctrinated and becomes what we do. They have become separated. Christianity is concerned with the evolution or maturity of what we are while its devolution into secularism is concerned with what we do. Apparently you do not see any difference between the inner and outer man. is this is the educated new philosophy? Heaven help us.

[mystery]

Jesus, if he existed, was an early liberal, and certainly not the first.

After millennia of brutality in the Middle East, JC suggested that people treat other with kindness and understanding. In no way does that equate to conservatism. Quite the contrary.

Man made Christianity or what Kierkegaard called Christendom is concerned with what people DO. Christianity or what Jesus taught is concerned with what we ARE. What we do vs what we are. Is there even one person on this site who has pondered the implications of this basic philosophical question?

One question to help with that, do Christians follow the religion of Jesus or the religion about Jesus. They are different. Is that what you are thinking about?

If yes, a related issue is, do ppl like us for who we are or what we are and can do. Many find deep confusion in this realm.

Yes, man made Christianity is idolatry. I thought it may be useless to begin a thread on what Plato called the harmony of the soul if it will help clarify at least theoretically why we live in darkness regardless of how it is denied, why not do it? You get it, why can't others even on secular sites?

That topic if I do understand is very scary for many. The truth of the truth of things is violently rejected, as is programmed by the shame police. I suggest if you do try, to always give the smart guy version of the idea and then at the same time translate to a version that would be understood by a toddler or very young child. Don't let jargon hide the meaning.

Usually, great pain is needed to cause even a small change in thinking.

Yet at the same time, our Lizard brains get it, but we work to ignore them due to shame.

[Nick_A]

All this means is that you don't know the ancient source of Jesus' efforts which became Christianity and later devolved into Christendom. Somehow this gets past the educated.

The very thing which is now called the Christian religion existed among the ancients also, nor was it wanting]rom the inception if the human race until the coming if Christ in the flesh, at which point the true religion which was already in existence began to be called Christian. -ST. AUGUSTINE, Retractiones

I didn't realize Augustine was such a heretic. The essence of Christiainty is the notion that Jesus was God Incarnate, and that he died to create a New Covenant and save us from our sins. If the passion and the resurrection are irrelevant (as some of us already believe) that surely puts a monkey wrench into the entire Christian faith.

Also, St. Augustine thought St. Ambrose was a strange, possibly bewitched dude because he read silently, without moving his lips. So you can't always go by what he says.

By the way, are you familiar with the Gospel acc. to Judas, a Gnostic bit of apocrypha. In it, Jesus asks Judas to facilitate his death, so he can throw off his earthly form and return to his spiritual home. He promises Judas spiritual bliss for playing this role, althugh he admits that it will tarnish Judas's earthly reputation. Here's a link to a New Yorker article about it (which I haven't reread):

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006 ... us-laughed

So perhaps Judas was a self-sacrificing liberal, willing to suffer personal shame for the good (salvation) of the world. As to Judas' notion that Jesus should sell the perfume to help the poor, that's a false dichotomy. There are plenty of other ways to help the poor; one of them, according to the Bible, is to have one of your disciples betray you, get crucified, and grant poor people eternal life. A little earthly poverty and suffering is weak sauce in comparison.

"Christendom has done away with Christianity, without being quite aware of it. The consequence is that, if anything is to be done, one must try again to introduce Christianity into Christendom." Kierkegaard

Christianity has been driven underground and been replaced by variants of man made interpretations for public consumption called Christendom. When a person becomes disappointed with Christendom they begin to look for what satisfies their inner need. Then they can find Christianity.

[mystery]

All this means is that you don't know the ancient source of Jesus' efforts which became Christianity and later devolved into Christendom. Somehow this gets past the educated.

The very thing which is now called the Christian religion existed among the ancients also, nor was it wanting]rom the inception if the human race until the coming if Christ in the flesh, at which point the true religion which was already in existence began to be called Christian. -ST. AUGUSTINE, Retractiones

I didn't realize Augustine was such a heretic. The essence of Christiainty is the notion that Jesus was God Incarnate, and that he died to create a New Covenant and save us from our sins. If the passion and the resurrection are irrelevant (as some of us already believe) that surely puts a monkey wrench into the entire Christian faith.

Also, St. Augustine thought St. Ambrose was a strange, possibly bewitched dude because he read silently, without moving his lips. So you can't always go by what he says.

By the way, are you familiar with the Gospel acc. to Judas, a Gnostic bit of apocrypha. In it, Jesus asks Judas to facilitate his death, so he can throw off his earthly form and return to his spiritual home. He promises Judas spiritual bliss for playing this role, althugh he admits that it will tarnish Judas's earthly reputation. Here's a link to a New Yorker article about it (which I haven't reread):

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006 ... us-laughed

So perhaps Judas was a self-sacrificing liberal, willing to suffer personal shame for the good (salvation) of the world. As to Judas' notion that Jesus should sell the perfume to help the poor, that's a false dichotomy. There are plenty of other ways to help the poor; one of them, according to the Bible, is to have one of your disciples betray you, get crucified, and grant poor people eternal life. A little earthly poverty and suffering is weak sauce in comparison.

"Christendom has done away with Christianity, without being quite aware of it. The consequence is that, if anything is to be done, one must try again to introduce Christianity into Christendom." Kierkegaard

Christianity has been driven underground and been replaced by variants of man made interpretations for public consumption called Christendom. When a person becomes disappointed with Christendom they begin to look for what satisfies their inner need. Then they can find Christianity.

This is true.

Pehaps there really was a great apostasy

[Nick_A]

Man made Christianity or what Kierkegaard called Christendom is concerned with what people DO. Christianity or what Jesus taught is concerned with what we ARE. What we do vs what we are. Is there even one person on this site who has pondered the implications of this basic philosophical question?

One question to help with that, do Christians follow the religion of Jesus or the religion about Jesus. They are different. Is that what you are thinking about?

If yes, a related issue is, do ppl like us for who we are or what we are and can do. Many find deep confusion in this realm.

Yes, man made Christianity is idolatry. I thought it may be useless to begin a thread on what Plato called the harmony of the soul if it will help clarify at least theoretically why we live in darkness regardless of how it is denied, why not do it? You get it, why can't others even on secular sites?

That topic if I do understand is very scary for many. The truth of the truth of things is violently rejected, as is programmed by the shame police. I suggest if you do try, to always give the smart guy version of the idea and then at the same time translate to a version that would be understood by a toddler or very young child. Don't let jargon hide the meaning.

Usually, great pain is needed to cause even a small change in thinking.

Yet at the same time, our Lizard brains get it, but we work to ignore them due to shame.

It is a scary topic but don't adults who have experienced the human condition at least leave a subtle invitation to open their minds? If it can't what good is philosophy? Plato describes meaningful human education

“…the power to learn is present in everyone’s soul and that the instrument with which each learns is like an eye that cannot be turned around from darkness to light without turning the whole body.

This instrument cannot be turned around from that which is coming into being without turning the whole soul until it is able to study that which is and the brightest thing that is, namely, the one we call the good. Isn’t that right?

Then education is the craft concerned with doing this very thing, this turning around, and with how the soul can most easily and effectively be made to do it. It isn’t the craft of putting sight into the soul. Education takes for granted that sight is there but that it isn’t turned the right way or looking where it ought to look, and it tries to redirect it appropriately.”

[mystery]

One question to help with that, do Christians follow the religion of Jesus or the religion about Jesus. They are different. Is that what you are thinking about?

If yes, a related issue is, do ppl like us for who we are or what we are and can do. Many find deep confusion in this realm.

Yes, man made Christianity is idolatry. I thought it may be useless to begin a thread on what Plato called the harmony of the soul if it will help clarify at least theoretically why we live in darkness regardless of how it is denied, why not do it? You get it, why can't others even on secular sites?

That topic if I do understand is very scary for many. The truth of the truth of things is violently rejected, as is programmed by the shame police. I suggest if you do try, to always give the smart guy version of the idea and then at the same time translate to a version that would be understood by a toddler or very young child. Don't let jargon hide the meaning.

Usually, great pain is needed to cause even a small change in thinking.

Yet at the same time, our Lizard brains get it, but we work to ignore them due to shame.

It is a scary topic but don't adults who have experienced the human condition at least leave a subtle invitation to open their minds? If it can't what good is philosophy? Plato describes meaningful human education

“…the power to learn is present in everyone’s soul and that the instrument with which each learns is like an eye that cannot be turned around from darkness to light without turning the whole body.

This instrument cannot be turned around from that which is coming into being without turning the whole soul until it is able to study that which is and the brightest thing that is, namely, the one we call the good. Isn’t that right?

Then education is the craft concerned with doing this very thing, this turning around, and with how the soul can most easily and effectively be made to do it. It isn’t the craft of putting sight into the soul. Education takes for granted that sight is there but that it isn’t turned the right way or looking where it ought to look, and it tries to redirect it appropriately.”

give it a try, let's find out.

[Sy Borg]

Sy Borg

The basis of your complaints does not lie in the readership but he who posed a dodgy, loaded "question". Of course, it was never a philosophical question but a definitive statement that brooks no opposition, but couched as a question. The OP shoehorned politics into an unrelated myth in a basic and non-philosophical manner. Oh well, these days a lot of Americans live for politics in this way. Not for me.

Socrates — 'Give me beauty in the inward soul; may the outward and the inward man be at one.'

I'm old school philosophy and still agree with Socrates. The inner man defines what we are while the outer man defines how it is indoctrinated and becomes what we do. They have become separated. Christianity is concerned with the evolution or maturity of what we are while its devolution into secularism is concerned with what we do. Apparently you do not see any difference between the inner and outer man. is this is the educated new philosophy? Heaven help us.

Weird, every claim you make is opposite to reality. In that you would seem well suited to a role as a columnist with Fox.

I just spoke at length about the illusion of separation of the inner self and outer world, but I guess you missed it. I obviously don't need a lecture about it, given that I consider this issue on a regular basis. Lumping me into some quasi-political box like "new philosophy" is very naive.

Christianity is just one of various forms of control. For the most part, Christianity cares even less about the inner person than the average physicist does. All they care about today is that Christians like you follow and promote the "correct" political dogma. This was once once the side of conservatism, but now it's reverted to radical authoritarianism. Hey ho.

Christianity has famously demonstrated zero interest in the maturing of humans. Rather, Abrahamic religions have stood in the way of human personal growth for many centuries. The aim? To create easily controllable, compliant and obedient drones.

The mindlessly obedient ones keep the wheels of industry rolling. Today this is aided by today's execrable "education" system, which ignores problem-solving, logic, philsophy, finance, relationships, information assessment, arts and creativity in favour of parrotting information that major companies want their employees to know.

Pentecostalism creates its own brand of obedient drones, ones that are ready to go into battle at the word of their "superiors". Ultimately, what is required of Christians (and Muslims, for that matter) is to never question the party line and to aggressively deal with naysayers.
look like a beacon of tolerance, reason and goodwill. Thinking for oneself is utterly rejected if it contradicts evangelist Christian dogma. That's not allowed.

I personally would rather maintain a mind that is free to consider whatever is of interest, thanks very much. I'd sooner focus on the nature of reality rather than participating in American Christians' political games. I hope you have fun in your tight mental chains.

[Nick_A]

Sy Borg

Christianity cares even less about the inner person than the average physicist does. All they care about today is that Christians like you follow and promote the "correct" political dogma. This was once once the side of conservatism, but now it's reverted to radical authoritarianism. Hey ho.

Is this the "correct political dogma" expressed in the following biblical passage? Is there a difference between giving to God and giving to Caesar?

Mark 12:17

Then Jesus said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.

[Nick_A]

Sy Borg

Christianity cares even less about the inner person than the average physicist does. All they care about today is that Christians like you follow and promote the "correct" political dogma. This was once once the side of conservatism, but now it's reverted to radical authoritarianism. Hey ho.

Is this the "correct political dogma" expressed in the following biblical passage? Is there a difference between giving to God and giving to Caesar?

Mark 12:17

Then Jesus said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.

[Sculptor1]

Sy Borg

Christianity cares even less about the inner person than the average physicist does. All they care about today is that Christians like you follow and promote the "correct" political dogma. This was once once the side of conservatism, but now it's reverted to radical authoritarianism. Hey ho.

Is this the "correct political dogma" expressed in the following biblical passage? Is there a difference between giving to God and giving to Caesar?

Mark 12:17

Then Jesus said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.

It is easy to cherry pick quotes from the Bible and to conlcude different and opposition messages. That is why Christianity can be represented by the KKK in the US and the Lord's Resistance Army in Africa, whilst also vadidating Student Christian Movement and their anti-racism policy, all the way to Christian Communism and EVERYTHING inbetween.

Render unto Caeser that which is Caesar's just means pay your taxes!

For my money I have always thought it weird that you can read the Bible and emerge a conservative, pro-life, bigot, patriot.

Jesus seems far more left leaning than that. He never said a word against abortion - there was a good reason for that- it was far more common then than it is today. Babies were not even seen as members of the family until formally confirmed by ritual. Until that time they could be legitimagely exposed on the hillside or, as in ancient Greece, left in a pot in the agora.
Jesus would not have approved of any kind of violence, so the Christian Rights obsessive support of the army and the US's litany of unnecessary wars would not seem to be very Christian to me.
But if you emphasis the Old Testament you can pretty much write your ticket to bigotry and authoritarianism - just look at Isreal.

[Steve3007]

You tell me. You're the one who rails against them. A quick search shows that you've used the word "educated" 97 times. In all cases that I can see at a quick glance, it's used in a pejorative or ironic sense. So you've presumably got a good idea what you mean by it. What is is?

... So you're not going to tell me what you mean by it in those posts? They're all quite consistently pejorative and/or sarcastic so I suspect you probably have quite a clear idea what you mean.

Steve ... You throw these terms around such as over educated without defining an educated person. If you cannot do it, doesn't that explain the source of the ignorance of the human condition or that we live in Plato's cave?

As I said, you throw these terms around. As I said, I'm just interested in the particular way in which you use the word "educated" in your posts. If you're not interested in discussing that, no problem. Just say so.

[Ecurb]

Christianity has been driven underground and been replaced by variants of man made interpretations for public consumption called Christendom. When a person becomes disappointed with Christendom they begin to look for what satisfies their inner need. Then they can find Christianity.

If Judas is a liberal, perhaps Nick is a Marxist. He seems to suggest that TRUE Christianity is an opiate which can "satisfy" one's "inner needs". Do you have "inner needs"? Here. Have a "fix" of this!

As a matter of form, "Chrstendom" refers to Christians, collectively. It does not refer to variants of Christianity, and even those Christians that are successfully satifying inner needs might qualify for membership.

Nick seems obsessed with "know thyself" and the satisfaction of "inner needs". I prefer looking outward, at other people (Jesus, perhaps) or at the world. When I ride my bicycle, I ride it through the world. I could ride a stationary bike in a gym or in my room and reap the same health benefits -- but I would miss an interaction with the world. I could search for the kind of religion that would "satisfy my inner needs", but perhaps I am better served by a less self-centered approach to spirituality. Look outward and where you find the world you will find yourself; look inward and you may find neither.

[Nick_A]

You tell me. You're the one who rails against them. A quick search shows that you've used the word "educated" 97 times. In all cases that I can see at a quick glance, it's used in a pejorative or ironic sense. So you've presumably got a good idea what you mean by it. What is is?

... So you're not going to tell me what you mean by it in those posts? They're all quite consistently pejorative and/or sarcastic so I suspect you probably have quite a clear idea what you mean.

Steve ... You throw these terms around such as over educated without defining an educated person. If you cannot do it, doesn't that explain the source of the ignorance of the human condition or that we live in Plato's cave?

As I said, you throw these terms around. As I said, I'm just interested in the particular way in which you use the word "educated" in your posts. If you're not interested in discussing that, no problem. Just say so.

The educated person is one who has consciously balanced their tripartite soul so they function as one and have inwardly turned towards the light leading to freedom from Plato's cave..