Toymods Car Club Inc: The Outhouse => ghost (not this s*%t again)

Toymods Car Club
www.toymods.org.au

F.A.Q.

Home

Members

Toymods » The Outhouse » *ghost (not this s%t again) Show:** Today's Posts :: Show Polls Email to friend

Author

Topic

river
Forums Junkie

Location:
Land of Oz
Registered:
June 2004

Re: ghost (not this s*%t again)

Sun, 14 August 2005 22:57

Hi,

oldcorollas wrote on Sun, 14 August 2005 23:07

so baby jebus ran around telling everyone that he was the son of god.

I think Jesus always referred to himself as the son of man. It was Pontious Pilot who said soemthing along the lines of "So you are the son of God?" to which Jesus replied "It is you who say I am".

Anyway... onto my reply for the answers to my questions. This maybe long winded, but hopefully you'll find it interesting and more of a history lesson as opposed to a religous tirade.

Whilst there is some merit in what Bubbles said that "to understand the Bible you have to read it", you must also take into consideration the socio-politcal times of the day when the various texts of the Bible were written.

Furthermore in 1947 the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. There are hundreds of scrolls, including those that are in the Bible and many more that were not included in the Bible. Many of these scrolls highlight festivals and rituals of the time, as well as narratives on Jesus (as per the Gospels). Much new information has been gleaned from reading these scrolls.

Although not considered to be history in the traditional sense, the Gospels relate the story of Jesus by way of continous narrative. Jesus often spoke in parables to simplify his message with allegorical discourse. The Gospels were constructed in a similar way, and it is important to recognise that many of the stories about Jesus are themselves parables for the benefit of "those with ears to hear". This often led to straightforward events being dubbed with supernatural overtones.

John 2:1-10 relates the story of Jesus substituting water for wine at the Cana wedding. This was the first of many presumptous actions by which Jesus made known his intention to circumvent tradition.

There was no such thing as Christianity in those days. The religion of Jesus was Judaism and the Jews all worshipped one God, but even they were split into various factions with different sets of community rules. It was generally perceived that Jehovah belonged to the Jews, but Jesus aspired to share Jehovah with the Gentiles in a way that did not require them to take on all the trappings of orthodox Judasim.

Jesus had little patience for the rigourous creeds of Jewish groups like the Pharisees and he realised that people would not be freed from oppression until they had forsaken their own uncompromising sectarianism.

Jesus was neither a King or a High Preist, however he paid little heed to such technicalities and processed to implement ritualistic changes regardless of his titular deficiency.

In John's Gospel, where the changing of water to wine is regarded as the first of Jesus' miracles, it is often misquoted that they "ran out of wine". The text actually says "and when they wanted wine the mother of Jesus said to Jesus 'they have no wine'". According to the ritual described in the Dead Sea scrolls, the relevance of this is plain. Only the fully initiated celibates were only allowed to partake in wine. All others present were regarded as unsanctified and were restricted to a purifying ritual with water - these included married men, novices, Gentiles and all lay Jews. Jesus merely substituted the water for wine.

The significence of Jesus' actions is he took it upon himself to break with tradition and allowed the 'unclean' guests to take the sacred wine. The ruler of the Feast of Cana 'knew not where it came from (but the servants which drew the water knew)'. He did not comment on any marvellous transformation, but simply remarked that he was surprised the good wine made its appearance at that stage.

Communion with consecrated bread and wine was an age old Essene tradition, not a product of later Christianity.In time the Christian Church appropriated the original custom as its own Eucharistic sacrament, symbolising the body and blood of Jesus in accordance with the Gospel references to its supposed institution at the Last Supper.

Judaic law was strict, but Jesus' new ministry was intended to the open hearted. Normally Gentiles were afforded access to Jewish ritual only if they were committed converts, who had undertaken to observe Jewsih customs. Jesus' thoughts were that Gentiles (non-Jews) should also have access to Jehovah.

The concept of a God shared by Jews and Gentiles alike became the very life force of Jesus' mission. It was an ideal that was more than revolutionary. To the die-hard orthodox Jews it was outrageous. Jesus was making Jehovah, the God of the Chosen People, available to all and sundry with few strings attached.

Gentiles wishing to be baptised into Judaism underwent a ritual where they as "fishes" were hauled into boats by "fishermen" to be blessed by the priestly "fishers". In similar imagery, the Levite officials of the Sanctuary were called "loaves". In the rite of ordination (the ceremony of admission to priestly ministery) the officiating Levite priests would serve seven loaves of bread and two fishes. Gentiels might receive baptism as "fishes" the law was very firm in that only Jews could become loaves.

Jesus again flouted law and tradition and allowed unclean Gentiles to partake what was normally reserved for Jews who were candidates for priesthood. Jesus made his concession to the representatives of the un-circumsised non-Jews of the Ham fraternity (know figuratively as the Five Thousand). Thus he granted their Multitude (governing body) symbolic access to the ministry by serving them five loaves and two fishes of the Jewish priestly candidates (Mark 6:34-44).

In the episode known as the Feeding of the Four Thousand, seven loaves of the senior priests were offered by Jesus to the uncircumsised Multitude of Shem (Mark 8:1-10).

At baptism ceremonies the "fishermen" who caught the Gentile "fishes" would first take their boats out some little distance from the shore. the baptismal postulents would then wade out into the water towards the boats. When everything was set the priestly "fishers" would leave the shore and make their own way to the moored boats along a jetty - thereby "walking on water" to the boats. Born into the tribe of Judah, not that of Levi, Jesus ahd no authority as a baptismal priest, but he nonetheless presumed to disregard the establishment and to usurp a priestly entitlement by walking on the sea to the disciples boats (Matthew 14:25-26). He even tempted Peter to arrogate himself the same right, but Peter was unable to comply for fear of legal reprisals (matthew 14:28-31).

I fear that I have become long winded, but I hope the above illustrates that some things mentioned in the Bible are not literal translations. There is no miraclous or divine changing of water into wine. Five thousand individuals were not fed by a few bits of food. Walking on water was an expression when one walked the jetty to the boats during the baptism ceremony.

The texts of the Bible refer to many rituals of the time that must be understood to gain a clearer defintion of what was written and said, as opposed to a pure literal translation.

I have not expounded upon Mary Magdalene or other things from my previous questions 'cos I have comsumed too much of your time already. Of course, if you'd like discourse on these subjects I will oblige, but there is the fear of the mods getting uppity on this topic and also the some people are not able to handle alternate translations of things they have wholly beleived in all their life.

seeyuzz
river

[Report message to a moderator]

[Message index]

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Sun Dec 22 19:41:52 UTC 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.015811920166016 seconds

.:: Contact :: Home ::.