Is man a spiritual being?

[ding]

I’d like to read more about this. Is there a link you can provide?

Gosh, ding, what I mentioned here just in passing has been learned from years of reading. In fact, I almost refrained from even mentioning anything about it based on that alone.

The best place for that kind of information rests in the national libraries of other countries, mostly European nations. Here's where we get into true Bible study, unlike what many see as Bible study in just reading the varying modern translations of it/them. It's a different kind of Bible study.

I'll look around for you and see what I can find from past reading on it. I may have saved some of the national archives on my other computer some place.

I spent about a year off and on studying linguistics in order to compare different biblic texts from around the world and that's how I eventually found some of those old writings, quite by chance. You know, we're 6 linguistics separated from that time.

But yeah, I'll poke around and find what I have saved from when I was doing that. Actually, I'm positive I still have some of the material some place now that I'm reminded of it.

I asked because I wasn’t aware of any 1st century bishops.

Peter is considered to be the first pope but I assumed that was recognized posthumously.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I asked because I wasn’t aware of any 1st century bishops.

Peter is considered to be the first pope but I assumed that was recognized posthumously.

You mean a Bishop? Peter was never a Bishop anywhere. The Church's own Apolstolic Constitutons verify that.

Though, it is the promoted view that it was Peter.

I'm pretty sure the first one was Linus in 58AD. Which happened in Peter's own lifetime. That's found in the Vatican's own Constitutions.

The Nazarenes are really the only ones whose faith follows the teachings of Jesus. Jesus also being a Nazarene.

 

[ding]

I asked because I wasn’t aware of any 1st century bishops.

Peter is considered to be the first pope but I assumed that was recognized posthumously.

You mean a Bishop? Peter was never a Bishop anywhere. The Church's own Apolstolic verifies that.

Though, it is the promoted view.

I'm pretty sure the first one was Linus in 58AD. Which happened in Peter's own lifetime. That's found in the Vatican's own Constitutions.

Ok, so now we are getting somewhere. So was Linus the bishop you allege was corrupt?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Wait, is it AD 58 or 58 AD? lol.

 

[ding]

Wait, is it AD 58 or 58 AD? lol.

How would I know

58 AD

 

[Natural Citizen]

Ok, so now we are getting somewhere. So was Linus the bishop you allege was corrupt?

It's the scripture that's corrupt, ding. The NT particularly. Largely as a consequence of linguistics, but the corruption came as a consequence of the Church denying women a place in the ministry of Jesus.

It's why the female Gospels weren't included. Jesus had females in his ministry, after all. That didn't sit well wit hthe RCC.

 

[ding]

Ok, so now we are getting somewhere. So was Linus the bishop you allege was corrupt?

It's the scripture that's corrupt, ding. The NT particularly. Largely as a consequence of linguistics, but the corruption came as a consequence of the Church denying women a place in the ministry of Jesus.

It's why the female Gospels weren't included. Jesus had females in his ministry, after all. That didn't sit well wit hthe RCC.

Women are some of the most prominent people in the Bible. How do you explain that?

 

[Natural Citizen]

The one thing I think everybody always gets wrong is the ascension thing, ding. That's the main thing. But it's been taught to people and nobody questions it.

 

[Hollie]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

The truth hurts.

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

You're rattling on about your invented spirit realms again.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Women are some of the most prominent people in the Bible. How do you explain that?

Absolutely. But their Gospels were omitted.

Look at how the Church twisted Mary Magdalene for instance, they called her a whore. And they said Mother Mary was a virgin. Mary was a virgo. Virgo doesn't mean virgin. It means young woman. Virgin translates to virgo intacta. This is another mistranslation, they used Latin instead of the Greek.

Neither of which is in any original Gospel, btw.

 

[ding]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

The truth hurts.

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

You're rattling on about your invented spirit realms again.

Only time will tell.

 

[ding]

Women are some of the most prominent people in the Bible. How do you explain that?

Absolutely. But their Gospels were omitted.

Look at how the Church twisted Mary Magdalene for instance, they called her a whore. And they said Mother Mary was a virgin.

Neither of which is in any original Gospel.

My reading of Scripture doesn’t call Mary Magdalene a whore.

And the OT reference to Mary had some unusual wording. Such that it referred to a new thing.

Catholic beliefs which are based on tradition which is based on early Christian beliefs which were passed down orally is that Mary was born without the stain of original sin and never sinned. That seems like pretty prominent treatment of women to me.

Then there is Ruth, the woman at the well and the woman who interrupted the meal of the apostles. All examples of women who were displayed in favorable lights.

 

[Hollie]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

The truth hurts.

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

You're rattling on about your invented spirit realms again.

Only time will tell.

Did it ever occur to you to ask your gods why they would choose to deliver their message through the corruptible hand of man? What is more important: gods who clearly deliver their message upon which one's eternal salvation rests, or do that leave it to persons unknown leaving open to interpretation what their intent is? Were the gods too busy with their administrative duties to bother reading the bibles? What a risk they put their children at.

One of the profound difficulties religious zealots have with reality in general and science in particular is that they are more complex than “the gods did it.” The universe does not consist of ideals and opposites, but instead of continua along dimensions with multiple (often infinite) possible options. Yes… it is one of the rude awakenings to the religious that we live in a Darwinian world, not a Platonic one.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Women are some of the most prominent people in the Bible. How do you explain that?

Absolutely. But their Gospels were omitted.

Look at how the Church twisted Mary Magdalene for instance, they called her a whore. And they said Mother Mary was a virgin.

Neither of which is in any original Gospel.

My reading of Scripture doesn’t call Mary Magdalene a whore.

And the OT reference to Mary had some unusual wording. Such that it referred to a new thing.

Catholic beliefs which are based on tradition which is based on early Christian beliefs which were passed down orally is that Mary was born without the stain of original sin and never sinned. That seems like pretty prominent treatment of women to me.

Then there is Ruth, the woman at the well and the woman who interrupted the meal of the apostles. All examples of women who were displayed in favorable lights.

Well, they portrayed her as a whore. Is that better language? You do agree with that, right?

But, yeah, there's women mentioned in the bible. We have Ruth, Helena-Salome, Martha, Mary Magdalene, Mary Jacob-Cleophas, probably some more I'm forgetting.

But they all were disciples of Jesus whereas the Church taught that they werentl worthy of life or were supposed to rermain silent, who said that? Peter, I think? Paul, too?

 

[ding]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

The truth hurts.

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

You're rattling on about your invented spirit realms again.

Only time will tell.

Did it ever occur to you to ask your gods why they would choose to deliver their message through the corruptible hand of man? What is more important: gods who clearly deliver their message upon which one's eternal salvation rests, or do that leave it to persons unknown leaving open to interpretation what their intent is? Were the gods too busy with their administrative duties to bother reading the bibles? What a risk they put their children at.

One of the profound difficulties religious zealots have with reality in general and science in particular is that they are more complex than “the gods did it.” The universe does not consist of ideals and opposites, but instead of continua along dimensions with multiple (often infinite) possible options. Yes… it is one of the rude awakenings to the religious that we live in a Darwinian world, not a Platonic one.

Nope. Never did occur to me.

 

[sealybobo]

Women are some of the most prominent people in the Bible. How do you explain that?

Absolutely. But their Gospels were omitted.

Look at how the Church twisted Mary Magdalene for instance, they called her a whore. And they said Mother Mary was a virgin.

Neither of which is in any original Gospel.

My reading of Scripture doesn’t call Mary Magdalene a whore.

And the OT reference to Mary had some unusual wording. Such that it referred to a new thing.

Catholic beliefs which are based on tradition which is based on early Christian beliefs which were passed down orally is that Mary was born without the stain of original sin and never sinned. That seems like pretty prominent treatment of women to me.

Then there is Ruth, the woman at the well and the woman who interrupted the meal of the apostles. All examples of women who were displayed in favorable lights.

Show me one guy in the middle east who would be ok with his virgin wife getting pregnant and telling him god did it.

 

[sealybobo]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

The truth hurts.

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

You're rattling on about your invented spirit realms again.

Only time will tell.

Did it ever occur to you to ask your gods why they would choose to deliver their message through the corruptible hand of man? What is more important: gods who clearly deliver their message upon which one's eternal salvation rests, or do that leave it to persons unknown leaving open to interpretation what their intent is? Were the gods too busy with their administrative duties to bother reading the bibles? What a risk they put their children at.

One of the profound difficulties religious zealots have with reality in general and science in particular is that they are more complex than “the gods did it.” The universe does not consist of ideals and opposites, but instead of continua along dimensions with multiple (often infinite) possible options. Yes… it is one of the rude awakenings to the religious that we live in a Darwinian world, not a Platonic one.

This is why I know religion is bullshit. No way a god would visit 11 sheep herders 2000 years ago, perform miracles for them and then make believing their stories the test for getting into heaven. I'm amazed so many people still believe that.

Sorry god but you should have put the gullible gene in my head. Or the wishful thinking gene or the superstitious gene.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Show me one guy in the middle east who would be ok with his virgin wife getting pregnant and telling him god did it.

She wasn't a virgin. That whole virgin birth thing is a total farce. They replaced the Greek term almah with the Latin term virgo.

Except the Greek term almah means young woman. Not virgin. In fact, there's nothing at all sexual about it.

 

[ding]

Women are some of the most prominent people in the Bible. How do you explain that?

Absolutely. But their Gospels were omitted.

Look at how the Church twisted Mary Magdalene for instance, they called her a whore. And they said Mother Mary was a virgin.

Neither of which is in any original Gospel.

My reading of Scripture doesn’t call Mary Magdalene a whore.

And the OT reference to Mary had some unusual wording. Such that it referred to a new thing.

Catholic beliefs which are based on tradition which is based on early Christian beliefs which were passed down orally is that Mary was born without the stain of original sin and never sinned. That seems like pretty prominent treatment of women to me.

Then there is Ruth, the woman at the well and the woman who interrupted the meal of the apostles. All examples of women who were displayed in favorable lights.

Well, they portrayed her as a whore. Is that better language? You do agree with that, right?

But, yeah, there's women mentioned in the bible. We have Ruth, Helena-Salome, Martha, Mary Magdalene, Mary Jacob-Cleophas, probably some more I'm forgetting.

But they all were disciples of Jesus whereas the Church taught that they werentl worthy of life or were supposed to rermain silent, who said that? Peter, I think? Paul, too?

Which were prevalent back then as well as indentured servants, right? So if you are suggesting they portrayed her as something she wasn’t then I agree that it would be wrong. Is that what you are suggesting?

I don’t really believe the church taught subordination of women. I believe that that was the custom of that day. In fact it persisted until the late 1800s. And still does today in certain religions.

To blame Christianity for that makes as much sense as blaming poor people on Christianity.

As to why women can’t be priests that is an entirely different matter. It has to do with consecration of the hosts. Which is literally an intercourse between God and man.

 

[sealybobo]

Show me one guy in the middle east who would be ok with his virgin wife getting pregnant and telling him god did it.

She wasn't a virgin. That whole virgin birth thing is a total farce. They replaced the Greek term almah with the Latin term virgo.

Except the Greek term almah means young woman. Not virgin. In fact, there's nothing at all sexual about it.

Well then this shows you how stupid Christians are. They've been repeating that lie for centuries. Every Christian I know believes Mary was a virgin and God impregnated her.

I don't want to hear your 21st century new modern enterpretations of the bible. What you said Chistianity was for the last 2000 years is what it is. No changing with the times. No evolving.