|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
Play online chess!
Luke 8: 9-10
« Back to club forum| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 Luke 8: 9-10What does this mean? Bob? Patz? Red? |
||
|
Zorroloco Part of this was to fulfill prophecy written in Isaiah, and to fulfill everything that was written about the Christ in the law, the prophets and the Psalms. I'm sure that Bob could elaborate on this. If I tell you the answer to a question you will soon forget. If you work through a problem with your own mind (discerning a parable) and come to a conclusion. Then that conclusion isn't easily forgotten. If you struggle to understand something then suddenly have an epithony or the ureka moment. Then you will never forget the answer. This also helps to layer knowledge and reveal things in time. |
||
|
|
||
|
Zorro 15:35 First, immediate context. This verse comes after a parable which (to the broader audience) would have seemed cryptic, almost meaningless. Most of the crowd might have taken it to mean no more than 'Sometimes sh*t just happens, and sometimes the victim deserves it.' But Jesus follows it with a private explanation to his disciples, interpreting it as a warning to them to be discerning, showing perseverance and courage. Then there is the next layer of context. The quote is from Isaiah 6:9. This is critical to a deeper understanding. The Isaiah reference tells of the epiphany to Isaiah, where Isaiah is stunned by the vision of God's holiness and his own impurity. But God takes away his impurity and asks "Whom shall I send?" Isaiah calls out "Send me!" That is when God tells Isaiah to tell the People "Continue hearing, but don't understand; continue seeing, but don't perceive." This will continue until disaster strikes, and only a remnant will survive. This vision of Isaiah comes before the destruction of Israel by the Assyrians. This is the key that Luke's readers would have understood, since Luke wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Thus the relevance of the Isaiah context as a background for Luke showing Jesus urging his disciples to show persistence and courage after the destruction of Jerusalem, just as Isaiah (which to his readers would have included deutero-Isaiah) did after the destruction of ancient Israel. |
||
|
|
||
|
Thanks guys |
||
|
bobspringett |
||
|
Apatzer 20:29 |
||
|
dmaestro 14-Jan-24, 23:32 |
Well put brothers. Let me add my 2 cents: The question I see is: why Jesus taught in parables to most rather than directly. It’s related gn the obvious question: why he focused on those who could hear him. His explanation is on point. His teaching requires growing levels of understanding. Only those who persevere gain the full effect. Others who don’t persevere are like the usual fundamentalists whose egos only lead them to error and others to error.Pearls before swine. Better they not hear at all and better that those who do hear be warned. |
||
|
Bobspringett |
||
|
So Does that mean he wanted salvation only for the few? Would it have be possible to speak his message clearly, and explicitly? Or is it simply that he was, in some ways, a Zen master? “The Tao [Way] that can be told of is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The Nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth; The Named is the mother of all things.” |
||
|
Zorroloco "Does that mean he wanted salvation only for the few?" Answer, No it is available to everyone. People have an incomplete vision/knowledge/definition of what Salvation actually is or what a person should do once they have it. |
||
|
Zorroloco |
||
|
Patz |
||
|
Zorroloco |
||
|
Patz From Wiki The unknown years of Jesus (also called his silent years, lost years, or missing years) generally refers to the period of Jesus's life between his childhood and the beginning of his ministry, a period not described in the New Testament.[1][2] The "lost years of Jesus" concept is usually encountered in esoteric literature (where it at times also refers to his possible post-crucifixion activities) but is not commonly used in scholarly literature since it is assumed that Jesus was probably working as a tektōn (usually translated as carpenter, but could also mean builder) in Galilee, at least some of the time with Joseph, from the age of 12 to 29.[2][3][4] In the 19th and 20th centuries, theories began to emerge that, between the ages of 12 and 29, Jesus had visited India and Nepal for Spiritual enlightenment inspiring from Hinduism, or had studied with the Essenes in the Judaean Desert.[4][5] Modern mainstream Christian scholarship has generally rejected these theories and holds that nothing is known about this time period in the life of Jesus. In 1887, Russian war correspondent Nicolas Notovitch claimed that while at the Hemis Monastery in Ladakh, he had learned of a document called the "Life of Saint Issa, Best of the Sons of Men" – Isa being the Arabic name of Jesus in Islam.[29][30][31] Notovitch's story, with a translated text of the "Life of Saint Issa", was published in French in 1894 as La vie inconnue de Jesus Christ (Unknown Life of Jesus Christ).[5][31] According to the scrolls, Jesus abandoned Jerusalem at the age of 13 and set out towards Sindh, “intending to improve and perfect himself in the divine understanding and to studying the laws of the great Buddha”. He crossed Punjab and reached Puri Jagannath where he studied the Vedas under Brahmin priests. He spent six years in Puri and Rajgirh, near Nalanda, the ancient seat of Hindu learning. Then he went to the Himalayas, and spent time in Tibetan monasteries, studying Buddhism,[29] and through Persia, returned to Jerusalem at the age of 29. Notovitch's writings were immediately controversial and Max Müller stated that either the monks at the monastery had deceived Notovitch (or played a joke on him), or he had fabricated the evidence.[29][32][33] Müller then wrote to the monastery at Hemis and the head lama replied that there had been no Western visitor at the monastery in the past fifteen years and there were no documents related to Notovitch's story.[34] J. Archibald Douglas then visited Hemis monastery and interviewed the head lama who stated that Notovitch had never been there.[34] Indologist Leopold von Schroeder called Notovitch's story a "big fat lie".[35] Wilhelm Schneemelcher states that Notovich's accounts were soon exposed as fabrications, and that to date no one has even had a glimpse at the manuscripts Notovitch claims to have had.[5] Notovich responded to claims to defend himself.[36] But once his story had been re-examined by historians – some even questioning his existence – it is claimed that Notovitch confessed to having fabricated the evidence.[35] Bart D. Ehrman states that "Today there is not a single recognized scholar on the planet who has any doubts about the matter. The entire story was invented by Notovitch, who earned a good deal of money and a substantial amount of notoriety for his hoax".[37] However, others deny that Notovich ever accepted the accusations against him – that his account was a forgery, etc. Although he was not impressed with his story, Sir Francis Younghusband recalls meeting Nicolas Notovitch near Skardu, not long before Notovitch had visited Hemis monastery.[38] In 1922, Swami Abhedananda, the president of the Vedanta Society of New York between 1897 and 1921 and the author of several books, went to the Himalayas on foot and reached Tibet, where he studied Buddhist philosophy and Tibetan Buddhism. He went to the Hemis Monastery, and allegedly found the manuscript translated by Notovitch, which was a Tibetan translation of the original scrolls written in Pali. The lama said that it was a copy and that the original was in a monastery at Marbour near Lhasa. After Abhedananda's death in 1939, one of his disciples inquired about the documents at the Hemis monastery, but was told that they had disappeared.[39][40] Levi H. Dowling, 1908 edit Main article: The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ In 1908, Levi H. Dowling published the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ which he claimed was channeled to him from the "Akashic Records" as the true story of the life of Jesus, including "the 'lost' eighteen years silent in the New Testament." The narrative follows the young Jesus across India, Tibet, Persia, Assyria, Greece and Egypt.[41] Dowling's work was later used by Holger Kersten who combined it with elements derived from other sources such as the Ahmadiyya beliefs.[10] Nicholas Roerich, 1925 edit Main article: Nicholas Roerich In 1925, Nicholas Roerich recorded his travels through Ladakh in India. This portion of his journal was published in 1933 as part of Altai Himalaya. He recounts legends of Issa shared with him by the Ladakhi people and lamas, including that Issa (Jesus) traveled from Palestine to India with merchants and taught the people. An extended section of this text parallels sections of Notovitch's book, and Roerich comments on the remarkable similarity of the accounts of the Ladakhis to these passages, despite the Ladakhis having no knowledge of Notovitch's book. He also recounts that the stories of others on his travel refer to various manuscripts and legends regarding Jesus (Issa) and that he personally visited the "abbot" of Hemis.[42] Jesus in the workshop of Joseph the Carpenter, by Georges de La Tour, 1640s Rejection by modern mainstream New Testament scholarship edit Modern mainstream Christian scholarship has generally rejected any travels by Jesus to India, Tibet or surrounding areas as without historical basis: Robert Van Voorst states that modern scholarship has "almost unanimously agreed" that claims of the travels of Jesus to Tibet, Kashmir or rest of India contain "nothing of value".[7] Marcus Borg states that the suggestions that an adult Jesus traveled to Egypt or India and came into contact with Buddhism are "without historical foundation".[8] John Dominic Crossan states that none of the theories presented about the travels of Jesus to fill the gap between his early life and the start of his ministry have been supported by modern scholarship.[6] Leslie Houlden states that although modern parallels between the teachings of Jesus and Buddha have been drawn, these comparisons emerged after missionary contacts in the 19th century and there is no historically reliable evidence of contacts between Buddhism and Jesus.[43] Paula Fredriksen states that no serious scholarly work places Jesus outside the backdrop of 1st century Palestinian Judaism.[44] |
||
|
Zorro <Does that mean he wanted salvation only for the few? Would it have be possible to speak his message clearly, and explicitly?> Academics call this about 'The Messianic Secret'. Examples are:- "And he asked them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter said to him in reply, "You are the Messiah." Then he warned them not to tell anyone about him." and "Then he said to him (a leper he had healed), 'See that you tell no one anything, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer for your cleansing what Moses prescribed; that will be proof for them.'" Why did Jesus do this? We are not told, but perhaps it was to build a following without triggering a political confrontation such as eventually led to his crucifixion. Or perhaps that's just part of the Synoptic tradition. It is interesting that Paul, who wrote his letters before the Jewish Revolt, doesn't seem to be aware of this Messianic Mystery; it appears only in post-Revolt writings. Make of that what you will. <Or is it simply that he was, in some ways, a Zen master? “The Tao [Way] that can be told of is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The Nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth; The Named is the mother of all things.”> There is a thread of such mysticism in the Old Testament, but it is usually overlooked in favour of a legalist emphasis such as propounded as 'Pharisaism' or a prophetic emphasis by most Christians. But instances such as Jacob's Ladder, "Your thoughts are not my thoughts", parts of Job and parts of Isaiah that hint at transcendence. 10:46 <Jesus likely spent time in India and probably spent time studying with Indian mystics.> There is negligible evidence for this theory. It ranks with von Daniken. What is known about Jesus is drawn entirely from the history and literature of his Jewish heritage and current events. If anything resembling a quote attributable to Indian influence is found on his lips, it would be co-incidental and just as readily explicable from his own literature or context. If anything, the initial reluctance of the disciples to consider Gentiles as possible converts suggests that they had inherited a very Jewish-centred understanding of Jesus' world-view, which leaves no room for him to have impressed upon them any Indian paradigms. |
||
|
thanks to all who discussed in this thread Thanks to Patz and Bob for helping us. |
||
|
Redfoxrising @Zorro Please don't take this the wrong way. In truth... It isn't a viable theory because it isn't in the theory stage of discovery. It is a hypothesis at best and an opinion otherwise. I am neither for or against that Idea and whatever the truth is once uncovered. I will aligne myself with. |
||
|
Patz There’s a reason it’s a fringe theory. But there’s also a reason it’s a theory 🤔 |
||
|
Zorro 17:15 Deep insights into human nature depend on being human, and that can be said of cultures all around the world; so the same insights arising independently should surprise no-one. Just like building pyramids arose independently in the Americas and China as well as Egypt. I certainly accept that Indian thought had parallels with Jesus' teaching. But I'm not convinced that Jesus' ideas were 'novel in the west'. I have no problem tracing them back to the Old Testament law, prophets and writings that he would have heard in the synagogue. Jesus' raising of them against the more formal cultus of Second Temple Judaism was more like a Revival than a New Thing. |
||
|
Bob |
||
|
Zorro 22:02 Indeed. It is interesting to ponder alternative possible histories. Think what might have happened if other teachers like Jesus, Mohammad, the Buddha, etc had similar ideas, but for lack of a cadre of disciples and/or through circumstances they simply never made a mark. 'Getting the word out' is critical, but also a very hit-or-miss process. |
||
|
dmaestro 16-Jan-24, 13:52 |
You can read John in particular that way and it resolves paradoxes fundamentalism can’t about the Trinity doctrine and how one can be both Son of God and Son of Man. Jesus had a huge effect on the West and world and appeared at just the right place and time. The East had no problem with God appearing in human form to save humanity but many Jews did That is why he is considered an Avatar in the East. It’s his later followers who are dismissed. If tradition is accurate St Thomas went to India in AD 52 and that is how linked the area was. Truth is universal but hidden until one is ready, as Jesus said. Ideas spread and for the same reason a Teacher of Righteousness and John the Baptist could arise in Judea of the era, a Jesus Avatar could appear, just in time, before Judea fell, to spread the word to the west. Jesus was no Carpenter—even at age 12 that was evident. By 30 he was ready. Most great spiritual figures work in the background. His mission ended in public for a reason. Why the word doesn’t get out? It’s always a matter of followers limitations. Look how Jesus struggled elaborating on existing scriptures widely misunderstood. Look how far off fundamentalists are now—focused on rapture not on Spirit or Truth. |
||
|
DM 13:52 I also see considerable merit in it. I often rattle on about 'The Transcendent'. But like all such models, it is ONLY a model. By definition, the Transcendent is ultimately beyond definition, and can be understood only by metaphor. Which is why I remain a Christian in the more traditional sense. Unlike other more 'spiritual' models, the Christian model touches the ground and meets people where they are. The Incarnation has long been the stumbling-block to both Judaism and Islam; but it combines Transcendence with Immanence. That is what gives people a 'divine' dignity as well as our biological limitations. Again, it is only a model, but a model with greater real-world utility. |
