If Jesus returned tomorrow...

[Hermes]

would he charge money for healing, conjuring up fish or wine?
What say you? Christian or non-christian, I ask this of you regardless of your path/faith. This question is in the face of worldwide prostitution of "spirituality" and "new age".

Some people, as it would be preposterous would say hey, why not? Indeed, times are different today. There is outsourcing which they had none of in Judea in those days.
I am just interested in your opinion.

 

[arthra]

would he charge money for healing, conjuring up fish or wine?
What say you? Christian or non-christian, I ask this of you regardless of your path/faith. This question is in the face of worldwide prostitution of "spirituality" and "new age".

Some people, as it would be preposterous would say hey, why not? Indeed, times are different today. There is outsourcing which they had none of in Judea in those days.
I am just interested in your opinion.

Well in my Faith the Spirit of Christ returned already back in the mid nineteenth century...

Regarding miracles though we believe they occurred but they are not used by us to try to convince anyone.. as the miracles were for those who received them... after that it was hear-say and would likely be denied:

"...most of the miracles of the Prophets which are mentioned have an inner significance. For instance, in the Gospel it is written that at the martyrdom of Christ darkness prevailed, and the earth quaked, and the veil of the Temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom, and the dead came forth from their graves. If these events had happened, they would indeed have been awesome, and would certainly have been recorded in the history of the times. They would have become the cause of much troublings of heart. Either the soldiers would have taken down Christ from the cross, or they would have fled. These events are not related in any history; therefore, it is evident they ought not to be taken literally, but as having an inner significance." [1]

[1 Cf. "Miracles," p. 100.]

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 36


Baha'u'llah asked that miracles not be used:

We entreat Our loved ones not to besmirch the hem of Our raiment with the dust of falsehood, neither to allow references to what they have regarded as miracles and prodigies to debase Our rank and station, or to mar the purity and sanctity of Our name.

~ Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 32


We could also suggest that the greatest miracles could be reconciliation of people and establishing brotherhood between erstwhile enemies..

Through the breaths of the Holy Spirit it performs miracles; the Orient and the Occident embrace each other, the North and South become intimates and associates; conflicting and contending opinions disappear; antagonistic aims are brushed aside, the law of the struggle for existence is abrogated, and the canopy of the oneness of the world of humanity is raised on the apex of the globe, casting its shade over all the races of men.

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith, p. 419

 

[Thomas]

Hi Arthra —

I would rather say all miracles have an inner significance, in fact the term 'miracle' I would say defines an actual event, for without it, where is the miracle?

Miracles are the physical signs, or forms, of spiritual actualities. Without the physical sign, there is no miracle as such, but miracles are not merely gratuitous demonstrations of power, but rather are signs that are intended to make something real in the lives of the witnesses.

... For instance, in the Gospel it is written that at the martyrdom of Christ darkness prevailed, and the earth quaked, and the veil of the Temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom, and the dead came forth from their graves. If these events had happened, they would indeed have been awesome, and would certainly have been recorded in the history of the times.

That last but is rather assumptive. We have evidence of many things that happened that were not recorded, or if they were, it was rather fortuitously. The eruption of Vesuvius (79AD) happened to be recorded by Pliny the Younger because he saw it ... had he been elsewhere, we would have no direct testimony.

They would have become the cause of much troublings of heart.

They was.

Either the soldiers would have taken down Christ from the cross, or they would have fled.

They did.

These events are not related in any history; therefore, it is evident they ought not to be taken literally, but as having an inner significance.

Quite wrong. What is evident now is that 'something' happened to trigger the growth of Christianity so suddenly, and so remarkably after what appears to be an utter defeat.

If they don't happen, then there's nothing inward nor outward, as far as I can see.

God bless

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

would he charge money for healing, conjuring up fish or wine?

No.

This question is in the face of worldwide prostitution of "spirituality" and "new age".

You think is was any different in His day?

Remember that Simon the Magician became a follower of The Way after witnessing the miraculous workings of the apostle Philip and tried to 'buy' the power off Peter when he and John came down to confer a Trinitarian baptism on the Christian community there.

Worth noting then that by before 70AD there was an awareness of a 'baptism in the name of Christ' and a baptism in the name of the Blessed Trinity. (cf Acts 8:16-20)

God bless

Thomas

 

[Etu Malku]

Remember that Simon the Magician became a follower of The Way after witnessing the miraculous workings of the apostle Philip and tried to 'buy' the power off Peter when he and John came down to confer a Trinitarian baptism on the Christian community there.

Worth noting then that by before 70AD there was an awareness of a 'baptism in the name of Christ' and a baptism in the name of the Blessed Trinity. (cf Acts 8:16-20)

God bless

Thomas

Thomas, as usual your scholar is excellent. But, from my understanding . . . John the Baptist could quite possibly have been the Fathering religious figure for both Yeshua and Simon. That Simon lost his life because of his slightly Left Hand views and that Yeshua remained to carry on John's Abrahamic monotheism ideology.

Indeed a form of Baptism existed in ancient Egypt thousands of years before the "formal" Baptism.

 

[Hermes]

Let me rephrase the question, when seeking a "seer" do you just accept them at their word or have some inner test for them?
What better "inner test" is there than to see if their service has a price?
There can be commerce in most normal endeavor but in divinity, healing etc, charging money would constitute to peddling God, and most certainly would would have karmic ramification. For me, I'd discount a person such as that as charlatan and want nothing to do with them, unseen. This is not a judgement from my part but a firm belief that a true seer would not advertise nor would accept money. If you have special powers then the first order of business is to free yourself of any need, or hindrance. If you need to pay your mortgage yet claim to be a psychic than you are nothing special from Joe or jack.

 

[Hermes]

"Remember that Simon the Magician became a follower of The Way after witnessing the miraculous workings of the apostle Philip and tried to 'buy' the power off Peter when he and John came down to confer a Trinitarian baptism on the Christian community there."

Thomas, you give me too much credit. My Biblical knowledge is nowhere near good enough. What do you mean "buy the power off Peter"? What exactly happened?

 

[arthra]

Thanks Thomas for your response to my post above... I really only was responding to the opening post...

Thomas wrote:

Quite wrong. What is evident now is that 'something' happened to trigger the growth of Christianity so suddenly, and so remarkably after what appears to be an utter defeat.

If they don't happen, then there's nothing inward nor outward, as far as I can see.

God bless

Thomas

My comment:

That "something:" wasn't quite wrong.. and we accept that spiritual resurrection and also the promise of the return of His Spirit. Geza Vermes recently wrote a book in 2008 entitled "The Resurrection history and myth". I'd encourage you to read the epiloque... It's not a very large book only about a hundred and sixty pages...

God bless you Thomas!

- Art

 

[arthra]

Let me rephrase the question, when seeking a "seer" do you just accept them at their word or have some inner test for them?
What better "inner test" is there than to see if their service has a price?
There can be commerce in most normal endeavor but in divinity, healing etc, charging money would constitute to peddling God, and most certainly would would have karmic ramification. For me, I'd discount a person such as that as charlatan and want nothing to do with them, unseen. This is not a judgement from my part but a firm belief that a true seer would not advertise nor would accept money. If you have special powers then the first order of business is to free yourself of any need, or hindrance. If you need to pay your mortgage yet claim to be a psychic than you are nothing special from Joe or jack.

I agree recognizing the return of the Christ would involve something much more than charging money!

 

[Faithfulservant]

If Jesus returned tomorrow? He'd clean house.

 

[wil]

Great to see you post FS, hope you and yours are all well!

 

[Thomas]

But, from my understanding . . . John the Baptist could quite possibly have been the Fathering religious figure for both Yeshua and Simon.

On what evidence?

That Simon lost his life because of his slightly Left Hand views and that Yeshua remained to carry on John's Abrahamic monotheism ideology.

His 'slightly Left Hand views' were morally (that is subjectively) bankrupt whatever way you look at it. I don't see any connection between Simon's thinking and your presentation of the LHP?

Indeed a form of Baptism existed in ancient Egypt thousands of years before the "formal" Baptism.

The Rite exists in many cultures, so I don't see any significant relevance in the rite itself, it's common to man. It's what the rite says that matters.

God bless

Thomas

 

[Etu Malku]

On what evidence?

John mentioned a messiah that would be greater than he, Christians commonly refer to John as the precursor or forerunner of Jesus (^ Meier, John (1994). Mentor, Message, and Miracles (A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Vol. 2). 2. Anchor Bible. ISBN 0-385-46992-6.)

Some of Jesus' early followers had previously been followers of John.
(Stephen L. Harris, Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. ISBN 1-55934-655-8 Matthew 17:12–13)

Some scholars have further speculated that Jesus was himself a disciple of John for some period of time,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_the_Baptist#cite_note-Sanders-23 but this view is disputed
(Sanders, E.P. (1985) Jesus and Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress Press; p. 91)

His 'slightly Left Hand views' were morally (that is subjectively) bankrupt whatever way you look at it. I don't see any connection between Simon's thinking and your presentation of the LHP?

Simon and his followers practiced Magick and this Magick was not associated with the Abrahamic god, in fact it was a form of Libyan magick which intends towards apotheosis/self-deification . . . truly a LHP objective.

The Rite exists in many cultures, so I don't see any significant relevance in the rite itself, it's common to man. It's what the rite says that matters.

Being that the Egyptian Baptismal Ritual is much older than any of the Abrahamic faiths, we can safely assume it was copied and reinvented as usual by the Abrahamics.

Diabolus Beatus
Etu Malku

 

[Thomas]

What do you mean "buy the power off Peter"? What exactly happened?

In Acts 8 Luke recounts that Philip went to Samaria, preaching and performing miracles. Simon was apparently a great magician of that place with no small reputation. He was converted and became a follower of Philip.
Word reached Jerusalem of the church there, and Peter and John came to visit. The people there "were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (v16) and Peter and John "laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost" (v17).
This is Confirmation in the Christian Tradition.
"And when Simon saw, that by the imposition of the hands of the apostles, the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying: Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I shall lay my hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said to him: Keep thy money to thyself, to perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money" (v18-20).

God bless

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Simon and his followers practiced Magick and this Magick was not associated with the Abrahamic god, in fact it was a form of Libyan magick which intends towards apotheosis/self-deification . . . truly a LHP objective.

But he was by then a Christian, and repudiated by Peter, changed his ways (v26).

Being that the Egyptian Baptismal Ritual is much older than any of the Abrahamic faiths, we can safely assume it was copied and reinvented as usual by the Abrahamics.

I'm not sure you can assume that with any safety.

You'd have to compare the two rites to see the distinction. Baptism in the Christian tradition is in the name of Jesus, and the reception of the living Word of God.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[Etu Malku]

But he was by then a Christian, and repudiated by Peter, changed his ways (v26).

All of Samaria, where Simon was from, were Simonians . . . Simon had already begun a Belief practice that would eventually become Gnosticism. It was later that he became a disciple of the Christ. But even that information is cloudy because of the hatred towards Simon the Heretic by most of the texts written about him.

Fortunately, unlike Jesus, there actually exists texts "from" Simon and a statue of him in Rome, as well as books written directly by his disciples.

Originally Posted by Etu Malku
Being that the Egyptian Baptismal Ritual is much older than any of the Abrahamic faiths, we can safely assume it was copied and reinvented as usual by the Abrahamics.

I'm not sure you can assume that with any safety.

You'd have to compare the two rites to see the distinction. Baptism in the Christian tradition is in the name of Jesus, and the reception of the living Word of God.

**See my next post, please.

 

[Etu Malku]

Baptism: Not originally a Christian practice

The practice of baptism in pagan religions seems to have been based on a belief in the purifying properties of water. In ancient Babylon, according to the Tablets of Maklu (no relation ), water was important as a spiritual cleansing agent in the cult of Enke, lord of Eridu.

In Egypt, the Book of Going Forth by Day contains a treatise on the baptism of newborn children, which is performed to purify them of blemishes acquired in the womb. Water, especially the Nile's cold water, which was believed to have regenerative powers, is used to baptize the dead in a ritual based on the Osiris myth. Egyptian cults also developed the idea of regeneration through water. The bath preceding initiation into the cult of Isis seems to have been more than a simple ritual purification; it was probably intended to represent symbolically the initiate's death to the life of this world by recalling Osiris' drowning in the Nile.

In the cult of Cybele, a baptism of blood was practiced in the rite of the Taurobolium: where one was covered with the blood of a bull. At first this rite seems to have been to provide the initiate with greater physical vitality, but later it acquired more of a spiritual importance. A well-known inscription attests that he who has received baptism of blood has received a new birth in eternity. However, the fact that this baptism was repeated periodically shows that the idea of complete spiritual regeneration was not associated with it.

The property of immortality was also associated with baptism in the ancient Greek world. A bath in the sanctuary of Trophonion procured for the initiate a blessed immortality even while in this world. The mystery religions of that period often included ablution rites of either immersion or a washing of the body for the purposes of purification or initiation.

Other concepts said to have been associated with these forms of baptisms included the transformation of one's life, the removal of sins, symbolic representation, the attainment of greater physical vitality, a new beginning, spiritual regeneration. It is believed that all ancient religions recognized some form of spiritual cleansing, renewal or initiation that was accomplished through a washing or immersion in water.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Arthra —

... and we accept that spiritual resurrection and also the promise of the return of His Spirit.

But the Christian message is one of spiritual rebirth and physical resurrection — the dualist notion of spirit and body as two separate entities was renounced by a teaching that points towards an holistic unity of spirit and matter. It validates the physical world in its own right, rather than declaring it a later necessary and unplanned corrective of a corrupt spirituality.

The sacralisation of the physical, rather than an 'escape' from it, was fundamental to the teaching. The 'miracles' referred to in the Synoptic Gospels were represented as 'signs' in John, who saw the community at risk of slipping back into old dualist ways of thinking, which tended to disregard the physical as a mere vehicle of the spirit and something to be abandoned.

John says 'the word became flesh' (1:14) and the word he uses is sarx which implies physical materiality, as opposed to 'soma' which means a body in the wider sense. The Johannine epistles are a strong refutation of the idea that the explicit physicality of the Gospels is purely metaphorical.

Paul develops this idea through his theology of recapitulation, a theology which underpins all subsequent theological developments, it's a theology of restoration and a return to the idea of the world as being good, indeed very good (Genesis 1:31), and not simply as a temporary expedience.

It counter-acts the persistent idea of the world as being outside or no part of the Eternal Plan. It's this element which is the most staggering revelation of Christianity — that 'salvation' is not out of this world but through it, in it and with it — salvation is for the whole world, not just man. It's simply that man was always intended to be the turning point, the consummation of spirit and matter.

What man and the world will be like, we can only imagine, St Paul says "We see now through a glass and darkly; but then face to face. Now I know in part; but then I shall know even as I am known" (1 Corinthians 13:12) St John says: "and it hath not yet appeared what we shall be. We know, that, when he shall appear, we shall be like to him: because we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2).

It is this Mystery that the world fails to see, because it can only be seen in 'the light of faith' — in a dark knowing — and it is this that the miracles point to, but only if they actually happened, if they are mere spiritual teachings, with no actual outward form, then death still rules.

Resurrection is, of course, the point on which Christianity turns — without that, it's nothing more than a morality tale — but resurrection is hard to believe, and even within the early communities, there were doubts and misunderstandings:

"Now if Christ be preached, that he arose again from the dead, how do some among you say, that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again. And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God: because we have given testimony against God, that he hath raised up Christ; whom he hath not raised up, if the dead rise not again.

"And if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain, for you are yet in your sins. Then they also that are fallen asleep in Christ, are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now Christ is risen from the dead, the firstfruits of them that sleep" (1 Corinthains 15:12-18).

But Paul is insistent on the idea of physical resurrection:
"Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall all indeed rise again: but we shall not all be changed. In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall rise again incorruptible: and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption; and this mortal must put on immortality. And when this mortal hath put on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?" (1 Corinthians 15:51-55).

That is what the miracles are all about. To reduce them to a merely spiritual or inner meaning is to rationalise them according to our own limited understandings — it's certainly not the message of Scripture.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[arthra]

My thanks for the very fine response Thomas!

You are entitled to your views here and far be it from me to attempt to change them.

I would only suggest your statement above:

"That is what the miracles are all about. To reduce them to a merely spiritual or inner meaning is to rationalise them according to our own limited understandings — it's certainly not the message of Scripture...'

may need some expansion or further work.

For me anyway a "miracle" without a spiritual meaning may only be a magic trick.

But thanks again for your kind response..

God bless you Thomas..

- Art

 

[Thomas]

All of Samaria, where Simon was from, were Simonians . . . Simon had already begun a Belief practice that would eventually become Gnosticism.

Based on Patristic sources, by the way ... and the popular 'gnostic' philosophies of the day were soundly refuted by both Christian and pagan philosophers alike.

It was later that he became a disciple of the Christ. But even that information is cloudy because of the hatred towards Simon the Heretic by most of the texts written about him.

Well that's the point — Simon only exists as s signifier of a heresy. Quite a simple one for Luke, and then later developed by various Patristic authors.

If you're going to defend Simon as an advert of the LHP, the first hurdle you have is to justify his attempt to buy his way in?

As for 'gnosticism', that's an umbrella term covering a vast array of teachings, as many as there were gnostic masters, each preaching his own individual route to wherever.

Gnosticism is of interest to historians, but purely from an historical perspective. Contemporary gnosticism is popular mainly because it has the cachet of being an 'esoteric' or 'secret' doctrine, and because anything condemned by Orthodoxy must be a good thing!

Frankly I find the philosophy appallingly ill-conceived and unable tio withstand the rigour of investigation, fundamentally dualist and utterly elitist.

Authentic gnosis is something else altogether, like the authentically esoteric, is not a teaching, it cannot be found in the pages of a book. It is a receptive disposition.

Outside of patristic sources, the Simonians are briefly mentioned in the Testimony of Truth (58,1-60,3) from the Nag Hammadi Library, in which they are regarded as gnostic "heretics"!

One of the translators of the Testimony observes that the author seems ill-disposed towards 'libertine' gnostic sects, although the Simonians might be no more guilty than allowing marriage and procreation.

Epiphanius also accuses the Simonians of similar sexual practices, but then he would be biased against them, and might be repeating hearsay as much as fact.

As Origen points out:
"but now I suppose it is not possible to find 30 Simonians altogether in the world; and perhaps I have put the number higher than it really is. But in Palestine there are very few, and in the rest of the world, in which he wished to spread his own glory, his name is nowhere mentioned. If it is, this is due to the Acts of the Apostles. It is the Christians who say what is said about him, and it has become plain as daylight that Simon was nothing divine."
(Origen, Contra Celsum, i. 57)

Fortunately, unlike Jesus, there actually exists texts "from" Simon and a statue of him in Rome, as well as books written directly by his disciples.

We thought there was ... A statue was found on an island in the Tiber with the inscription Simoni Deo Sancto, "Simon the Holy God". However, in the 16th century, another statue was unearthed inscribed to Semo Sancus, which is a Sabine deity, leading most scholars to believe that Justin Martyr confused Semoni Sancus with Simon.

God bless,

Thomas