The Jewish Zohar Shekhinah and the Christian, & Mormon Holy Spirit

muhammad_isa said:
I can't agree with that.
The Bible is a VERY IMPORTANT BOOK.
Click to expand...
Of course you can agree to that. I said nothing against the Bible as being important, I said there was a lot that Jesus said which was not recorded down for us. The entire Sermon on the Mount can be read in a mere few minutes, yet it probably took a very long time for Jesus to give the full teaching. The Gospel of John says there were so many teachings of Jesus that if they were all put together would make several books, yet he only gave a brief synopsis of his teachings. That is what I was meaning.
 
muhammad_isa said:
There is truth in the Gospel of John.
I love Jesus, and not "a logos".
Click to expand...
Then it seems to me you entirely misunderstand why John would call Jesus the Logos, they are not two different things. At least not in John's view. Jesus in saying he was the bread of life was not making himself into two different things in also saying he was the light, or the way, or the truth. Symbolisms can have more meanings than one.
 
muhammad_isa said:
It is not about what we might prefer, It is about what Almighty God "prefers".
..and that is what Jesus taught us .. not some anonymous author that rambles on about an anonymous disciple.
Click to expand...
Oh my... um, everything written about Jesus is from some anonymous author or another, not even a single eyewitness. We have, at this point in time, no choice but to go with what has been said about Jesus from people who never even knew him...
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
ScholarlySeeker said:
..The entire Sermon on the Mount can be read in a mere few minutes, yet it probably took a very long time for Jesus to give the full teaching. The Gospel of John says there were so many teachings of Jesus that if they were all put together would make several books, yet he only gave a brief synopsis of his teachings. That is what I was meaning.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course I can understand that.
However, I can't understand how Jesus would have failed to tell us that he was "a logos",
and hence part of a trinity which makes him God :D

Maybe I haven't got that right..
I can't understand how Jesus would have failed to tell us that he was "a logos"
and that he was God, and hence part of a trinity. Mmm .. yes, that looks better.

No .. it doesn't really. It is all very mysterious.
 
Last edited:
muhammad_isa said:
Yes, of course I can understand that.
However, I can't understand how Jesus would have failed to tell us that he was "a logos",
and hence part of a trinity which makes him God :D
Click to expand...
You ignored everything @ScholarlySeeker said in his last three posts, in order to bring the subject back around down to your own personal agenda. You are dragging down the intelligent level of debate of the IO website and driving intelligent people away by your trolling across multiple boards.

Take it as a warning :D
 
ScholarlySeeker said:
Oh my... um, everything written about Jesus is from some anonymous author or another, not even a single eyewitness. We have, at this point in time, no choice but to go with what has been said about Jesus from people who never even knew him...
Click to expand...

That is the same as saying that we have no choice to explore literature other than the Bible, imo.
I don't think you really mean that, do you.
 
muhammad_isa said:
How do you know that? From the gospel of John?
Click to expand...
No. @ScholarlySeeker is widely read
muhammad_isa said:
That is the same as saying that we have no choice to explore literature other than the Bible, imo.
I don't think you really mean that, do you.
Click to expand...
You are speaking to an intelligent, widely read scholar, as if he was a naughty child.

Stop insulting the intelligence of other members in order to promote your own tunnel-vision proselytising on these interfaith forums.
 
muhammad_isa said:
That is the same as saying that we have no choice to explore literature other than the Bible, imo.
I don't think you really mean that, do you.
Click to expand...
No, I meant that Jesus left no writings at all. All we have is later stories told about him in any and ALL scripture... we always have choices of various literatures to attend to, but realize they are all interpretations, not quotes of what Jesus may have said. Yes?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
RJM Corbet said:
No. @ScholarlySeeker is widely read

You are speaking to an intelligent, widely read scholar, as if he was a naughty child.

Stop insulting the intelligence of other members in order to promote your own tunnel-vision proselytising on these interfaith forums.
Click to expand...
I honestly have not taken him in this manner my friend. I am enjoying the bantering actually, it's all good...
 
muhammad_isa said:
How do you know that? From the gospel of John?
Click to expand...
Yes, from John, and many other kinds of commentators and Greek examinations of the word and its meaning, etc. It is an interesting if not difficult topic, without doubt....so..... you don't accept the Gospel of John as inspired?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
muhammad_isa said:
However, I can't understand how Jesus would have failed to tell us that he was "a logos",
and hence part of a trinity which makes him God :D
Click to expand...
Good heavens, Jesus kept the majority of his teachings in parables so the public would not understand it, and only revealed the actual meaning to a few select disciples. What makes you think he has to tell us everything? He sure didn't in ancient times. And, there were several secret traditions within Christianity itself wherein the more deep doctrines were kept from other Christians! Is it that Jesus failed to tell, or that he kept it to himself? Is there anything that says Jesus has to teach everything he knows? In that case the Bible would have been a library of hundreds of thousands of books, yes? LOL! Thank goodness he didn't tell all, we'd never be able to read through it all - GRIN!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
ScholarlySeeker said:
Good heavens, Jesus kept the majority of his teachings in parables so the public would not understand it, and only revealed the actual meaning to a few select disciples. What makes you think he has to tell us everything? He sure didn't in ancient times. And, there were several secret traditions within Christianity itself wherein the more deep doctrines were kept from other Christians! Is it that Jesus failed to tell, or that he kept it to himself? Is there anything that says Jesus has to teach everything he knows? In that case the Bible would have been a library of hundreds of thousands of books, yes? LOL! Thank goodness he didn't tell all, we'd never be able to read through it all - GRIN!
Click to expand...

Next: Chewbacca was a 7th level logos, and Jean Luc Picard doesn't have to tell anyone about it so what's the issue?
I seriously hope you see your own stance reflected back at you in that one line because there won't be many that can stop your inertia without the sin of interfering and not minding one's own business. I mean: it's your life it's not for me to insist you change, but please check out circular reasoning, begging the question, changing the goalposts, and any other fallacies of thought.
 
SufiPhilosophy said:
Next: Chewbacca was a 7th level logos, and Jean Luc Picard doesn't have to tell anyone about it so what's the issue?
I seriously hope you see your own stance reflected back at you in that one line because there won't be many that can stop your inertia without the sin of interfering and not minding one's own business. I mean: it's your life it's not for me to insist you change, but please check out circular reasoning, begging the question, changing the goalposts, and any other fallacies of thought.
Click to expand...
I grasp that, I am simply reporting the actual historic situation.
 
ScholarlySeeker said:
I grasp that, I am simply reporting the actual historic situation.
Click to expand...

You say Jesus spoke in parables to hide the truth from the ordinary. This therefore contradicts his role - and the role of any Prophet - as a teacher. Why else do we even exist.

You then say the secret meaning was passed on to the select. Evidently this includes you, and now me.

You then ask why Jesus must tell us everything? Which begs the question: what makes you think you know there's more? And moreoever, well, if he had a mission to give knowledge, then why would he hold back?

You then point out there were several secret traditions in Christianity itself, whilst ignoring that they probably disagreed with each other thus adding wormholes to the wormholes, and well, who is to say what is what, at this point in your statement?

You then say that Jesus doesn't have to teach everything. Ok there are probably personal things between him and God. But for Jesus to be the LOGOS i'd say that is headline news and should be dished out. Secret traditions are usually vehicles for false stuff and hearsay, hence the secrecy, i.e. hide them from critique, coax only people that are in the market for it. Preferably people with a bit of cash because it costs money for the secretary of the secret tradition to issue all those secret newsletters of wisdom bulletins.

But yep, Jesus being Logos is pretty important. Not the stuff of secrecy. Instead of a network of secrecy, how about that he was just never the Logos and never taught he was the Logos?

Then you give a reductio ad absurdum that the Bible would othewise be hundreds of thousands of books. Well, it's big enough already. All Jesus needed to do was say he was the Logos not write many books, that's absurd.
 
RJM Corbet said:
No. @ScholarlySeeker is widely read
You are speaking to an intelligent, widely read scholar
Click to expand...

ScholarlySeeker said:
No, I meant that Jesus left no writings at all.
Click to expand...

So, in the affair of Christianity, one of you says the other is widely read. That other says there are no primary texts to speak of. So what you been reading then?

Thank you, between the two of you, you made me smile today.
 
Last edited:
SufiPhilosophy said:
So, in the affair of Christianity, one of you says the other is widely read. That other says there are no primary texts to speak of. So what you been reading then?

Thank you, between the two of you, you made me smile today.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with you. Jesus spoke in parables to make himself clear to ordinary people in a way that would last through time. There are probably other reasons too. Perhaps what @ScholarlySeeker meant was the parables contain hidden layers of truth below their deceptively simple surface?

However @ScholarlySeeker is widely enough read to know there are no primary texts to speak of on the particular subject. I invite you to search some of what he has written on the forums?

The issue being he is not a blinkered idiot who gets all his information about a scripture from from that scripture alone.

The issue in these threads is one member talking down and lecturing others as his own spiritual inferiors, in an insulting and patronising way, across multiple boards, bringing every discussion down around to his own obsessive need to proselytise his own faith on open boards on an interfaith website.

It has been going on for months and is threatening to drive other people away, who feel unable to conduct a proper discussion without one person coming in and hijacking it, always back to the same singular subject. As you have observed, there is an Islam forum.

Nice to have you with us.
 
Last edited:

Thank you. As ScholarlySeeker said, the muhammad_isa is inoffensive. I agree.

He was dismissive of Bishops and priests, but in the same breath, of Islamic clergy too, so he was even-handed. Is there any specific post he was out of order? I'd be interested to give an opinion, maybe heal hearts.


By the way, l have to inform you: website forums on these matters are generally dead now anyway, this isn't the only one, so l wouldn't attribute it to one person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top