The lack of progress in christian theology.

I had earlier said to a friend, about the lack of any kind of progress in christian theology, shown all over the world, and noted thus at the ILP religion forum.

Originally most religions began as spiritualities, not orthadoxies. They were once gnostic shamanism and anything similar, from the original cultural context of the tribal styles of life.

Through this came a theory that there were invisible forms of life within and above objects, theory of spirits. Ideas that there are lifeforms existant in alternate dimensions, which still effect the earth but are invisible to anybody other than the energy-sensative or the ones chosen to have higher entities reveal themselves to the person in question. Many alien-contactees in the more modern times are ni exactly like the ancient prophets of that sort, a person whom was chosen then communicated with my some form of life outside of the earth’s ordinary things. Through this came the false and perhaps the real mystics, the first “divine revelations”, which were then recorded but sadly often tampered with.

From thus came somehow the Egyptian and the Jewish mystics, high priests and magicians, in many ways the originators of thus later christian side-effect. Originally what was said, was that God chose certain people, then revealed himself to the chosen, selected ones, and after thus, he left with them his chosen expressions. Though I would perhaps refute and deny the later christian, also I would not say that I have disproven any type of event that I could not experience or know anything about, and there is some amount of real experiences inside of every cultural footprint of ideology.

Originally, though, there was a type of progress. There were the first men whom tried to at least make something like a science, to record all observed phenomenon, to accurately record experiences, and then to form theory. This only happened for a short time, though, and the christian is nothing like the christ. They witness no magic now, they even forbid it, though in the beginning of their mystical religion there was only the magician as the founder, the one who could somehow conjure through his prayer and his initiation and whatever else, so that spirits made manifest, and then the communications and the workings of such spirits were written down. Later it was the unmagical fool whom inherited the religion, aswel as the politicians of rome whom used any religion they could as a pseudo-democratic deception for favor. Any understanding of what was really going on, and most-importantly, the truth about some higher form of superior life, was all lost in the stupidity and numbness of the limitations of the average sheep, and the entire spiritually was then replaced by a type of morality, in which there was nothing given to men other than commands. That is when the religion became nothing but mysterious alterior politics, a whole system of laws, commands, designed not for worthy wisemen but instead designed for the whole population, blanket policies of slow and annoying conquest.

Today foolish theological persons would spend most of their time as lawyers, and only as lawyers of politics, going through the old laws and dancing over the old codes of rules. Each sect and division of the christianity was from a different lawyer whom interprated and applied some old political book of law a little bit differently, reading between each line with their own personal style, so that the leader could use it all as a tool not as a truth.

There is no conversation about what god literally is, or how to interact with such a thing. There is no science at all, no progress, nothing but old codes to enforce. In that way the whole progress died thousands of years ago, and was replaced by decadence.

Originally shamanism and spiritism came from psychism, from sense-extention either through strict training or through psychadelia. In order for anybody to re-establish a protochristianity, they would have to return to the roots which the orthadoxy forbid. In this way, any theological progress would require that the protochristian create entirely new ideas, based on real experiences and supernatural miracles, expanding their mind and thinking outside of the ordinary, refuting all of the religions leaders yet again, and reaching to touch some higher power that was truly great, strong, and more dynamic than the descending hoards of sheep.

Originally theology for the christian was its own exact opposite, but that is what happens when something great is given to the opposite of great, if some superior individual entity were exposed to an inferior and weak group, the eventual result through the hundreds of years of decay, would be eventually, nothing more than the comfort and the security of the suppression of strength, a way to force even the natural down to being weaker than it was, nevermind the supernatural which they cowar before and say sorry to.

Dan. You sound very ill-informed about Christianity.

What’s he wrong about?

Hi Dan,

I must agree with Ned, you are ill-informed. The things you say are typical of Christianity are in fact typical for any group that subscribes to some kind of world-view. Once people form a group, the cohesion of the group becomes a subject. However, in Christianity this cohesion can be acquired in a different way – namely through awareness and being alert in the present moment. That is really what liturgy is about, although the everyday experiences of people in churches is often different. A church thrives when the community is awake, alert, participating and contributing.

Christianity began as a movement of people who did things the way Jesus had done things, remembering what he had said, doing what he had done, invoking the presence of the Son of Man, enabling the “Menschwerdung” of God in their midst and therefore participating in the “Realm of God”, the “Realm of the Heavens” or “the Way”. The liturgy is an enactment of ritual, a participation in the stories of scripture, a being taken along by the Spirit of the Holy to places we would not have reached without this inspiration. It took on a more structured form when it became clear that the return of Christ wasn’t an external overthrowing of power structures but an inner freedom. Christ is where two or three come together “in his name”, being the “Realm of God” and constituting the “body of Christ”.

You are going well back to times beyond Abraham in what you are saying, but in the Jewish-Christian-Islamic tradition, Abraham signalises the first emancipation from the gods and idols of early polytheism. In Jewish tradition Moses made the next step and in the Christian tradition, Jesus fulfilled the hope that had been sown in his forerunners. Each step was a movement away from idolatry. First of all from the local deities and the fear of of retribution for unpaid debts, moving on to freedom from wooden, stone and metal images and from slavery to the powers that be, then from the idols of ideologies that became stuck in the ruts of routine and passive “being-there” to spiritual freedom and engagement.

The Holy, our God, isn’t bound to stretches of land, rocks and constructions, buildings, ideas or even books. These are only things which can be utilised and assist us on our Way, but when they are gone, new substitutes are found which assist us in perceiving the Holy. We must avoid calling the Menu the Meal (as a friend once said). This doesn’t mean that these things are not important at certain stages in our lives or that they are not themselves “holy” inasmuch that they are utilised for perception or experience of the Holy, our God.

To be quite honest, I think that science is superfluous in a spiritual environment. When a community is awake, alert, participating and contributing, things become apparent. There is no need of proof, because all can see enough to understand what they need to understand. People become healthier, more effective, more intelligent, more inspired in a spiritual environment. The problem is that the church has given up such environments, or they have become desecrated by compromising with the non-spiritual. This is the reason why Israel had a Holy of Holies which they repeatedly lost to their pagan neighbours as a result of “adultery” with their gods. The loss of this spiritual environment, the “Realm of God”, describes the community-spirit within a church, its ability to remain awake and alert, participating and contributing to the common good. “For I hungered, and you did not give me a thing to eat. I thirsted and you did not give me a thing to drink; I was a stranger, and you did not take me in; naked, and you did not clothe me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit me.”

Theology comes from the Greek theologia “an account of the gods” or from theologos “one discoursing on the gods”. Paul Tillich wrote, “Theology moves back and forth between two poles, the eternal truth of its foundations and the temporal situation in which the eternal truth must be received” (Systematic Theology, 1951). Those who forget the one or the other pole corrupt what theology can be and it becomes merely what the Greek word implies, “an account of the gods”.

Shalom

Dan, you are entirely correct about “theological progress”. It is losing, but unfortunately not fast enough.

You must understand that all metaphysics is a bastardization of ordinary language, and through this mis-use of language, ruling classes have been successful in subordinating the entire world. I understand it is difficult to accept such a simple explanation- one would expect a critique of theology to be a bit more elaborate. But I’m afraid not much effort is required in unmasking the lies that have been perpetuated since the beginnings of civilization. It is simply that, Dan, an enormous conglomeration of lies.

homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Why … lassTheory

If you would like to discuss the content of these ideas, I will gladly participate.

Manic,

did you ever read that Marx was a deeply religious personality?

He only rejected the synagogue and church he experienced, but not the freedom of faith.

Shalom

I don’t know where to begin, it’s culturally ni all-encompassing. I was surprised to even read that URL, as I thought people of such ideas were all either dead or non-existent. What is there to disguss? That metaphysics was made of politics? Or what politics truly is?

Bob, you sneaky man.
I suppose if I were in Europe or Russia and then lived under Bob-ism, I would be much better off than if I were an American Catholic or an African Pentacostal.

I suppose I am ill-informed ever-still, but I would also suppose that 99% of christians don’t even know who the heck Tetragrammaton is.

Yes it’s typical of any group of moralist converts, but they are hardly divine manifestations.
Hasn’t the cohesion become the conformity, the law, a way to lead sheep in this or that way?
Being aware of the present moment is hardly within any christian exclusion, and there’s nothing christian about it. To be christian to-day is to obey and to have faith, not to have a hightened awareness of what really is going on.

Ritual was that old and inaccurate black magic of sacrifice, oath and pact, dumbed down into a robotic repeatition that was hardly social, though I suppose everyone doing anything at a certain time ‘together’ would appear, on the surface, as some sort of communion unity.

I hardly suspect that the christians or the christ have saved people, and in many ways the christian has done the opposite of save. Instead they assimilate, politically, through prosthelatization. We can only assume that the christian saves, if we assume that a native indian is far better off in a church under an imperialism that you all either forgot about or somehow accepted.

Monotheistic exclusion is hardly a liberating type of freedom, even if it forbids or put to death anyone whom worshipped at an alternative idol. A name is still equal to an idol, as is a concept, and through a sort of double-think, the christian mannaged to ban all religious competition and corner the mind-market. This christian misconcept is that the pagan supposedly literally worshipped the statue, instead of only using the statue as a sympathetic aid for focus, a way to look at an honored symbol then remember the godform which was not at all limited to the statue. The images and bodies of those old gods were often symbolic, anyways. Now, to forbid polytheism hardly made one more spiritually free, and most christians already would say that the devil is in any religion other than their own. It had often been instead a hate and a sort of anti-diversity which kept the book burnings and the witch burnings so lively. These monotheists have very-often enforced the exact opposite of freedom on alternative cultures, outsiders, other races and other religions.

I suppose also that the tax-evasion so commonly done by the preachers in america should never be of any surprise, because to evade and undermine things is much more easy and much more common for a sneaky man, and to be any type of ‘leader’ requires often the persuasiveness of a crafty mind. No matter whether they were a religious apologist or a priest or an elder, each type of “spiritual leader” I have ever met, is always a bit subtle, indirect, rhetorically skilled and ideologically injecting.

Dan, as much as you perceive Christianity has brought harm to people and other beliefs, it has suffered a lot of persecution itself. Christianity only fails when men interject their own desires as to what needs to be done to disseminate God’s Word. The basic tenets of this teaching in my opinion is not flawed, it’s what happens when people procure the interpretations the meanings that suit them. The fact that Christianity has split into several almost distinct affectations of beliefs plus, has existed these some two millinea is in and of itself a wonder.

People who would dedicate their lives to a faith to which some would consider foolish yet they don’t alter from that faith is something to take into account too. Even (in my opinion) there was no God, Jesus’ style of teaching in a secular form would be a model to follow. The world would do a lot better I believe. As to what kind of a monetarial society could evolve from such an ilk, I couldn’t say. Possibly none would be necessary. In my mind, Europe is the one slipping demotivational state through hedonistic qualities which could be their moral ruination.

As for tetragrammaton, you are probably right, most Chritians wouldn’t know the meaning of that term…but it’s not hard to look up. O:)

Christians are people. They eat, breath, sleep, and all of that. There are those whom did better than the christian, and there are those whom have done worse. I’ve not yet taken any sort of a side, though I suppose it always appears that way. But, a christian is a human-being, and that’s that.

But I would speak of eras, cultures, events, a specific certain type of personality, when spirituality and religion was held up by the monarchs and made into something entirely political. In that context it was terrible propaganda, a virus of the mind. So whenever I see a bible, I feel sorry for peasands in the early C.E. I think not of this moment but of many times, therefor my feelings are not even here today about this moment.

I think it’s a terrible way to live, to be scared of God, and that’s how allot of people have lived. Ashamed of so much, guilty and just… too poor.

Speaking for myself, I don’t live in fear of God, I rejoice in Him. I was introduced to religion as a child and went dutifullly with reluctance. Mostly with my dad who at that time was a single parent. We didn’t go all the time, but when my dad did, my brother and I went also. I participated in the services without full realization of what it meant in my life. As time went on, we went less till finally not at all. Several years after my dad had died after moving away, I had returned home to some friends of my dad. The wife of those friends had invited me to a non-denominational church, so I went. During my absence before returning I had reflected many times on my religious upbringing and where God fit in my life. Those years I was gone my life felt empty without really knowing why. When I had gone to that church several times with those friends it dawned on me what it was. I was beginning to understand the scriptures a little, so the more I investigated and prayed, things started to become known to me I had ofte wondered about. It wasn’t until my mind had matured enough to conceptualize of Jesus’ sacrifice and His role where God is concerned that the Bible started making sense to me. Thus, my faith has become stronger in the Lord while I still keep learning scriptures.

I don’t know of your religious background or lack thereof (I will not ask…it is none of my business), but unless you place yourself in the position to learn about God like you have in other areas of life, all you will have is misconceptions (in my opinion) about God. I know little of Jewish or islamic religions, but I don’t criticize them. I do ask questions about them to learn of their subsequent correlations with Christianity. I also don’t criticize pegan, wiccan, buddhism or other forms of religious ilks, but am happy to learn of their positive aspects of teachings. That is why I participate in these forums…to learn. Learning doesn’t mean I will let go of my foundational beliefs, rather I use what I learn to help build my faith in God. If you don’t look for positive things in life and find fault in them, that is what you will find.

Dan~ Are you saying that Christianity has lost it’s vital connection with God?

Meh, a lot of it is just the modern age. Today is characterized by individualism that is forced on us because we have egos so large that nobody else can get close. The idea that there used to be, and still is, a religion organized enough that it actually teaches it’s followers what the truth of things is instead of letting them make it up themselves as they go is an affront to our vanity. What gives them the right? How dare you come into the court of the mighty Myself and presume to tell me something about spirituality?
But we don’t live for 1000 years, so the history we personally experience is rather short. It’s easy to think that ‘how it is now’ is simply ‘how it is’. The idea that preaching, teaching, proselytization is some sort of cruel barbarism, a brain-washing or manipulation, is an absurdity that only seems plausible because it only makes sense if we’re allowed to first admit that somebody else knows more than us, and we just don’t do that anymore.

Ucc,

You’ve expressed as a value submission to authority, but such a claim has no more standing than personal authority. Suggesting that there is something not quite right with individuality is simply a meritless claim by fiat with no “proof” that either has any greater claim to fame than the other.

Dan,

Some of your observations are spot on, but generalizations are painting with a 4" house brush, and you may have missed a spot or two…

I intensely disagree.

If one lab shows XYZ, there is still good reason for suspicion. After all, there are a variety of reasons why a person might lie. But when hundreds of labs have shown XYZ, the rationale for suspicion becomes ever more remote.

To equate personal authority with broader authority is to deny science, and everything else really. A very silly path to take, IMHO. Unless, that is, you assume the individual is capable of knowing everything. But I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell that all-knowing individual . . .

As risky as self-reliance is, the more we learn about authority, the more reasons we have to question it. The break down in traditional institutions, the continuous “revelation” of power’s tendency to corrupt, and the accelerating, technologically- driven pace of change are ever-present reminders that we must seek wisdom within because there is so precious little of it without.

See, that is what I am not so sure on. Authority is certainly imperfect. Anyone who thinks authorities are perfect is a danger. But likewise, I think that anyone who relies on themselves exclusively is bound to be ignorant. Try discovering calculus for yourself, building a car for yourself, ect. Both theoretical and practical knowledge is preciously transmitted. It is a matter of striking a balance. Reasonable people understand both the value of authority and the value of their own selves. Though I will say, given the gross ignorance of ourselves as compared to the collective wisdom of humanity, the primary faculty of our own wisdom is to select which authorities we ought pay attention to in which situations.

Given the impressive advancements of science by scientists, only the blind would trust the scientific opinion of a theologian. But we also need to be wary that we don’t overextend the knowledge of scientists and apply that to theological matters. I’m not so sure the idea of non-overlapping magisteria applies, since clearly there are many intersections between the two areas, since they both deal with matters of truth. Instead it is a matter of what kind of question is being asked. For Confucians, a, if not the, central element is “the investigation of things”. During the Ming Dynasty, this actually lead to something close to proto-science, at least at times. That is, until Yangming asked, “Can we find moral principle in the grain of bamboo?” That shouldn’t be taken to mean that the “grains of bamboo” are unimportant – though it was taken that way at the time. Instead we should understand what sort of question we are asking. Science is a terrible place to look for morality in and religion is a terrible place to look for science in.

Seems pretty obvious to me. Ask the right person the right question. D’uh.

I agree authority vs. autonomy is not an either…or proposition. But Dan~ seems to be saying that the spiritual power has gone out of the church and that what is left is mainly rules and regulations to which one is expected to conform. That is probably not entirely true but there is evidence that it is a problem for religious organizations including the church. Outward conformity of that kind produces mendicants and sycophants not living sons and daughters of God, which is what Jesus said he had in mind.

Xunz,

We aren’t talking about the physical universe, but the metaphysical which is speculation. You’re mixing the peas and carrots.

Well yeah, if God is my dad, I figure we should have some real conversations. If he gave me his phone number, I’d sure as heck phone him. We should go fishing, play baseball, me visit his place at work. Jesus portrayed God as some type of loving parental figure, BUT, I suspect before mr.Jesus’s apolagetic idealisms, the God of abraham was also pretty damn scarry, what with all of the big killings and righteous anger. He sounds allot more like a law-man than a dad. He sounds allot more like a politician, I’m seriously saying, that’s all I can feel is a list of distant globalization laws. God the politician, the ruler, the king.

God is not my friend, he’s not here with me. I’m not talking shit or saying he should be my servant. I’m not saying I’m special and better and deserve fantastic divine attention. I’m not here to stur up the rationalizations for divine inactivity. What I’m just saying, is that God is literally not in my life, and he’s probably not in your life either, and there’s no way yet repeatable to make that happen substantially. It’s nonsense to think that a God who truly cares about us and is so strong, must be at all times hiding himself and keeping one hell of a sociopathic distance away from real communication, playing some wacky event-manipulation games instead of talking in plain english. That’s impersonal, even if the christian personalizes it, their God even as-described is still very impersonal in the actual christian life.

What if Jesus was on crack, and he thought this terrible world was better than it actually is? Allot of people lied about him, if he even existed, so the world wasn’t that appreciative or nice, either, they just nailed him up and talked crap as they always did. There’s no-use worshipping the corpse a few hundred years later after you broke it. It’s like a broken car, it just doesn’t go anywhere.

I think I’m saying something that is already obvious. God isn’t with us, and Jesus is not alive. Everyone who made the bible, the founders, the active originators, they’re all dead. No shortage of people tried to act like it’s all still alive when it’s not. Who are we kidding? No-body is getting saved, healed, cleansed or illuminated. There’s nothing super about all this, it’s only a bunch of human men and women, and nothing else. That’s all the christian is left with. The christian cannot be other than a real person. So now that Jesus is dead and God is somewhere between gone and unknown, what is there left for you to do? Trying to copy the old ways isn’t enough, it’s not working. There’s not a divine presence. There’s no glowing lights and thunderous voice. No magic at all. Nothing but natural matter, boring reality. Somebody has to do something new, and different. There needs to be more strength and intelligence, something alive instead of something dead.