this blog is the continuation of a genuine mystical tradition, unless you get in daily contemplative time and abstain to a significant degree from "entertainment" then you are just wasting your time and mine !
Answer to that question is in 1 Corinthians 1:18 and 1 Corinthians 1:27.
"and priests as christ's representatives ?"
Only in Roman Catholicism AKA Papism (not real Christianity, cf. 1 Timothy 2:5).
---
You claim to be a mediator between this world and infinity. Or between the present time, and eternity.
I pointed to a passage of a certain somebody, who said this before. Somebody who really lived according to the scientific consensus of the vast majority of historians.
I have never researched how antibiotics work. Yet when I got very sick and took antibiotics, they saved me.
When the doctor gave me the pill, I trusted the scientific medical community.
Even you Buddhists have a story explaining this in the "poisoned arrow" parable.
As for the consensus, this is what the encyclopedia says:
"An overwhelming majority of New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is more probable than not, although they differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels. While scholars have criticized Jesus scholarship for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness, with very few exceptions, such critics generally do support the historicity of Jesus, and reject the Christ myth theory that Jesus never existed."
How many stations does the Via Crucis on "Via Dolorosa" have, JD? The Spirit proceeding toward Golgotha look like a dress-up game to the non-elect as per Mt 13:11 & Luke 8:10 & Mark 4:11 Ora pro me.
St. Paul was a Jewish fanatic and persecutor of Christians before turning to Christ. Augustine was a Manichean, Neoplatonist, before, also a party animal, and who knows what else.
I find it interesting that the religious people are always ready to be skeptical about other people's religions: I saw a debate between a Muslim and a Christian on YouTube. The Muslim was saying things like: "you claim this or that miracle happened, but that is impossible" - etc. the Christian replies: why are you a skeptic when you read the New Testament, but not when you read in the Quran that Muhammad split the moon in half, or that Muhammad flew to heaven on a winged horse?
Similarly, if you want to play the skeptic, tell us what you believe about Andrew, his role as mediator between eternity and present, infinity and finitude, and his "quantum visions", his status as the 7th Patriarch, etc. Tell us your catechism and how much you allow yourself to doubt in it.
It's dai （大） not "dia" - for some reason Andrew keeps misspelling that, maybe he's dyslexic (it's a little bit humorous that not only you inherited his punctuation style, even his misspellings - but don't take this too personally, it's just an observation).
How do you assess "progress"? What's your measuring stick?
Also, you haven't answered about your catechism. Do you believe Andrew is the 7th Patriarch and that this title has been conferred to him via a vision of the 6th Patriarch that is "quantum" (that is, related to phenomena observed by quantum physics) - so not metaphorical but quite literal? And that this makes him the one and only authority of our times?
You don't have to be shy about your confessio. It can't be crazier than bodily resurrection from the dead, can it?
i'm not shy i just think you're a sort of slow, i would say progress is me seeing how you're sort of slow
i think andrew is the 7th patriarch
i was thinking the other day that if andrew is the 7th patriarch what does that mean for others ? you know you could tell people you're a patriarch and they probably don't know what that means
I consider myself a follower of Andrew, but I believe Jason has surpassed me as of late. I am a shitty follower, but I'll get to it more seriously, some day when I have more funds.
I agree with him on most stuff, but I still find it difficult how Infinity is not bleak. It is most likely due to my own ineptitude.
you've gone through how many religions and their denominations in the last two years ?
zakaj replies: three !
my comment
pure land, then zen then back and forth between these, then a crazy fundamentalist form of christianty, then some sanskrit "weirdness" and now back to some modified crazy christianity
Can fugue states of Infinity occur in dreams? I normally feel it in dreams. Most of my fiction is inspired by my dreams. I always tried to add a dream or two or mine in most of the pieces.
It's like saying to a scientist: you proposed, how many hypotheses already? A hundred? So this 101th can't be taken seriously now, can it? That is a logical fallacy, convincing only to people who cannot think properly. It is a matter of complete indifference what one has been through before arriving at the truth, which I wanted to testify to, and now my purpose is completed, at least for the time being. You are not a mediator simply because there cannot be two mediators if the first one says "I am the only one" then the second one is bound to be a false prophet, like Muhammad the great deceiver of man was, for instance.
He was not Persian or Indian. Perhaps, he was mixed with both because Gandhara was a melting pot of various cultures. The Gandharans and Sogdians technically developed Mahayana Buddhism more than the Indians.
One aspect that isn't researched enough is how much of a Tantric Bodhidharma was. I think he belonged in the "early Esoteric" Buddhism, - not the late Tantra (as the Tibetan have) ,but an early strand of Mantrayana, that developed as the interaction between Shaivism and Buddhism. - He was not bringing some "pure, unadulterated, original" buddhism as the ewkians/zen mythologist want you to believe, but a very late mix of esoteric (early tantric), mahayana and shaivism, - and while trying to explain it to the Chinese, he had to remove the cultural references they wouldn't understand, and this process actually created something new!
Something APPARENTLY "simpler", "more original", "purer" , "minimalist" , - the simple is always an illusory result of something much more complex behind it.
John 14:6
ReplyDeleteare you going crazy zakaj ?
Deleteand priests as christ's representatives ?
Delete"are you going crazy zakaj ?"
DeleteAnswer to that question is in 1 Corinthians 1:18 and 1 Corinthians 1:27.
"and priests as christ's representatives ?"
Only in Roman Catholicism AKA Papism (not real Christianity, cf. 1 Timothy 2:5).
---
You claim to be a mediator between this world and infinity. Or between the present time, and eternity.
I pointed to a passage of a certain somebody, who said this before. Somebody who really lived according to the scientific consensus of the vast majority of historians.
(One small correction, I would remove the word "scientific", "consensus" is enough, as history is not a science.)
Delete"Somebody who really lived according to the scientific consensus of the vast majority of historians"
Deleteyou never researched in the slightest did you, you are so lazy . .
I have never researched how antibiotics work. Yet when I got very sick and took antibiotics, they saved me.
DeleteWhen the doctor gave me the pill, I trusted the scientific medical community.
Even you Buddhists have a story explaining this in the "poisoned arrow" parable.
As for the consensus, this is what the encyclopedia says:
"An overwhelming majority of New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is more probable than not, although they differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels. While scholars have criticized Jesus scholarship for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness, with very few exceptions, such critics generally do support the historicity of Jesus, and reject the Christ myth theory that Jesus never existed."
you've gone through how many religions and their denominations in the last two years ?
DeleteJason Dafonte: three. Your point?
DeleteHow many stations does the Via Crucis on "Via Dolorosa" have, JD? The Spirit proceeding toward Golgotha look like a dress-up game to the non-elect as per Mt 13:11 & Luke 8:10 & Mark 4:11
DeleteOra pro me.
you're sure this time it's real ?
Deletecuz to me it seems like another thing you're cycling through
i'm always ready to say to myself that i'm wrong and then i move on, which is sort of what you've done in the past with your other cycles of religions
infinity doesn't need me or you, zen or any other religion
DeleteSt. Paul was a Jewish fanatic and persecutor of Christians before turning to Christ. Augustine was a Manichean, Neoplatonist, before, also a party animal, and who knows what else.
DeleteI find it interesting that the religious people are always ready to be skeptical about other people's religions: I saw a debate between a Muslim and a Christian on YouTube. The Muslim was saying things like: "you claim this or that miracle happened, but that is impossible" - etc. the Christian replies: why are you a skeptic when you read the New Testament, but not when you read in the Quran that Muhammad split the moon in half, or that Muhammad flew to heaven on a winged horse?
Similarly, if you want to play the skeptic, tell us what you believe about Andrew, his role as mediator between eternity and present, infinity and finitude, and his "quantum visions", his status as the 7th Patriarch, etc. Tell us your catechism and how much you allow yourself to doubt in it.
Are you sure it's for real?
"infinity doesn't need me or you, zen or any other religion"
DeleteHow do you know this?
i'm completely ready to let the whole zen thing go, for now i'm making progress with it so i don't see why i would let it go
Deletei'm not being skeptical of your religions i'm skeptical of how you use the religions
' infinity doesn't need me or you, zen or any other religion '
How do you know this? "
simple i've seen it with dia kensho
It's dai （大） not "dia" - for some reason Andrew keeps misspelling that, maybe he's dyslexic (it's a little bit humorous that not only you inherited his punctuation style, even his misspellings - but don't take this too personally, it's just an observation).
DeleteHow do you assess "progress"?
What's your measuring stick?
Also, you haven't answered about your catechism. Do you believe Andrew is the 7th Patriarch and that this title has been conferred to him via a vision of the 6th Patriarch that is "quantum" (that is, related to phenomena observed by quantum physics) - so not metaphorical but quite literal? And that this makes him the one and only authority of our times?
You don't have to be shy about your confessio.
It can't be crazier than bodily resurrection from the dead, can it?
:)
i'm not shy i just think you're a sort of slow, i would say progress is me seeing how you're sort of slow
Deletei think andrew is the 7th patriarch
i was thinking the other day that if andrew is the 7th patriarch what does that mean for others ? you know you could tell people you're a patriarch and they probably don't know what that means
I consider myself a follower of Andrew, but I believe Jason has surpassed me as of late. I am a shitty follower, but I'll get to it more seriously, some day when I have more funds.
DeleteI agree with him on most stuff, but I still find it difficult how Infinity is not bleak. It is most likely due to my own ineptitude.
zepher :
Delete"but I still find it difficult how Infinity is not bleak. It is most likely due to my own ineptitude."
its all about "fugue states of infinity"
a fugue state is infinity itself
forget everythign else, it doesn't matter
Deletejason asks zakaj
you've gone through how many religions and their denominations in the last two years ?
zakaj replies: three !
my comment
pure land, then zen then back and forth between these, then a crazy fundamentalist form of christianty, then some sanskrit "weirdness" and now back to some modified crazy christianity
Can fugue states of Infinity occur in dreams? I normally feel it in dreams. Most of my fiction is inspired by my dreams. I always tried to add a dream or two or mine in most of the pieces.
Deletezephyr
Deleteyeah i feel some of your writing is fugue statish it has a certain visionary intensity
It's like saying to a scientist: you proposed, how many hypotheses already? A hundred? So this 101th can't be taken seriously now, can it? That is a logical fallacy, convincing only to people who cannot think properly. It is a matter of complete indifference what one has been through before arriving at the truth, which I wanted to testify to, and now my purpose is completed, at least for the time being. You are not a mediator simply because there cannot be two mediators if the first one says "I am the only one" then the second one is bound to be a false prophet, like Muhammad the great deceiver of man was, for instance.
Deletezakaj, i'm not going through your demented rubbish again for the hundreth time wasting time . .
Deleteyou are not welcome here, fuck off to some net realm of christian crazies !
just fuck off anyway !
sheesh !
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20170124/Nicotine-normalizes-genetically-induced-brain-impairments-linked-to-schizophrenia.aspx
DeleteNobody is forcing you to do anything old man. You are the same as ewk who calls you mental over and over. You're doing the same with that link :)
DeleteBodhidharma was mostly like Sogdian or Gandharan.
ReplyDeleteHe was not Persian or Indian. Perhaps, he was mixed with both because Gandhara was a melting pot of various cultures. The Gandharans and Sogdians technically developed Mahayana Buddhism more than the Indians.
most likely*
DeleteOne aspect that isn't researched enough is how much of a Tantric Bodhidharma was. I think he belonged in the "early Esoteric" Buddhism, - not the late Tantra (as the Tibetan have) ,but an early strand of Mantrayana, that developed as the interaction between Shaivism and Buddhism. - He was not bringing some "pure, unadulterated, original" buddhism as the ewkians/zen mythologist want you to believe, but a very late mix of esoteric (early tantric), mahayana and shaivism, - and while trying to explain it to the Chinese, he had to remove the cultural references they wouldn't understand, and this process actually created something new!
DeleteSomething APPARENTLY "simpler", "more original", "purer" , "minimalist" , - the simple is always an illusory result of something much more complex behind it.
Delete