Is the bible true?how do you really know?what do you believe is God?

Hello Everyone 🙂

I always wondered how people come to believe what they believe?? :confused:
Does everyone think the bible is true?, How do you know?.... I mean HOW DO YOU KNOW, FOR SURE?.
Did you not ever question your strong hold belief on the bible?.
Have you ever considered that the disciples may have written in the bible through the ego’s fear, because some of its reading is …well really quite frightening of what God might do if you disobey.
I said to myself” Can an all loving god be this way to his creations?” Now a vengeful God- I don’t believe. :022:
I was strongly brought up with the teachings of the bible on my own accord, yet my way of seeing the bible is now somewhat “different”.
I don’t disbelieve in God ( As I believe God is to me). I believe God is all loving. all powerful, all divine, peace, just everything so beautiful no words can describe…..I wonder what could make people dis believe?..I hope my asking gives a sort of view to meaningful answers and discussions between everyone.

Just hoping that this thread will now get back on topic!

Sacrel, I’m going to take your questions one at a time.

I always wondered how people come to believe what they believe??

I believe because it works!

Does everyone think the bible is true?, How do you know?.... I mean HOW DO YOU KNOW, FOR SURE?.

To me, the Bible is on three levels, the historical, the moral and the spiritual. A vicar once said to me that the Bible is about 80% about man and about 20% about God. To me, it’s what we learn about God’s true nature that is important. I totally reject the old orthodox idea of a tribal anthropomorphic deity with human-like changeable emotions.

It’s the spiritual dimension of the Bible that is important and the Bible needs spiritual understanding to recognise when the writing is the inspired Word (the self-revealing activity) of God and when it is not (it is full of contradictions, like the Adam and Eve story contradicts the spiritual and perfect creation of Genesis 1)

When the writing lifts you to a higher place, brings “the peace of God, which passeth all understanding” (Phil 4) and brings harmony to every aspect of being, including actual physical healing, then to me that is proof that those words are inspired.

Have you ever considered that the disciples may have written in the bible through the ego’s fear, because some of its reading is …well really quite frightening of what God might do if you disobey.

I think Sacrel that you will find this perception of God more among some writers of the Old Testament. Jesus brought a higher view of God as Love.

As Mary Baker Eddy explained:
[COLOR="Blue"]
The Jewish tribal Jehovah was a man-projected God, liable to wrath, repentance, and human changeableness. (Science and Health 140)

In that name of Jehovah, the true idea of God seems almost lost. God becomes "a man of war," a tribal god to be worshipped, rather than Love, the divine Principle to be lived and loved. (Science and Health 524)

I said to myself” Can an all loving god be this way to his creations?” Now a vengeful God- I don’t believe.

Neither do I – see my signature! :p

I was strongly brought up with the teachings of the bible on my own accord, yet my way of seeing the bible is now somewhat “different”.

Every time any one of us reads something, sees something, watches something, we make our own interpretation. Of course, some people are told what to think without reasoning or proving it for themselves, but as I always say, the view that a rabbit has of an oak tree is very different from the view an eagle has. Neither is the wrong view – the tree is seen from different perspectives, that’s all.

I don’t disbelieve in God ( As I believe God is to me). I believe God is all loving. all powerful, all divine, peace, just everything so beautiful no words can describe…..I wonder what could make people dis believe?..I hope my asking gives a sort of view to meaningful answers and discussions between everyone.

I can’t tell you why people disbelieve – perhaps it’s because they are stuck in the old orthodox hell and brimstone conception which they instinctively feel is incorrect, yet can’t move past that to understand that not all faiths think that way!

And yes, I agree with you – “so beautiful no words can describe” – that’s lovely!

Love and peace,

Judy

I thank all of you for your many thoughts and comments concerning my attempts to tidy up the forums a little 🙂

There have been many questions addressed to me as to where should we place this or that topic and the answer is very simple, if you are discussing for example reflexology, then please post in the reflexology forum so when members are looking for pertinent information on reflexology they know where to find it.

If you happen to be a therapist who is looking for information on religion then the place to find such information is in the religious forums.

But Paul, what about my case, when my "religion" includes health and healing?

Judy says Christian science, which is a variation of the Christian religion, does cover some aspects of health and healing from a religious aspect.

However, faith healing is not Reiki nor is it energy healing, so to place long posts promoting Christian science and the bible on a thread which has nothing at all to do with it, places the post under the heading of preaching. Which is why Judy's post, which was placed after Sacral had split his topic and put the religious side in here, was moved.

I am not just singling out Judy here; it is not acceptable to use the therapy forums as a place to promote religion.

So if you want to discuss faith healing, prayer, Buddhist philosophy etc. then the religious forums are the correct place to discuss them, not the therapy forums.

I hope this clarifies the situation for you 🙂

So if you want to discuss faith healing, prayer, Buddhist philosophy etc. then the religious forums are the correct place to discuss them, not the therapy forums.

I hope this clarifies the situation for you 🙂

Dear Paul,

You clearly don't have much understanding of what Buddhist philosophy is if you think it's best placed in the religious forums. What you have said clarifies very little to me I'm afraid.

Norbu

Judy says Christian science, which is a variation of the Christian religion, does cover some aspects of health and healing from a religious aspect.

However, faith healing is not Reiki nor is it energy healing, so to place long posts promoting Christian science and the bible on a thread which has nothing at all to do with it, places the post under the heading of preaching. Which is why Judy's post, which was placed after Sacral had split his topic and put the religious side in here, was moved.

I am not just singling out Judy here; it is not acceptable to use the therapy forums as a place to promote religion.

So if you want to discuss faith healing, prayer, Buddhist philosophy etc. then the religious forums are the correct place to discuss them, not the therapy forums.

I hope this clarifies the situation for you 🙂

I had hoped not to have to bring this subject up again (I really would rather get on with the subject of the thread - sorry Sacrel) but may I just say one last word about this - well two actually.

First of all, Christian Science healing is NOT faith healing. It has a scientific metaphysical basis. Atheists can be healed through it. The healings that come through it are awesome and deserve more than mere dismissal. There are thousands of people in the world who had been given terminal diagnoses who are alive today thanks to it. No, we don't have a 100% success rate, but neither does any treatment - allopathic, complementary or alternative.

Though I know he is not a Reiki healer, Pierre Pradervan (who is a Cygnus Review author) uses the principles in Science and Health in his work. He reviewed it in the Nov issue and said that the book is possibly unique because it is the only complete non-dual presentation of Christianity and based on the spiritual laws governing reality which we can each learn to understand. Then he explains:

“Although the book is written in traditional Christian language, the concepts behind the language are universal, non denominational and even non-religious…..”

He goes on to say that you can learn to:

“filter out traditional theological language” and “end up with a golden nugget of basic principles for the healing of the world.”

He then says in the last sentence:

“ … The last 100 pages are accounts of people healed of all imaginable diseases simply by reading the book… Is there any other book in the spiritual literature of humanity that can make such a claim?”

So that's why I feel that CS belongs in any discussion of healing! :p

The other point is that I am acutely aware of people's sensibilities on HP. I know that you seem to have an aversion to "religion" so try to avoid upsetting you. How many times Paul have I posted on the Reiki forums in the past? Well, actually, I'm going to answer that for you - twice - in 2004. Is that "Promoting my religion?"

where someone was commenting on how they had seen a Christian (read orthodox) stand at a MBS exhibition and I mentioned that we have had CS Reading Room stands for years at them (in fact, I'm going to be on stand at Brentwood tomorrow)

In fact Paul, we so often have great conversations with Reiki practitioners at the shows, many of whom use Mary Baker Eddy's textbook on healing, Science and Health as a vital aid in understanding healing and finding it more effective. One Reiki practitioner said to us that he uses the book as the basis of all his lectures (I hope he gives her credit but wonder?) One chap said to us at the end of one exhibition that none of this would be here had it not been for her contribution to opening up thought to unlimited possibilities.

The other time I posted in 2004 was where someone listed all the different types of healing she had tried (including several versions of Reiki) and asked where she could go from there as she felt something was missing. I gave some info and said, "I wish you a sweet and fulfilling search – which ever direction it takes."

I think it is extremely unfair to accuse me of "promoting religion" when I was discussing healing and illusion on a thread about healing and illusion which already had loads of references to God (and it wasn't me who brought up the Bible). I only went to Sacrel's thread because I saw the title of "illusion" and saw that he was talking about God (long before I joined in!) I did have something to contribute on that thread but will not go there again as I have been made to feel so unwelcome.

Anyway, I've had my protest and I hope that you understand my position a bit more clearly now.

I respect everyone on these forums and have a great affection and appreciation of all that HP stands for and for all that the mods to, in often difficult circumstances.

I am now looking forward to getting back to Sacrel's thread.

Love and peace,

Judy

Back to the Bible!

Hi Maure,

I wrote to you yesterday morning, but the post mysteriously disappeared.

I wanted to welcome you to HP and to say that I found your testimony very moving and am really happy for you that you have found what is right for you. I’m glad you love the KJV which is my favourite too! 🙂

You are probably feeling rather like everyone has been picking on you though! I think that’s because while it’s fine to post about your own personal experience like you did, (or others), once you start bringing other members of HP by name into your theology and posting what appears to be threats, it puts people’s backs up. No-one on HP will ever become a Christian because someone tells them they will go to hell if they don’t convert! We think for ourselves over here. Just let your light shine - that is all that is needed!

I just wanted to answer your remark on one of the threads (I’m now confused which!) about Father-Mother God. In Genesis 1, (which was written at a different time and by a different author than the Adam and Eve allegory), we are told that :
[COLOR="Purple"]
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (Gen 1:27)

Think of a mirror. If the reflection is male and female, then the original must also be male and female.

Also, in the Hebrew Scriptures especially, there are many allusions to God as feminine, like Deut 32:11, Isa 49: 15, 16, Isa 40:11

One of the many Hebrew names for God is El-Shaddai, (used for example in Ps 91) which means God Almighty. El points to the power of God Himself. Shaddai seems to be derived from another word meaning breast, which implies that Shaddai signifies one who nourishes, supplies, and satisfies. It is God as El who helps, but it is God as Shaddai who abundantly blesses with all manner of blessings.

Here are two articles, that I hope you will read, which show how understanding that God does not send suffering, punishment, illness or death brings the power and presence of the Christ into realization.

[url]My journey from terminal to joyful and healthy[/url]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"]
One day, I finally came to an incredible place of peace. Although I still wasn’t sure that I knew who God was, I could feel this presence with me, and I somehow knew that my boys were going to be fine, whatever happened to me….

As I lay there, I thought about God. Was He kind and loving? Did He have something to do with this peace that I’d found about leaving my boys? Then the most revolutionary (and funny) thought came. All those years in Sunday School had taught me my Bible pretty well. I remembered that in the Old Testament there was all this talk about smiting—the Israelites smiting so and so, and being smitten by so and so. But now, I knew, God wasn’t “up there” with a big “smite button,” and He would never say that today was my day to be the one who gets the smiting! It sounded so crazy that I laughed out loud. At that moment I knew that there was an answer for me—and that it would be a spiritual answer.

This second article showed how a change of conception of God brought the healing of a tumour on a dog and then bringing a still born puppy to life.

[url]Now my heart sings[/url]

Love and peace,

Judy

I thank all of you for your many thoughts and comments concerning my attempts to tidy up the forums a little 🙂

However, faith healing is not Reiki nor is it energy healing, so to place long posts promoting Christian science and the bible on a thread which has nothing at all to do with it, places the post under the heading of preaching. Which is why Judy's post, which was placed after Sacral had split his topic and put the religious side in here, was moved.

I am not just singling out Judy here; it is not acceptable to use the therapy forums as a place to promote religion.

So if you want to discuss faith healing, prayer, Buddhist philosophy etc. then the religious forums are the correct place to discuss them, not the therapy forums.

I hope this clarifies the situation for you 🙂

As far as I am aware the Christian Science movement offers Healing to all respected of race or creed. If this is the case then is what they are offering Energy Healing? Surely you cannot have Faith Healing by Christians unless you believe in God. :confused: I am starting a thread on Faith Healing v Energy Healing.

Hi Maure,

I wrote to you yesterday morning, but the post mysteriously disappeared.

Hi Judy

Just popping into this thread briefly to let you know we have done a thorough search for the post, including the HP 'bins' ;), and unfortunately can find no trace. Glitches can sometimes happen like this but it's extremely rare, though often frustrating.

Best wishes
Moonfairy
HPmods

Thanks Moonfairy - golly, I didn't expect anyone to bother!

Thankfully, I had been having problems with Microsoft Word and each time I have written something in a document, Word was crashing, so I'd been saving as I went along. (I always find it's easier to write in Word so I can spell-check etc before I post.) It was the post to Maure and I was able to re-post it yesterday, so all is well.

I appreciate your attempts very much - sorry, should have saved you the time!

Love and peace,

Judy

If a man really could change water to wine, no one would have killed him on a cross

If a man really could change water to wine, no one would have killed him on a cross

Why do you think that, Meganhunter?

It is possible that different slants can be put on some Biblical events.
I was told that Herod, being unsuccessful in getting Jesus, (who claimed to be the son of God), to bow down to him, manipulated the persecution of Jesus.
This was done to try to force God to plead for Jesus's life and thus make Herod equal to God.....I don't think that Herod was true Jewish, and felt inferior.
Can't remember all the details...........

Sounds far fetched, but the political shenanigans of 2000 years ago, would be no different from the shenanigans that go on today......

Why do you think that, Meganhunter?

Hi
😉 i think thats true cos im Irish and we would worship someone who could make more wine out of all the water here!

Is the Bible true?
The Old Testament isn't a historical record of events as archaeological evidence and logic proves. The New Testament was compiled by the Literalist Christians living in Rome from what were largely Gnostic texts. Unfortunately because of historic events, the Roman Christians took the story literally. Like the Old Testament, it later became a political tool and so the fictional story became the 'Gospel' truth.

How do I know?
By careful study of the Bible history, the first part was aired on BBC 2 two weeks ago. Israel Finkelstein explained some of his department's findings at the University of Tel Aviv, published in his book The Bible Unearthed. Basically, it shows that the Exodus didn't happen, the original Jews had always been Canaanites; there was no great Solomon's Kingdom or any mass of people living in the Sinai desert at any of the times the Bible alleged they were there. That's just my starting point.

I also mentioned logic. How could Moses have smuggled 2,000,000 people - half the population of Egypt - out from a heavily guarded country along a heavily guarded route? How could they have survived forty years hidden in a desert and emerged wealthy, fit and well trained enough to equip Joshua with a mighty army, yet left not one artefact or town behind to show they were there?

The New Testament describes the stories of the Jewish Mystery Godman written by descendants of the outer initiates of the religion, who had only been taught the religion's allegorical stories and consequently believed them as the truth. After the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE many uneducated Jews were taken to Rome as slaves to work.

The Jewish Mystery religion was developed by Philo and other Hellenic Jews from Plato and Pythagoras's work and the Mystery of Dionysus, in Alexandria around from around 10 BCE. Eventually the Jewish Mysteries became very popular with the people of Jerusalem. By a pure quirk of fate, in 70 CE it all went wrong. A serious rebellion erupted in Jerusalem. Just as we are seeing today, when unrest threatens and the people attempt to oppose an occupying power, it leads to mass flight of people with skills, education and finance and leaves a gap for extremists to move in. Mass rebellion against the state of Rome led to many Jews being enslaved and deported.

Once settled in Rome, the followers of the Jewish Mysteries had no teachers or spiritual guidance and soon the allegorical stories of Jesus become believed to be the truth. Romans who recognised that Jesus and his story was identical to those of other Mystery Godmen tried to explain the truth, but these uneducated Jews, from a culture that had always had God's special protection became more entrenched in their views. They had lost everything but their own version of the truth, so they were not going to sacrifice their Son of God as the Romans once had done … Thanks to the obstinacy of a minority sect in Rome and the astuteness of future emperors, the myth eventually became the truth.

What do I believe is God?
Everything.

If you want to know where the original Jewish religion came from and why it was encoded to hide it from the Babylonians at the time it was written down and what became of the truth preserved within the Jewish Mysteries, more about a good book that details it all can be viewed here www.thegreatestlieevertold.co.uk

I tried to describe how the Bible is true to me (because I've proved it) in this post;

I have simply had so many many experiences of healing and protection from what I understand in the Bible, like when our aircraft was untouched, while all others just minutes in front of us, in the same airspace and at the same altitude, suffered such severe turbulence that their pilots could not read their instrument panel. Once again, the Captain described the experience we'd just had as a "miracle" (Personally, I would never use that word =apart from its original meaning of something wonderful - as God's laws of harmony are natural and normal) I describe what happened in the 91st Psalm thread:

[url]The heart of the Bible[/url]

After discussing some of the skepticism about the Bible, the author shares an experience where picking up a Bible literally saved a young man's life. She writes:

"Its true value to mankind is not found in archaeology, in theological debate or in rigid doctrine. It is found, simply, in salvation. Spiritual transformation and salvation that happens one life at a time."

Love and peace,

Judy

Hi Principled
I will be honest, I haven't read all the posts in this thread but one can imagine the content...
Just read your post and love it. When the heart is full of love, devotion and surrender, any book can transform and Bible certainly can! No wonder you have these lovely experiences through Bible. Humble heart Versus a head full of analysis and scrutiny are two different worlds.
Scepticism is easier to entertain. To surrender and remain open come to lucky few.

Bible in my experience(not opinion) is a profound book and incessantly points at the Truth. It is easy to miss that as mind is constantly distracted by concepts, ideas, paradoxes. Once one goes beyond books one comes to see that all scriptures were saying just the same one thing(and very little else)

Devotion shines through in almost all your posts. Thats all one needs. Then who cares whether it is Bible or Qoran or some other book.
love
Ruby

Aw, bless you Ruby! I hope I've said it elsewhere, but your posts have always so resonated with me too. 😉

Your words above remind of these, by Mary Baker Eddy:

[COLOR="Blue"]Whatever inspires with wisdom, Truth, or Love--be it song, sermon, or Science--blesses the human family with crumbs of comfort from Christ's table, feeding the hungry and giving living waters to the thirsty. (Science and Health 234)

I see sacred scriptures (as it sounds like you do too) as signposts to Truth. Sadly, some groups see them as the final destination.

Love and peace,

Judy

Hello Ruby,

I just love what you've written here and have to say, I totally agree with you! And Judy (Principled), too, has shared some great food for thought.

I've had a look at "The Greatest Lie Ever Told", to which Catrin provided the link. It appears to be entirely the work of a single person, one W H Uffington, for whom the site gives no background information or academic credentials whatsoever. Unlike virtually all people who've made some impact in the world of thought - let alone in trustworthy scholarship - he doesn't even come up in Wikipedia, nor anywhere else in a Google search (except this website and online booksellers). Nowhere are we told, independently, who he is and where he gets any credible evidence to support his theories about the Bible and the origins of Judaism and Christianity.

However well-intentioned he may be, the only logical conclusion I can draw about Mr Uffington is that he is some sort of obscure crank with a personal agenda and a taste for polemic. There is simply no way I can take any of his claims seriously.

There's a whole lot I'd love to say too about what the Bible means to me, but I might save that for another post! 😉

All love, Charis

Israel Finkelstein, whose name also came up earlier, is a known scholar who challenges the idea that the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah were anything like as magnificent as the Old Testament makes out. For all I know, he may be right. There's plenty in the Bible, especially in the older texts, that surely has many layers of legend wrapped around whatever might have occurred historically. There are other scholars who argue differently; what each one sees, and what they make of it, always depends a lot on what they're looking for (sometimes subconsciously) in the first place.

But whatever archaeology reveals (or not), does any of this make the Bible "untrue"?

I would have to agree with what Judy said in an earlier post in this thread:

To me, the Bible is on three levels, the historical, the moral and the spiritual. A vicar once said to me that the Bible is about 80% about man and about 20% about God. To me, it’s what we learn about God’s true nature that is important.

It's pretty obvious that not all the accounts in the Bible would have happened exactly as they are described. Some are indeed myth - the story of Adam and Eve, for instance - although nearly always included to make some moral point. But for me too, the real "truth" is not in proving how many of these events literally happened, but in discovering just what they teach us about God.

Ever since I started studying the Bible with a view to digging into its spiritual and inspired (rather than literal) meaning, I've found increasing evidence in my own life that the Bible is true in this deeper sense. Many of those who wrote these texts, or those who later edited them and compiled them, didn't have a completely clear view of God; there are lots of tribal beliefs and anthropomorphic concepts mixed in with their inspiration. Many of the old stories have surely been embellished over time. But this same message keeps on shining through even the mistier parts: the whole universe is created and governed harmoniously by one God, one perfect divine power, who (as Christ Jesus proved most fully) is Love itself.

So to me, the main question I need to ask about the Bible is not, "Did this all happen exactly as stated?", but "What does this teach me about the nature of God, and of myself as God's image and likeness [see Gen. 1:27]?" And when learning that deeper kind of truth makes a huge and tangible difference in my life - which I know it has for me - it becomes that much easier to trust that the Bible as a whole isn't far-fetched (let alone false) after all.

All love, Charis

Hi Charis
It is good to say your truth even if others disagree. Hold on to your faith, its better than knowing all the scriptures back to front. Because the fire of faith and love burns away all dross. Nothing wrong with being a believer. Devotion and love are the ultimate alchemy.
Blessings
Ruby

Thank you, Ruby! 🙂

I should add that I don't really consider myself a "believer"; I'm a thinker. I can't accept something as true just because someone else tells me to believe it, or because some unknown person thousands of years ago wrote it down and claimed that God said it (so there). It's true for me if it has come to make sense in my own life and experience, as so much in the Bible has.

The denomination I belong to, Christian Science, has as its first tenet:
"As adherents of Truth, we take the inspired Word of the Bible as our sufficient guide to eternal Life."

As I've heard pointed out, it's "the inspired Word", not "the literal words"! 😀

If we were to take everything in the Bible as literally true and historically factual, what would we have? An apparent mass of contradictions, including a God who is sometimes portrayed as good, just, and everlastingly loving and merciful - and elsewhere as wrathful, vengeful, erratic, and sometimes supporting (or at least permitting) war, genocide, misogyny, and other examples of the worst human behaviour... 😮 That might have worked in a tribal society 6000 years ago, but I don't know many people who could believe in a God like that now.

The founder of the Christian Science Church, Mary Baker Eddy (who wrote the tenet I quoted above), put a huge emphasis on looking beneath such cultural baggage and old theology to find the spiritual meaning of the Bible. She saw her seminal work as a textbook for understanding the Bible in this way - a "Key to the Scriptures" - and that is what's been pivotal for me in deciding that the Bible really is worth digging into. (I was previously an agnostic from a completely skeptical family!)

Here's an example of how she explains a problematic concept in the Bible:
[COLOR="Blue"]"The manifestations of evil, which counterfeit divine justice, are called in the Scriptures, 'The anger of the Lord.' In reality, they show the self-destruction of error or matter and point to matter's opposite, the strength and permanency of Spirit. Christian Science brings to light Truth and its supremacy, universal harmony, the entireness of God, good, and the nothingness of evil." (Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, p. 293)

I see that as exactly like what you said, Ruby - "the fire of faith and love burns away all dross." :nature-smiley-008:

All love, Charis

… I've had a look at "The Greatest Lie Ever Told", to which Catrin provided the link. It appears to be entirely the work of a single person, one W H Uffington, for whom the site gives no background information or academic credentials whatsoever.

I gave the link to his book, so that you could view the contents and download the first chapter if you wished. In that you will start to see the level of scholarship. I should have linked to the publisher too as I think it mentions more about him there.

Unlike virtually all people who've made some impact in the world of thought - let alone in trustworthy scholarship - he doesn't even come up in Wikipedia, nor anywhere else in a Google search (except this website and online booksellers). Nowhere are we told, independently, who he is and where he gets any credible evidence to support his theories about the Bible and the origins of Judaism and Christianity.

The reason for that is his writing under a pseudonym. His ten years of research have touched a few raw nerves so he'd rather live a little longer if he can. I think his family were German-born Jews. You can find articles he has published try "Uffington Pope Joan" in Google to find one I particularly like. You can see the sources he uses there. (There are around three hundred in the book.)

However well-intentioned he may be, the only logical conclusion I can draw about Mr Uffington is that he is some sort of obscure crank with a personal agenda and a taste for polemic. There is simply no way I can take any of his claims seriously.

What a strange conclusion when you haven't read his argument. He starts off echoing Finkelstein, is he wrong too? If so, what evidence have you got?

There's a whole lot I'd love to say too about what the Bible means to me, but I might save that for another post! 😉
All love, Charis

I found I like it better, now I understand it better too. Before that the OT was a horror story and I couldn't get along with the megalomaniac God, now I know what it is about he seems okay. The NT I could live with, it has messages in the parables that I approve of and understand and no horrendous God. The ten year pregnancy didn't bother me as I thought in 2000 years you're bound to get the odd mistranslation.

I found I like it better, now I understand it better too. Before that the OT was a horror story and I couldn't get along with the megalomaniac God, now I know what it is about he seems okay. The NT I could live with, it has messages in the parables that I approve of and understand and no horrendous God. The ten year pregnancy didn't bother me as I thought in 2000 years you're bound to get the odd mistranslation.

Can't remember there being a ten-year pregnancy anywhere in the Bible, but it wouldn't be the strangest incident recounted there! :p

I'd definitely recommend starting with the NT too, especially for anyone unfamiliar with the Bible. Give the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew ch. 5-7) a good reading-through if you want the best possible summary.

The OT is much harder to take in many places, given that the older parts in particular come from a much more tribal, parochial, even brutal era. I find it helpful to remember that the Bible as a whole is a record, compiled and edited by many different people over thousands of years, of a progressively deepening understanding of the Divine. The key to the whole, ultimately, is the first chapter of Genesis: one all-good creator, one all-good creation. That's the reality of God and His/Her self-expression (including us). The rest of the Bible traces a gradual (sometimes very gradual) waking up to this oneness of all humanity with the Divine. It's sometimes hard to find under the less inspired stuff, but it's there.

If you're interested in keeping on reading the Bible, just keep looking out for those parts that flash out at you with a "Hey, yeah, that makes sense!" You'll probably find more and more as you go. 🙂

All love, Charis

Can't remember there being a ten-year pregnancy anywhere in the Bible, but it wouldn't be the strangest incident recounted there! :p

Luke mentions the conception taking place in the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC and has the birth firmly fixed by the census of Quirinius in AD 6 - hence the ten year pregnancy. Mind you Matthew has the birth in Herod the Great's time too, in 4 BC. Hence my growing up thinking that the translators had got confused.

It wasn't until 1999 when I read The Jesus Mysteries by Freke and Gandy that the mystery or even Mystery, was revealed and I understood that the mistake wasn't in the writing of the stories, it was in our understanding of them. Now it all makes sense.

… If you're interested in keeping on reading the Bible, just keep looking out for those parts that flash out at you with a "Hey, yeah, that makes sense!" You'll probably find more and more as you go. 🙂
All love, Charis

I read every single word from start to finish over the last forty years. It was the fact that the OT didn't make any sense at all and that what it contained was basically horrendous and barbaric acts commended or commanded by a vicious god that left me totally confused. The NT on the other hand was full of stories that encouraged and inspired.

It is only since reading The Jesus Mysteries that I started to take a critical look at Bible history and the mists gradually cleared from my eyes. That's why I enjoyed Uffington's book so much. It explains everything I had discovered and has even more extensive references, but it adds so much more.

It looks at why the OT was written the way it was and reveals what it actually encodes. It takes an engineer's and mathematician's view of the Sphinx and pyramids of Giza and gives some fascinating insights into Celtic Christianity that no-one else has ever mentioned.

I believe Uffington is researching the Celtic Christian - Druid link currently, I just hope he doesn't take another ten years to get his findings into print. I want to read them now!

Hi Catrin,

I’m not surprised you were disturbed by parts of the OT! I find it helpful to remember that the Bible is a record of how thought has progressed, from primitive ideas of the Deity being synonymous with nature. For example, when you had natural calamities, it was the wrath of God (the Deity of course, having been given anthropomorphic human emotions). Many of the early stories were passed down through oral tradition and when written down, perhaps some of those early scribes simply wrote down how things appeared to them.

Starting in prehistory, as I’m sure you know, there has been shocking treatment by humans to other humans (and animals) – take for instance human sacrifice, it existed long before the evidence we have today of its practice in many cultures, including the Aztecs, Minoans and Celts.

In this passage in Science and Health, Mary Baker Eddy explains how God who is Love was almost lost to mythology:

In 2004 I wrote about a book that I’ve found is a real eye-opener in how to interpret the Bible (if you’re interested, I know where to get it)

From the foreword:

The Search for God by Marchette Chute ISBN: 0-933062-04-4

There are two ways in which it is usual to interpret the Bible: the way of the theologian and the way of the scholar. Neither is wholly satisfactory. The theologian, whether Jewish or Christian, is handicapped by the fact that he must read his Scriptures by the light of a pre-conceived theory, so that anything in the text which is alien to his particular doctrine must either be omitted or forcibly re-interpreted. The scholar, on the other hand, is handicapped by the fact that he must read the Bible by no light at all. He has no exact selective principle to guide him through the mass of confused and frequently contradictory material that the book contains. He must select and reject according to the fragmentary historical evidence that is available to him, and the turn of an archaeologist’s spade can at any time overturn the whole of his carefully constructed theory. Moreover, historical evidence, even at its most trustworthy, does not offer an adequate basis for an interpretation of the Bible. The history of Israel is primarily the history not of events, but of ideas. (My emphasis)

The Bible at its highest is a book of the spirit, unfitted to be interpreted solely from the historical point of view. It is also a free book, and equally unfitted to be used as a series of texts in support of a theological proposition. It is the attempt of this interpretation to do neither, but to let the Bible illuminate itself.

Now to The Jesus Mysteries. I actually met Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy when I went to a talk about their book. I’m glad it’s made you appreciate the Bible – that’s great! But to me, it tries to downgrade Jesus into a comglomate of various myths, rather than a real, historical man.

The thing is, why did a myth change the world as it did? Why were the followers of a myth willing to be martyred for their beliefs? To me, that wouldn’t make sense. Something happened back then. We know Christians existed, we know they were persecuted – there are records going back to the fire in Rome in AD64 and blamed on Christians by Nero and this website on the history of Rome has some documents:

I know Wiki isn’t always 100% reliable, but it does try to be balanced. These two pages have a look at some of the early evidence for Jesus.

I had a look at what Wiki had to say about the book and was surprised to find that even Bart Ehrman, an agnostic and author of Misquoting Jesus was not complimentary. Have a look at the Reception section of

I tried hard not to read any Christian comments about the book, (in case they were biased) but I really encourage you to read the review (and investigation into the sources - particularly what they've written about Mithras) of the book here: Books for and against the Existence of Jesus:

The aim of Bede's Library is show how a person from a scientific background came to Christianity and has had his faith strengthened rather than weakened by argument and reason. It is intended for anyone who is interested in these subjects and wants to see how having faith does not mean sacrificing intellectual integrity.

More in my next>>>

Cont…

But to me Catrin, the greatest evidence that Jesus existed and did what he did lies in healing. When John sent his disciples to ask if Jesus was the Messiah, he didn’t give him some philosophical answer, but pointed at his healings as proof. (see Matt 11)

People disbelieve in the resurrection, but to me, this was the whole point of Jesus' life and mission. Without the proof that what he said was true, his whole message would have just died away (well, it almost did anyway!) If we look at the mentions of Jesus’ raising of the dead – it seems he started simply and progressed. he began with raising Jairus’ daughter (who had only just died) then there was the son of the widow woman at Nain (in Judaism, a body has to be buried within 24 hours); then there was Lazarus who had been in his tomb for 3 days and as his sister said, would have been stinking. Jesus highest demonstration was raising himself. To me, It’s just the next logical step after raising someone else.

Not convinced? Well, the Old Testament prophets healed and raised the dead (especially Elijah and Elisha) and in the Acts of the Apostles, the young man who fell asleep while Paul was preaching and fell down and was killed was raised, as was Dorcas, by Peter.

Still not convinced? Irenaeus, the leader of an important Christian group in provincial Gaul in the second century; wrote that many newcomers came to Christian meeting places hoping for miracles, and some found them: “We heal the sick by laying hands on them, and drive out demons,” …”We even raise the dead, many of whom are still alive among us and completely healthy.”

Though Christian healing largely died out after the Church of Rome was established by Constantine in the AD 300’s, all through history there have been individuals who have walked in the light and who have healed (Venetian knows of healings done by those of other religions too – and why not, as the spiritual laws of healing are universal.) However, until Mary Baker Eddy rediscovered in 1866 how Jesus and his disciples healed, it was no longer a normal part of Christian worship and life, though thankfully now, most churches are taking steps to include it.

Still sceptical? Eddy healed hundreds of every conceivable disease and deformity, including those considered terminal and incurable. There are at least 4 accounts of when she raised the dead and her book has helped tens of thousands to demonstrate these universal laws for themselves.

I can’t find his actual words, but Mark Twain (who ran cold and hot on the subject) said of Christian Science healing words to the effect that if healing had been true nineteen hundred years ago, why should one suppose that it wasn’t true today? What I’m saying here is the reverse – if this sort of healing is going on today (and it is) why should we suppose it didn’t happen in Jesus’ day? It is only our limited, materialistic thinking that shuts out admitting the possibility that the great works that are described in the Bible, including the resurrection took place.

More in the next >>>

And finally ...

To me, one of the clearest explanations of Jesus' mission was made by N. Talbot in his article, Christ Jesus and True Sonship, which is in a collection of articles on Christian Science titled, Anthology of Classic Articles. He writes in part:

...But to define Jesus as God would disguise the purpose of Jesus' presence on earth.

Jesus' life was not an illustration of how God could be manlike. Instead, his life afforded incontestable proof that man's true identity is Godlike. Jesus illustrated how each individual can realize himself to be the likeness of God. To define Jesus as God would misrepresent the nature of God, who is All, infinite Spirit.

On the other hand, to define Jesus' true nature as a mortal is to misrepresent his real identity. Jesus came not to show us that God can be a man but to disprove the belief that God's man is a mortal...

Love and peace,

Judy

Cont…

But to me Catrin, the greatest evidence that Jesus existed and did what he did lies in healing. When John sent his disciples to ask if Jesus was the Messiah, he didn’t give him some philosophical answer, but pointed at his healings as proof. (see Matt 11)

People disbelieve in the resurrection, but to me, this was the whole point of Jesus' life and mission. Without the proof that what he said was true, his whole me

Not convinced? Well, the Old Testament prophets healed and raised the dead (especially Elijah and Elisha) and in the Acts of the Apostles, the young man who fell asleep while Paul was preaching and fell down and was killed was raised, as was Dorcas, by Peter.

Still not convinced? Irenaeus, the leader of an important Christian group in provincial Gaul in the second century; wrote that many newcomers came to Christian meeting places hoping for miracles, and some found them: “We heal the sick by laying hands on them, and drive out demons,” …”We even raise the dead, many of whom are still alive among us and completely healthy.”

Though Christian healing largely died out after the Church of Rome was established by Constantine in the AD 300’s, all through history there have been individuals who have walked in the light and who have healed (Venetian knows of healings done by those of other religions too – and why not, as the spiritual laws of healing are universal.) However, until Mary Baker Eddy rediscovered in 1866 how Jesus and his disciples healed, it was no longer a normal part of Christian worship and life, though thankfully now, most churches are taking steps to include it.

Still sceptical? Eddy healed hundreds of every conceivable disease and deformity, including those considered terminal and incurable. There are at least 4 accounts of when she raised the dead and her book has helped tens of thousands to demonstrate universal laws for themselves.

I can’t find his actual words, but Mark Twain (who ran cold and hot on the subject) said of Christian Science healing words to the effect that if healing had been true nineteen hundred years ago, why should one suppose that it wasn’t true today?

Hi Judy
Largely agree with what you say. The space you are speaking from is that of love. But it is also of attachment. It will deepen to become dispassionate with time

I recall having the same passion to have others feel, understand and see what I was expereincing myself. The alchemy has happened to you. That is fortunate. It does not necessarily happen to all and certainly not through the same book or master or path.
A master/path/book is akin to a gateway, You pass through the gate, that is all. One is changed for ever. A master is looking to kill you as you know yourself.
When that eventually happens - all books, masters, paths etc become immensely significant and yet utterly insignigicant (even useless) all at once. Paradox!
When one has passed through the door.The purpose of the gate is over and done with.

One loses all passion, agendas, mission or purpose to propagate what has woked for them. It becomes an utterly playful, purposeless, spontaneous unfolding. One become available but there is no urge to change or convince anyone. Jesus was just available. His life was a spontaneous movement of life. He was not looking to write Bible and start a new religion. He did not need to. His being was enough. (So is everyone else's but most have convinced themselves that they need a thousand efforts before they enter the Truth)

The desciples want to justify the master, because of their own reasons. The master needs none of that. He is neither pleased or displeased.

The whole point of Jesus or any master is to remind you of Kingdom of God, which lies within. Other than that he is simply not interested. For a master the show has ended. He hangs in there for you out of compassion and love.
Other than that one connection all books are dead and so is the master. They only come alive with a childlike trust.

I am not criticising any thoughts or research on this thread purely my mindless ramblings...

Hi Ruby, you know very well that yours are not mindless ramblings.

I found this quite chilling though and no, I do not know this at all. Could you explain please?

A master is looking to kill you as you know yourself.

Thanks

Judy

Hi Judy
The 'you' as you perceive as a separation from the whole, the 'I' that is an individual I. The pseudo ego identity, the mind. Chilling! haha! A master kills, not you but false identification and fear of death. The 'killing' is ultimate compassion.
Thats why most people flee as the journey gets deep. A Master is a dangerous friend, who takes away everything false that clings to you until nothing false remains for you to identify with, only your true nature, ie supreme consciousness/Absolute.

When the mind dies and no-mind remains, that is the ultimate death. But it is not dying at all, it is actually the death of all death.

Thats all. He doesn't disclose what his true purpose is, otherwise no one will stay around! So he hides this plan behind miracles, happiness, joy, peace etc etc. But that is just to get your attention, to mellow your heart, to make you fall in love with him. and when that happens, the game is on! The master can get on with what he is really here to do. To dehypnotise you from your human-ness and awaken you to your divine self.
x

Ruby
Nicely put as always, knowledge, gets in the way along with everything else! the greater the understanding the more you realize that you dont need it.
Never been much for the bible but then for me it has always been that my "teaching" comes from elsewhare.