Christian Origins?

[Bronco73idi]

Thanks for your reply, Bronco.
Yes, I think Eusebius was mentioned in a link you shared. He - the father of church history - said that lying for the church was good.

Interesting about Celsus being mentioned in the journal of discourses. Do you know the context?

Personally, I don't think polygamy is good or godly, & I believe Jesus (Yeshua) was a man but many ideas of him have been added, like legends. But this "legend" is like the archetype of all legends - a culmination of the highest ideals we humans can imagine, & may attempt to follow.

Celsus was talked about when Jedediah M. Grant gave a discourse on “Uniformity”

https://jod.mrm.org/1/341

When you said “ Jesus (Yeshua) was a man” I took that as, just a prophet and not the son of God. I reread and said “he could have meant, a real person and the son of God”

I’m curious, do you believe that Jesus was the son of God or a prophet?

[Thinker]

Celsus was talked about when Jedediah M. Grant gave a discourse on “Uniformity”

https://jod.mrm.org/1/341

When you said “ Jesus (Yeshua) was a man” I took that as, just a prophet and not the son of God. I reread and said “he could have meant, a real person and the son of God”

I’m curious, do you believe that Jesus was the son of God or a prophet?

Just read that link, thanks. Some of it:

1) “When Moses descended from the mountain, was everything calm and peaceable, and uniform? No! The Israelites had made a golden calf, and were dancing round the god they had made out of their earrings and jewelry they had pilfered from the Egyptians—they had stolen by revelation, by divine direction; they were having a grand dance around this molten calf, when Moses in his anger broke the tables. Can you find any uniformity, any beauty, any order reigning in the house of Israel?…

2) …Celsus was a heathen philosopher; and what does he say upon the subject of Christ and his Apostles, and their belief? He says, “The grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was, because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him.”..
A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were “Mormons.”

3) …Apostles, after awhile you see them thrust into cauldrons of oil, crucified with their heads downwards, and persecuted in various ways until they became extinct…

4) “Mormonism” changeth not. It is the same now as in the days of Joseph… we as a people may be fluctuating, but our religion changeth not…

5) Do we look for a privilege to fold our hands and sing lullaby baby, etc.? No; we expect the rage of all hell to be aimed at us to overthrow us… The earth will be rent with earthquakes, and a thousand thunders will utter their voices, and make the ears of mortals tingle, and their hearts to fail within them; and the voice of God will be heard, that will pierce the wicked to the very core…”

I love how with the topic, Uniformity, he reiterates that life is supposed to be tough - not exactly all-agreeing/uniform. “There must needs be opposition in all things.”

1) Sounds familiar.

2) It’s possible, but my impression is unlikely Jesus was killed for polygamy. Maybe this was confirmation bias - wanting so much for polygamy to be deemed acceptable. Although I don’t see it as moral at least in this society, I acknowledge that it seemed to work well for many in Africa… but who knows, there haven’t been polls conducted there.

3) Yeah, Christ & his apostles were wiped out - “extinct.” And though I agree that Mormonism is probably the best in many ways (especially for those operating on Faith stage 3 - most religious people), it is still based on the corrupt version of those who took over after the extinction.

4) Just “policies change.”

5) Again, right on! Life is tough! God is actually in significant ways the process of making good out of bad conditions. In the thick of it, it really sucks. But when you look at it from a more peaceful & bigger perspective, this life is like spiritual boot camp! Tough times are what will help us most… but ideally we get them “here a little there a little.”

To answer your question, I believe Yeshua/Jesus was a person, but again, like most icons, was not all that is dogmatically ascribed to him. Christ is not his last name but what he became & urges us all to become.

What do you think?

[Bronco73idi]

Celsus was talked about when Jedediah M. Grant gave a discourse on “Uniformity”

https://jod.mrm.org/1/341

When you said “ Jesus (Yeshua) was a man” I took that as, just a prophet and not the son of God. I reread and said “he could have meant, a real person and the son of God”

I’m curious, do you believe that Jesus was the son of God or a prophet?

Just read that link, thanks. Some of it:

1) “When Moses descended from the mountain, was everything calm and peaceable, and uniform? No! The Israelites had made a golden calf, and were dancing round the god they had made out of their earrings and jewelry they had pilfered from the Egyptians—they had stolen by revelation, by divine direction; they were having a grand dance around this molten calf, when Moses in his anger broke the tables. Can you find any uniformity, any beauty, any order reigning in the house of Israel?…

2) …Celsus was a heathen philosopher; and what does he say upon the subject of Christ and his Apostles, and their belief? He says, “The grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was, because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him.”..
A belief in the doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were “Mormons.”

3) …Apostles, after awhile you see them thrust into cauldrons of oil, crucified with their heads downwards, and persecuted in various ways until they became extinct…

4) “Mormonism” changeth not. It is the same now as in the days of Joseph… we as a people may be fluctuating, but our religion changeth not…

5) Do we look for a privilege to fold our hands and sing lullaby baby, etc.? No; we expect the rage of all hell to be aimed at us to overthrow us… The earth will be rent with earthquakes, and a thousand thunders will utter their voices, and make the ears of mortals tingle, and their hearts to fail within them; and the voice of God will be heard, that will pierce the wicked to the very core…”

I love how with the topic, Uniformity, he reiterates that life is supposed to be tough - not exactly all-agreeing/uniform. “There must needs be opposition in all things.”

1) Sounds familiar.

2) It’s possible, but my impression is unlikely Jesus was killed for polygamy. Maybe this was confirmation bias - wanting so much for polygamy to be deemed acceptable. Although I don’t see it as moral at least in this society, I acknowledge that it seemed to work well for many in Africa… but who knows, there haven’t been polls conducted there.

3) Yeah, Christ & his apostles were wiped out - “extinct.” And though I agree that Mormonism is probably the best in many ways (especially for those operating on Faith stage 3 - most religious people), it is still based on the corrupt version of those who took over after the extinction.

4) Just “policies change.”

5) Again, right on! Life is tough! God is actually in significant ways the process of making good out of bad conditions. In the thick of it, it really sucks. But when you look at it from a more peaceful & bigger perspective, this life is like spiritual boot camp! Tough times are what will help us most… but ideally we get them “here a little there a little.”

To answer your question, I believe Yeshua/Jesus was a person, but again, like most icons, was not all that is dogmatically ascribed to him. Christ is not his last name but what he became & urges us all to become.

What do you think?

I really do appreciate that you read the link, most people read to reply and not to understand. For simplicity I’m going to refer Yeshua name as Jesus so anyone else reading will understand easier.

The first time I read the quote about Celsus I understood it like you did. When I reread it I realized he was saying, the Greek philosophers and Celsus persecuted (mocked) Jesus. That group did not crucify Jesus.

“The grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was, because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him.”..

Now going on with the idea that Jesus was just a person and not the literal son of god. I think anyone wanting to truly know or understand the New Testament needs to ask this question. Is Jesus the only begotten, did he die for my sins? I asked this question to myself in 07-08 when I was going through my divorce that was a temple marriage.

I came out with a testimony that he is my Heavenly Father’s only begotten and my lord and savior. With that answer I then knew this world is, as you said, truly a spiritual boot camp. Everything is about his strange work, making men make a choice, good or evil. His plan allows both, for our true free agency.

Now going back to your scripture, Luke 17:20-21. His answer wasn’t about the second coming, the kingdom of heaven was there, he brought it, thus fulfilling Daniel

2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands,

They have ears but cannot hear and eyes but cannot see.

You can tie Luke 17:20 into John 4:24 when he told the woman to praise Heavenly Father with her spirit.

24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

He is saying, I brought the kingdom of god, it’s here, it’s in anyone who will accept it. You do not need a building to worship your Father in Heaven

Thus the fraud committed against the members of the church and Ronald E. Poleman in 1984 is a serious one.

[Thinker]

I really do appreciate that you read the link, most people read to reply and not to understand. For simplicity I’m going to refer Yeshua name as Jesus so anyone else reading will understand easier.

The first time I read the quote about Celsus I understood it like you did. When I reread it I realized he was saying, the Greek philosophers and Celsus persecuted (mocked) Jesus. That group did not crucify Jesus.

“The grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was, because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him.”..

Now going on with the idea that Jesus was just a person and not the literal son of god. I think anyone wanting to truly know or understand the New Testament needs to ask this question. Is Jesus the only begotten, did he die for my sins? I asked this question to myself in 07-08 when I was going through my divorce that was a temple marriage.

I came out with a testimony that he is my Heavenly Father’s only begotten and my lord and savior. With that answer I then knew this world is, as you said, truly a spiritual boot camp. Everything is about his strange work, making men make a choice, good or evil. His plan allows both, for our true free agency.

Now going back to your scripture, Luke 17:20-21. His answer wasn’t about the second coming, the kingdom of heaven was there, he brought it, thus fulfilling Daniel

2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands,

They have ears but cannot hear and eyes but cannot see.

You can tie Luke 17:20 into John 4:24 when he told the woman to praise Heavenly Father with her spirit.

24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

He is saying, I brought the kingdom of god, it’s here, it’s in anyone who will accept it. You do not need a building to worship your Father in Heaven

Thus the fraud committed against the members of the church and Ronald E. Poleman in 1984 is a serious one.

I agree that a building isn't needed to worship God. In fact, increasingly it seems to truly worship God is not some bowing down or praying as much as- seeking truth (God is a god of truth) & doing what is godly. It was kind of funny when an atheist was told how they lived as if God existed - like they strived to find truth, do good etc.

When I read scriptures now, I read it knowing that some words were played with - so I don't accept it all without question. When some scripture does resonate - or at least there doesn't seem to be any corruption with the general meaning - then I ask, "how can this help me live or love better?" You know, scriptures are supposed to be "likened" to us. What else would they be for - just fancy poetry? No, there are some "pearls of great price" but as someone said, "Sometimes to find a pearl in a dumpster, you have to get dirty." Not only do we have to wrestle with the corruption that is being passed off as good and unquestioned dogma, but we also have to wrestle with our own "dogma" - our own confirmation bias.

To be blunt with you, do you WANT Jesus to have been polygamist? Nevermind if it's true or not - is that something that you personally would feel better about and want?

[Bronco73idi]

I really do appreciate that you read the link, most people read to reply and not to understand. For simplicity I’m going to refer Yeshua name as Jesus so anyone else reading will understand easier.

The first time I read the quote about Celsus I understood it like you did. When I reread it I realized he was saying, the Greek philosophers and Celsus persecuted (mocked) Jesus. That group did not crucify Jesus.

“The grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was, because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him.”..

Now going on with the idea that Jesus was just a person and not the literal son of god. I think anyone wanting to truly know or understand the New Testament needs to ask this question. Is Jesus the only begotten, did he die for my sins? I asked this question to myself in 07-08 when I was going through my divorce that was a temple marriage.

I came out with a testimony that he is my Heavenly Father’s only begotten and my lord and savior. With that answer I then knew this world is, as you said, truly a spiritual boot camp. Everything is about his strange work, making men make a choice, good or evil. His plan allows both, for our true free agency.

Now going back to your scripture, Luke 17:20-21. His answer wasn’t about the second coming, the kingdom of heaven was there, he brought it, thus fulfilling Daniel

2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands,

They have ears but cannot hear and eyes but cannot see.

You can tie Luke 17:20 into John 4:24 when he told the woman to praise Heavenly Father with her spirit.

24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

He is saying, I brought the kingdom of god, it’s here, it’s in anyone who will accept it. You do not need a building to worship your Father in Heaven

Thus the fraud committed against the members of the church and Ronald E. Poleman in 1984 is a serious one.

I agree that a building isn't needed to worship God. In fact, increasingly it seems to truly worship God is not some bowing down or praying as much as- seeking truth (God is a god of truth) & doing what is godly. It was kind of funny when an atheist was told how they lived as if God existed - like they strived to find truth, do good etc.

When I read scriptures now, I read it knowing that some words were played with - so I don't accept it all without question. When some scripture does resonate - or at least there doesn't seem to be any corruption with the general meaning - then I ask, "how can this help me live or love better?" You know, scriptures are supposed to be "likened" to us. What else would they be for - just fancy poetry? No, there are some "pearls of great price" but as someone said, "Sometimes to find a pearl in a dumpster, you have to get dirty." Not only do we have to wrestle with the corruption that is being passed off as good and unquestioned dogma, but we also have to wrestle with our own "dogma" - our own confirmation bias.

To be blunt with you, do you WANT Jesus to have been polygamist? Nevermind if it's true or not - is that something that you personally would feel better about and want?

My Polygamy “opinion” was formed a few years ago, it’s from Isaiah 3:16 to all of chapter 4. To be fair, I wasn’t against it at that point either since I believe the lord reestablished his church and doctrine with Jospeh Smith.

You say “It was kind of funny when an atheist was told how they lived as if God existed - like they strived to find truth, do good etc.” and then ask me if I read with a perspective? Seems to contradict the statement of the atheist.

Did you know Stephen Hawkins died believing in a creator? In 2013 he started on his journey into holographic universe theory. Big Bang theory was a joke that the beast turned into a theory. In 1964 it was said that it was proven through noise of a radio telescope. Problem is right after it was mathematically “proven” the scientist brought up more possibilities of other noises they couldn’t measure, in the same paper. How could anyone with any intelligence believe that was proof of anything? Atheist are the ones that fulfilled Peter’s words about denying a deluge. The Greeks knew the earth went through many catastrophes, this was common knowledge 2000 years ago.

Atheists are as or more ignorant as the bulk of Christians, I haven’t meet an intelligent atheist ever.

The most intelligent man in the USA believes in a creator, he doesn’t believe in any one religion, probably because of all the lies.

[Love]

Book of Ether shows Christ was a spirit before his birth also, I see no issues with that.

That’s different. Earlier Christians believed Christ was always a spirit - never born as a person.

Wow on that one.

The resurrection was a cornerstone of early Christian belief. Why ? Because of the people in their midst who had both witnessed the crucifixion and the later resurrected Christ. This fact is what galvanized His despondent followers to go out and preach, let the consequences follow . . . which they did when many of them were martyred.

Hi Larsen! I’m glad you’re on this thread - I was hoping for your input.

Consider that nobody believed he had been resurrected - not even those closest to him.

• “Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my LORD, and I know not where they have laid him.” - John 20:13

It seems it had never crossed her mind that he could have been resurrected - instead her assumption was his body was taken by someone.

I realize, as explained before, there were various views. It seems to have had this order:
1) Christ is a Spirit (Gnosticism)
2) Christ is a spirit with an illusion of being a man (Docetism)
3) Christ is a man who became deity upon resurrection
4) Christ is a man who became deity upon baptism
5) Christ is a man who was born demi-god to a virgin (as many other myths)
6) Christ is born God
7) Christ was always God - even in pre-existence

This was outlined in this lecture, “Evolution of Jesus in Early Christianity,” by Prof. Bart D. Ehrman: https://youtu.be/3lBHmpaYUHI

The problem is that those writings - all of the bible - have been through a corrupt crusading/Inquisition theocracy who sought to warp religion to keep people from arguing and submissive to the theocracy - (Constantine & the Catholic/“Universal” church). Even if we were to trust them, the earliest writings were about 2 generations after Christ. It is suggested that the 4 gospels were written after - and patterned after - Paul’s epistles.

Constantine wanted to stop people from arguing and potentially warring over religious differences so he collected doctrine from various sects. The reason why only Matthew and Luke have the story of Christ’s birth and Mark and John don’t is in part, due to the religious differences in ancient Christianity.

Most dogmatically religious sources & websites reflect incorrect timelines. Why? Is it because they want to portray the same story as the Catholic church did? What do you think about the similarities between religious beliefs...



Unlike some, I would NOT conclude these are deceptive copies, but more like symbolic truths that are retold in different times and through different characters.

This video goes through all these people and explains the error.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KdNZtduV2AY

[Thinker]

Bronco,
Seems misunderstanding… I was pointing out the irony & humor of an Atheist being told they act as if God exists.

JPeterson debates SBlackmore (Atheist)
https://youtu.be/syP-OtdCIho

Maybe you saw it as confirmation bias in how God is defined. And that could be, but I can’t think of a better definition of God than striving for the highest GOoD.

[Thinker]

Love,
Thank you. We discussed this, & came to the conclusion that Krishna is the main one that seems to be so similar to Jesús’s story…
*divine conception
*Parents went to be taxed
*Resurrected etc

[Thinker]

How little I learned before, about so many other Christians! Been reading about Eastern Orthodox…



One of the main initial cause of the split in Catholic Church to create Eastern Orthodox is Catholicism adding words to the nicean creed…



Eastern Orthodox can’t fall asleep in church because they stand during the 2-3 hour service. They try to stick with original stuff (though it’s probable the original stuff isn’t so original- as explained before). More Bible books than Catholic (ie Maccabees). They consider church leaders as fallible. Women do all men do. Lots of (75% of service is) singing.

[Thinker]

More learned (or forgot & remembered)…



^Geneva Bible came before “our” KJV… & was concocted in Switzerland of all places…

”… During the reign of Queen Mary I of England (1553–58), a number of Protestant scholars fled from England to Geneva, Switzerland, which was then ruled as a republic in which John Calvin and, later, Theodore Beza, provided the primary spiritual and theological leadership. Among these scholars was William Whittingham, who supervised the translation now known as the Geneva Bible, in collaboration with Myles Coverdale, Christopher Goodman, Anthony Gilby, Thomas Sampson, and William Cole; several of this group later became prominent figures in the Vestments controversy. Whittingham was directly responsible for the New Testament, which was complete and published in 1557, while Gilby oversaw the Old Testament.

The first full edition of this Bible, with a further revised New Testament, appeared in 1560, but it was not printed in England until 1575 (New Testament[5]) and 1576 (complete Bible). Over 150 editions were issued; the last probably in 1644. The first Bible printed in Scotland was a Geneva Bible, which was first issued in 1579...” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Bible

[TheDuke]

Sure there might have been some theological reasons for east-west split but it was mostly power. Power as in kings, realms and money.

[Niemand]

Sure there might have been some theological reasons for east-west split but it was mostly power. Power as in kings, realms and money.

They are remarkably small. Look up the "filioque" business, that was one of the chief causes.

But I think it was mainly because they didn't want to be under Rome which had appointed itself head. One could read the Crusades as an attempt to re-establish western hegemony over the Eastern Churches as well as an anti-Muslim action.

[Thinker]

”The Language of Jesus

In the time of Christ, three languages figured prominently in the lives of the people of Judaea -- the common language of Aramaic, the language of Hebrew, used in the synagogues, and the Greek language -- which was commonly spoken and understood throughout the Roman Empire.

Some Aramaic words and expressions are preserved in the Gospels, such as Talitha cum, which means, "Little girl, get up!" (Mark 5:41). Also, Abba ("Father"; Mark 14:36; Gal.4:6; Rom.8:15); Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani ("My God, my God, why have you forsaken me"; Mark 15:34); Cephas ("Peter"; John 1:42); Mammon ("Wealth"; Matt.6:24, RSV); Raca ("Fool"; Matt.5:22, RSV). In fact, we can be specific and say that Jesus spoke a Galilean version of "western Aramaic," which differed from that which was spoken in Jerusalem (Matt.26:73; compare Acts 2:7).

Jesus could also read and speak Hebrew. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls has proved that Hebrew was used quite extensively in certain circles, especially for religious purposes. Jesus stood up and read the Hebrew Scriptures in the synagogue of Nazareth (Luke 4:16-20), showing He could also read and speak Hebrew. Some Hebrew words are also preserved in the gospels, such as, Ephphatha ("Be opened"; Mark 7:34); Amen ("Amen": Matt.5:26; Mark 14:30, RSV).

• Writes Robert H. Stein, in Jesus The Messiah: A Survey of the Life of Christ:
  
  "The third major language spoken in Palestine was Greek. The impact of Alexander the Great's conquests in the fourth century B.C. resulted in the Mediterranean's being a 'Greek sea' in Jesus' day. In the third century Jews in Egypt could no longer read the Scriptures in Hebrew, so they began to translated them into Greek. This famous translation became known as the Septuagint (LXX). Jesus, who was reared in 'Galilee, of the Gentiles,' lived only three or four miles from the thriving Greek city of Sepphoris. There may even have been times when he and his father worked in this rapidly grow- ing metropolitan city, which served as the capital city of Herod Antipas until A.D. 26, when he moved the capital to Tiberias" (Jesus the Messiah: A Survey of the Life of Christ, Robert H. Stein, InterVarsity Press,, 1996, p.87)...
  
  Stein goes on to explain, further:
  
  "Two of Jesus' disciples were even known by their Greek names: Andrew and Philip. In addition, there are several incidents in Jesus' ministry when he spoke to people who knew neither Aramaic nor Hebrew. Thus unless a translator was present (though none is ever mentioned), their conversations probably took place in the Greek language. Probably Jesus spoke Greek during the following occasions: the visit to Tyre, Sidon and the Decapolis (Mark 7:31ff), the conversation with the Syro-Phoenician woman (Mark 7:24-30; compare especially 7?26) and the trial before Pontius Pilate (Mark 15:2-15; compare also Jesus' conversation with the 'Greeks' in John 12:20-36)" (p.87, emphasis all mine).

The fact that Jesus Christ and the disciples all knew and spoke Greek, as a "third language," in addition to Aramaic and Hebrew, is also indicated and supported by the fact that all the gospels and epistles of the New Testament are written and preserved in the Greek language…

"PROVE ALL THINGS; hold fast that which is good" (I Thess.5;21). We must not allow men to wrap us around their little fingers, and make mincemeat of us, just because they sound convincing and positive in their writings and arguments. The truth is, they don't know what they are talking about. They don't have a leg to stand on. They have placed their personal theological beliefs before the record of history. They have denied the facts in order to keep their own cherished beliefs…” https://www.ntgreek.org/answers/nt_written_in_greek.htm

I’m not entirely convinced that at least some of the 4 gospels (like Mark) were not written first in Hebrew, then translated (with major changes in some cases) into Greek. At this point, I recognize “opposition in all things” so am not blindly believing any fallible human’s words - not even those popularized through canon. At the same time, I thirst after truth & when I consider the stark difference in meaning of the original Greek word for “meek” (sheathed sword), I wonder what else has been so mistranslated?

[Niemand]

”The Language of Jesus

In the time of Christ, three languages figured prominently in the lives of the people of Judaea -- the common language of Aramaic, the language of Hebrew, used in the synagogues, and the Greek language -- which was commonly spoken and understood throughout the Roman Empire.

Some Aramaic words and expressions are preserved in the Gospels, such as Talitha cum, which means, "Little girl, get up!" (Mark 5:41). Also, Abba ("Father"; Mark 14:36; Gal.4:6; Rom.8:15); Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani ("My God, my God, why have you forsaken me"; Mark 15:34); Cephas ("Peter"; John 1:42); Mammon ("Wealth"; Matt.6:24, RSV); Raca ("Fool"; Matt.5:22, RSV). In fact, we can be specific and say that Jesus spoke a Galilean version of "western Aramaic," which differed from that which was spoken in Jerusalem (Matt.26:73; compare Acts 2:7).

Jesus could also read and speak Hebrew. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls has proved that Hebrew was used quite extensively in certain circles, especially for religious purposes. Jesus stood up and read the Hebrew Scriptures in the synagogue of Nazareth (Luke 4:16-20), showing He could also read and speak Hebrew. Some Hebrew words are also preserved in the gospels, such as, Ephphatha ("Be opened"; Mark 7:34); Amen ("Amen": Matt.5:26; Mark 14:30, RSV).

• Writes Robert H. Stein, in Jesus The Messiah: A Survey of the Life of Christ:
  
  "The third major language spoken in Palestine was Greek. The impact of Alexander the Great's conquests in the fourth century B.C. resulted in the Mediterranean's being a 'Greek sea' in Jesus' day. In the third century Jews in Egypt could no longer read the Scriptures in Hebrew, so they began to translated them into Greek. This famous translation became known as the Septuagint (LXX). Jesus, who was reared in 'Galilee, of the Gentiles,' lived only three or four miles from the thriving Greek city of Sepphoris. There may even have been times when he and his father worked in this rapidly grow- ing metropolitan city, which served as the capital city of Herod Antipas until A.D. 26, when he moved the capital to Tiberias" (Jesus the Messiah: A Survey of the Life of Christ, Robert H. Stein, InterVarsity Press,, 1996, p.87)...
  
  Stein goes on to explain, further:
  
  "Two of Jesus' disciples were even known by their Greek names: Andrew and Philip. In addition, there are several incidents in Jesus' ministry when he spoke to people who knew neither Aramaic nor Hebrew. Thus unless a translator was present (though none is ever mentioned), their conversations probably took place in the Greek language. Probably Jesus spoke Greek during the following occasions: the visit to Tyre, Sidon and the Decapolis (Mark 7:31ff), the conversation with the Syro-Phoenician woman (Mark 7:24-30; compare especially 7?26) and the trial before Pontius Pilate (Mark 15:2-15; compare also Jesus' conversation with the 'Greeks' in John 12:20-36)" (p.87, emphasis all mine).

The fact that Jesus Christ and the disciples all knew and spoke Greek, as a "third language," in addition to Aramaic and Hebrew, is also indicated and supported by the fact that all the gospels and epistles of the New Testament are written and preserved in the Greek language…

"PROVE ALL THINGS; hold fast that which is good" (I Thess.5;21). We must not allow men to wrap us around their little fingers, and make mincemeat of us, just because they sound convincing and positive in their writings and arguments. The truth is, they don't know what they are talking about. They don't have a leg to stand on. They have placed their personal theological beliefs before the record of history. They have denied the facts in order to keep their own cherished beliefs…” https://www.ntgreek.org/answers/nt_written_in_greek.htm

I’m not entirely convinced that at least some of the 4 gospels (like Mark) were not written first in Hebrew, then translated (with major changes in some cases) into Greek. At this point, I recognize “opposition in all things” so am not blindly believing any fallible human’s words - not even those popularized through canon. At the same time, I thirst after truth & when I consider the stark difference in meaning of the original Greek word for “meek” (sheathed sword), I wonder what else has been so mistranslated?

There was some mutual intelligibility between Hebrew and Aramaic and some portions of the Old Testament are written in it. What we tend to think of as Hebrew script nowadays is really Aramaic script. If you spoke Aramaic, you could guess some Hebrew.


Even Hebrew and Arabic have some similarities today - their speakers use Shalom & Salaam (peace) to greet one another. There are other elements as Hugh Nibley pointed out. Aramaic and Hebrew were even closer.

A lot of New Testament names are Hebrew and Aramaic - Matthew, Mary (Miriam), John (Yokhanan) Joseph, Judas (Yehuda) etc.

The bit you quoted omits Latin. I've no doubt Jesus knew some Latin. Most people would from dealings with Roman soldiers, trade etc. Hebrew and Aramaic both contain a number of Greek loanwords e.g. sanhedrin.

[Thinker]

There was some mutual intelligibility between Hebrew and Aramaic and some portions of the Old Testament are written in it. What we tend to think of as Hebrew script nowadays is really Aramaic script. If you spoke Aramaic, you could guess some Hebrew.


Even Hebrew and Arabic have some similarities today - their speakers use Shalom & Salaam (peace) to greet one another. There are other elements as Hugh Nibley pointed out. Aramaic and Hebrew were even closer.

A lot of New Testament names are Hebrew and Aramaic - Matthew, Mary (Miriam), John (Yokhanan) Joseph, Judas (Yehuda) etc.

The bit you quoted omits Latin. I've no doubt Jesus knew some Latin. Most people would from dealings with Roman soldiers, trade etc. Hebrew and Aramaic both contain a number of Greek loanwords e.g. sanhedrin.

Interesting. Thanks for filling me in more. I didn’t realize but it makes sense that Latin was likely spoken at least some - given the Roman Empire. And logical Aramaic being similar to Hebrew - & modern Arabic as well.

You inspired me to search more…



And I remember reading that the Bible was put together much later than original writings & in suspicious ways. Considering where biblical books were written & the timing context might help in understanding parables etc.

• “Some scholars say as much as 50% (possibly more) of the Old Testament was originally in Aramaic, as many books were written during or after captivity in Aramaic-speaking countries…”
  https://allfamousbirthday.com/faqs/is-a ... as-hebrew/

Since the Greek Empire had spread & been established for a while, even by 30 AD during Roman Empire rule, it seems at least in the eastern Mediterranean - it was spoken more than Latin…

• ”If someone from the western part came to the eastern part of the country, then he used the lingua franca. This is an adverb, on which people who did not know their native language were communicating. This dialect for one million merchants in Rome was the "common Greek" language - koine.”
  https://en.atomiyme.com/in-what-languag ... -or-latin/

Not sure if accurate & what this map means by civilization but maybe proof of the prevalence of Greek in NT times (soon after map depiction) …

[Niemand]

There are some instances of other languages in the Bible. Apart from Latin - INRI, the name "Mark" etc, there also traces of Babylonian, Assyrian, Hittite, Ancient Egyptian and ancient Persian in some of the names. For example, there is a character called Tartan in the Old Testament. This appears to be a foreign word for commander.

Some of the names of characters in the Book of Mormon also come from various other languages including Egyptian.

I was actually at college with a native Aramaic speaker, but modern Aramaic is very different from 2000 years ago.

Koine Greek is a lot simpler than the Greek of Plato, Euripides etc. There is a nice link in with Septuagint - the Greek Old Testament, used by many Jews around the Med and the Apocrypha, which is mostly known to us from Greek. (Some fragments have been found in Hebrew in more recent times. These were unknown in Luther's time.)

[Thinker]

...I was actually at college with a native Aramaic speaker, but modern Aramaic is very different from 2000 years ago.

Koine Greek is a lot simpler than the Greek of Plato, Euripides etc. There is a nice link in with Septuagint - the Greek Old Testament, used by many Jews around the Med and the Apocrypha, which is mostly known to us from Greek. (Some fragments have been found in Hebrew in more recent times. These were unknown in Luther's time.)

Did you pick up any Aramaic from your college friend? Sometimes I wish I had more lives to learn more languages well & travel to practice them.

Although it seems the consensus is that the New Testament was mostly originally written in Greek, some strongly believe it was Hebrew. Who knows for sure. Maybe Paul & later Eusebius & Constantine completely remodeled Christianity- well lots of evidence so - but maybe language & cultural references too.

It’s strange how the Roman Empire lasted longer & was the rulers during Christ - yet Greek influence persisted. Eg., scriptures mention the Greek city, Decapolis (what a name!)…

• Mark 5:20:
  And he departed, and began to publish in Decapolis how great things Jesus had done for him: and all men did marvel.
  
  Mark 7:31:
  And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, he came unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis.
  
  Matthew 4:25:
  And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.”

”Decapolis meant literally “ten cities” in Greek, and referred to a loosely knit group of ancient cities in what is now Israel, Jordan, and Syria…”
http://clfrancisco.com/the-decapolis/

[Niemand]

...I was actually at college with a native Aramaic speaker, but modern Aramaic is very different from 2000 years ago.

Koine Greek is a lot simpler than the Greek of Plato, Euripides etc. There is a nice link in with Septuagint - the Greek Old Testament, used by many Jews around the Med and the Apocrypha, which is mostly known to us from Greek. (Some fragments have been found in Hebrew in more recent times. These were unknown in Luther's time.)

Did you pick up any Aramaic from your college friend? Sometimes I wish I had more lives to learn more languages well & travel to practice them.

Although it seems the consensus is that the New Testament was mostly originally written in Greek, some strongly believe it was Hebrew. Who knows for sure. Maybe Paul & later Eusebius & Constantine completely remodeled Christianity- well lots of evidence so - but maybe language & cultural references too.

It’s strange how the Roman Empire lasted longer & was the rulers during Christ - yet Greek influence persisted. Eg., scriptures mention the Greek city, Decapolis (what a name!)…

• Mark 5:20:
  And he departed, and began to publish in Decapolis how great things Jesus had done for him: and all men did marvel.
  
  Mark 7:31:
  And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, he came unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis.
  
  Matthew 4:25:
  And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.”

”Decapolis meant literally “ten cities” in Greek, and referred to a loosely knit group of ancient cities in what is now Israel, Jordan, and Syria…”
http://clfrancisco.com/the-decapolis/

The problem with me is that it doesn't, my memory's not big enough! I have a working knowledge of several languages, but my Hebrew is pretty minimal, and as for Aramaic, non-existent. I think Modern Aramaic is very different from what Jesus

He was a modern Assyrian. They are mostly Christian Middle Easterners.
https://modernassyrians.blogspot.com/?m=1

It’s strange how the Roman Empire lasted longer & was the rulers during Christ - yet Greek influence persisted. Eg., scriptures mention the Greek city, Decapolis (what a name!)…

Greek was well established as an international language round there before the Romans turned up, and Greek culture was about the only foreign culture the Romans truly respected and learnt at school. A lot of their literature was based on Greek models. When Julius Caesar was stabbed, some people think he didn't say "Et tu, Brute?" but said something in Greek to Brutus instead.

https://www.theguardian.com/notesandque ... 56,00.html

[davedan]

Every major religion has its form of mysticism. They are all corrupt. Mysticism devalues the physicial. But scripture values spiritual and physical together. The body and spirit together are the soul of man and produce a fullness of joy. The Earth is God's footstool and Jesus Christ was physically resurrected.

Jewish - kabbalism
Christianity - gnostacism
Islam - sufism

[Niemand]

Every major religion has its form of mysticism. They are all corrupt. Mysticism devalues the physicial. But scripture values spiritual and physical together. The body and spirit together are the soul of man and produce a fullness of joy. The Earth is God's footstool and Jesus Christ was physically resurrected.

Jewish - kabbalism
Christianity - gnostacism
Islam - sufism

I think that is a blanket condemnation of mysticism which is not necessarily a bad thing. A lot of Mormonism is mysticism. It is a shame that none of the leaders since Joseph Smith and Brigham Young have been very mystical.

It also isn't necessarily gnosticism in the case of Christianity either.

[Thinker]

The problem with me is that it doesn't, my memory's not big enough! I have a working knowledge of several languages, but my Hebrew is pretty minimal, and as for Aramaic, non-existent. I think Modern Aramaic is very different from what Jesus

He was a modern Assyrian. They are mostly Christian Middle Easterners.
https://modernassyrians.blogspot.com/?m=1

Well, it’s good you have learned some of another language. I think it’s like travel - helps you see things from a different perspective.

Thanks for the interesting info. From your posted link:


”… "In Palestine itself, according to Noldeke, the Jews and later the Christians there referred to their dialect of Aramaic as Syriac; in Babylon, both Greeks and Persians called the Arameans Syrians.” …

“Christianity began in an Aramaic environment; Jesus preached his message in an Aramaic dialect. Among the converts to the new faith were Jews and Gentiles of all ethnic backgrounds. The Church and the new religion served as a melting pot; as members of a new dispensation, the converts tended to lay aside former distinctions and prejudices and became in the character of Christians one homogenous people devoted to the Lord…

“When the Byzantine empire became Christian with the conversion of Constantine, the Persians began to question the loyalty of their Christian subjects…. Relations between Byzantium and Persia deteriorated when Christianity became the state religion of Persia’s enemy.”

As a result of controversies over the nature of Jesus, the first split occurred between Western and Eastern Christianity which would lead to the Christians of the Persian Empire adopting the name “Nestorians” for themselves…

Aramean/Syrian/Christian/Nestorians Become Catholic and Protestant:

“The ‘evangelical awakening’ of the eighteenth century in Great Britain and the quickening of religious life in Protestant circles in that country and America gave rise in the nineteenth century to the greatest missionary movement in the history of the Christian Church since apostolic times…

Rassam’s position was that ‘Syrian’ was wrong; the correct form was ‘Assyrian,’ but preferred ‘Chaldean’…

It is difficult enough to be Christian in Iraq these days, seeing as how the country is being attacked by a coalition of mostly Christian nations, without seeking the help of those same nations for a “land of our own” to be carved out of Iraq.”


So sad for anyone to be persecuted for their beliefs.

Assyrian & Syrian seem so obviously the same root word - yet some are adamant about them being distinct. Pride I guess.

I can’t help but wonder how dogmatic, “new & improved” Christian mission work has harmed - even if has also helped. Eg., many African countries saw huge spikes in prostitution, STD’s, HIV/AIDS after missionaries forbade polygamy. Not that I’m for polygamy. The point is religion - especially when it is used as political or psychological suppression - it seems to become more evil. Evil in the sense of pretending to “help” but “not knowing what they do.” It’s definitely been used as a weapon of war/influence.

[Thinker]

ok, I'll be your huckleberry , (hope that makes you laugh),

In the following you made an assumption and then used it to make your point. Isaiah's prophesies do apply to more than Israel.
"What is a “good” man? In context, this is Jewish religion - so from Isaiah’s view, it would apply to only Jewish men."

Hey, my sweet huckleberry, not bad, considering. Who wants to even think their foundation is made of cardboard?

This is a MAJOR aspect that members ignore. Tough pill to swallow…

The assumption is factual. Jews - according to their own doctrine (Talmud) HATE lds/Mormons, & all other “goyim.”

“The ‘goyim’ are not humans. They are beasts.” (Baba Mezia 114b)
* “Even the best of the ‘goyim’ should all be killed.” (Soferim 15)

All the prophecy etc they wrote in the Old Testament was about Jews - nobody else. They want goyum dead - they see us as beasts/animals. So what do we do? Worship them - or their writings that were exclusive to them. And we pretend it all applies to us, when the authors meant only a select Jewish group. Why do we do this? Ancient psychological warfare - ie: Scofield bibles that promoted it & others like Joseph Smith went along… it’s controlled the masses effectively.

This is one of those truths that is so hard to take, that few seem up to the task. If the Old Testament is not what we thought - not for us - then do the rest of the dominoes fall? I think there can still be good found, despite the OT not applying to anyone not Jewish. But it definitely can helps one stop deifying scripture, especially when you realize the hand they had in twisting Christ’s teachings.

ah well... hmmm. I like it! I am betting that you didn't expect that response.

I'll have to wander thru Isaiah's prophecies, but I believe that there are many which apply to more than just the Jewish. In other words, Jewish prophecy was about the fate of the world ...but.. no doubt, all of their words were in the context that only those of Jewish blood had any favor at all in the eyes of 'HVH.

Yes, I have considered the subject which you have covered and my perspective is not one that I typically discuss in religious circles. My understanding of the OT writings is perhaps overly critical for many reasons, including what you have detailed. I find that what occurred in the book of Joshua to be barbaric and more specifically, quite insane.

All the ancient cultures believe they are 'special' and that they alone were God's chosen. To love others like themselves and to consider all others as beasts or at best "less than" they are. <(que modern mormonism). I think that is a foundation for what we call 'cults'. The most interesting tidbit is that in their scriptures , their God repeatedly tells them that they are the only chosen ones. Did God create all men? Are all men from God? .... ... which God(s)?..... Something to chew on there.

This all is in direct contrast with what Christ represents. Why is Christ the deliverer and savior? To deliver us from...? To save us from? My answer would be to save us from a multitude of levels of imprisonments which we more or less, unwittingly chose. There is no injustice, just the appearance of it.

I believe that we are both at least in the same book, if not on the same page in many regards. btw, I've got some huckleberries growing in the garden. They do make tasty pies. Oh...and cardboard foundation you say? I thought cardboard was for burning

edit to add: I believe a better word for 'unwittingly' is 'naively' . Lucky we are immortals.

You’re right, I didn’t expect that response.
Lots of good thoughts to explore!
Definitely some insanity in scriptures - which is why cherry picking is a must.

”All the ancient cultures believe they are 'special' and that they alone were God's chosen.”
True then & now - in groups & individually. Human development theories say children/teens need this cockiness to develop strong enough to make it in the world, but of course not everyone puts off childish things upon adulthood. When you’ve experienced childhood neglect, you see clearly through the illusion, since parents are the first gods to us. Silver lining is seeing how God/angels can be cheering for both opposing sides.

”Did God create all men? Are all men from God? .... ... which God(s)?”
Good question! What if we all are worshipping different gods. Someone suggested that there are as many different beliefs of God as there are people. Paul Tillech wrote how even atheists worship -or prioritize something above everything else… the key is worshipping without idolatry. Easier said than done. Eg., I used to basically worship church leaders above God.

This one is very deep:
”Why is Christ the deliverer and savior? To deliver us from...? To save us from? My answer would be to save us from a multitude of levels of imprisonments which we more or less, unwittingly chose. There is no injustice, just the appearance of it.”
I have also asked what exactly is Jesus saving us from & how? I think it’s an illusion. Perfectionist/bipolar within us wants to be perfect but we’ll be imperfect to our dying day. This is unacceptable so the deceptive traditional lie of human sacrifice scapegoat is believed. Nobody can save us from ourselves. And God meant for us to have weakness so we’ll humble ourselves & then God helps make weaknesses strengths - that’s God’s main thing!

I believe (though it’s a work in progress) that Christ is indeed meant to be followed - but in our own way. So, as Christ took upon him response-ability above that which most did, ideally we get to that point too. For a while though it may be plenty to focus on addressing our inner “imprisonments.” This is deserving of a book - our own personal journals.

What do you mean by “There is no injustice, just the appearance of it”?


P.S. Rather than berries, I keep imagining this…
Huckleberry Finn https://youtu.be/2yXz1r5kn_k

[FrankOne]

ok, I'll be your huckleberry , (hope that makes you laugh),

In the following you made an assumption and then used it to make your point. Isaiah's prophesies do apply to more than Israel.
"What is a “good” man? In context, this is Jewish religion - so from Isaiah’s view, it would apply to only Jewish men."

Hey, my sweet huckleberry, not bad, considering. Who wants to even think their foundation is made of cardboard?

This is a MAJOR aspect that members ignore. Tough pill to swallow…

The assumption is factual. Jews - according to their own doctrine (Talmud) HATE lds/Mormons, & all other “goyim.”

“The ‘goyim’ are not humans. They are beasts.” (Baba Mezia 114b)
* “Even the best of the ‘goyim’ should all be killed.” (Soferim 15)

All the prophecy etc they wrote in the Old Testament was about Jews - nobody else. They want goyum dead - they see us as beasts/animals. So what do we do? Worship them - or their writings that were exclusive to them. And we pretend it all applies to us, when the authors meant only a select Jewish group. Why do we do this? Ancient psychological warfare - ie: Scofield bibles that promoted it & others like Joseph Smith went along… it’s controlled the masses effectively.

This is one of those truths that is so hard to take, that few seem up to the task. If the Old Testament is not what we thought - not for us - then do the rest of the dominoes fall? I think there can still be good found, despite the OT not applying to anyone not Jewish. But it definitely can helps one stop deifying scripture, especially when you realize the hand they had in twisting Christ’s teachings.

ah well... hmmm. I like it! I am betting that you didn't expect that response.

I'll have to wander thru Isaiah's prophecies, but I believe that there are many which apply to more than just the Jewish. In other words, Jewish prophecy was about the fate of the world ...but.. no doubt, all of their words were in the context that only those of Jewish blood had any favor at all in the eyes of 'HVH.

Yes, I have considered the subject which you have covered and my perspective is not one that I typically discuss in religious circles. My understanding of the OT writings is perhaps overly critical for many reasons, including what you have detailed. I find that what occurred in the book of Joshua to be barbaric and more specifically, quite insane.

All the ancient cultures believe they are 'special' and that they alone were God's chosen. To love others like themselves and to consider all others as beasts or at best "less than" they are. <(que modern mormonism). I think that is a foundation for what we call 'cults'. The most interesting tidbit is that in their scriptures , their God repeatedly tells them that they are the only chosen ones. Did God create all men? Are all men from God? .... ... which God(s)?..... Something to chew on there.

This all is in direct contrast with what Christ represents. Why is Christ the deliverer and savior? To deliver us from...? To save us from? My answer would be to save us from a multitude of levels of imprisonments which we more or less, unwittingly chose. There is no injustice, just the appearance of it.

I believe that we are both at least in the same book, if not on the same page in many regards. btw, I've got some huckleberries growing in the garden. They do make tasty pies. Oh...and cardboard foundation you say? I thought cardboard was for burning

edit to add: I believe a better word for 'unwittingly' is 'naively' . Lucky we are immortals.

You’re right, I didn’t expect that response.
Lots of good thoughts to explore!
Definitely some insanity in scriptures - which is why cherry picking is a must.

”All the ancient cultures believe they are 'special' and that they alone were God's chosen.”
True then & now - in groups & individually. Human development theories say children/teens need this cockiness to develop strong enough to make it in the world, but of course not everyone puts off childish things upon adulthood. When you’ve experienced childhood neglect, you see clearly through the illusion, since parents are the first gods to us. Silver lining is seeing how God/angels can be cheering for both opposing sides.

”Did God create all men? Are all men from God? .... ... which God(s)?”
Good question! What if we all are worshipping different gods. Someone suggested that there are as many different beliefs of God as there are people. Paul Tillech wrote how even atheists worship -or prioritize something above everything else… the key is worshipping without idolatry. Easier said than done. Eg., I used to basically worship church leaders above God.

This one is very deep:
”Why is Christ the deliverer and savior? To deliver us from...? To save us from? My answer would be to save us from a multitude of levels of imprisonments which we more or less, unwittingly chose. There is no injustice, just the appearance of it.”
I have also asked what exactly is Jesus saving us from & how? I think it’s an illusion. Perfectionist/bipolar within us wants to be perfect but we’ll be imperfect to our dying day. This is unacceptable so the deceptive traditional lie of human sacrifice scapegoat is believed. Nobody can save us from ourselves. And God meant for us to have weakness so we’ll humble ourselves & then God helps make weaknesses strengths - that’s God’s main thing!

I believe (though it’s a work in progress) that Christ is indeed meant to be followed - but in our own way. So, as Christ took upon him response-ability above that which most did, ideally we get to that point too. For a while though it may be plenty to focus on addressing our inner “imprisonments.” This is deserving of a book - our own personal journals.

What do you mean by “There is no injustice, just the appearance of it”?


P.S. Rather than berries, I keep imagining this…
Huckleberry Finn https://youtu.be/2yXz1r5kn_k

It appears that I'll have to come out of retirement in order to address what you've said and asked. it's good that risk doesn't exist.

I have also asked what exactly is Jesus saving us from & how? I think it’s an illusion.

Which is the illusion? His saving us or us avoiding being saved? When a child has become lost in the forest, does a parent go out and save him? How about an omniscient father, knowing that his child would be lost in advance, yet also knowing that being alone in the woods for a while would be a productive experience for the child?

Can we really run from what is real? How long can we maintain our own illusions as reality awaits us, ever-present in the recesses of our minds? Why do we maintain our separateness? Is the apple really that tasty?

What do you mean by “There is no injustice, just the appearance of it”?

An injustice indicates that someone has impinged on someone else against the latter's will. Are we so sure that we didn't will all of this? Can what is real be hurt or destroyed at all? An example I gave earlier, on another thread:

A man is at war and his legs get blown off , the man looks down and watches the blood flow as his body goes lifeless. He gets to the other side and looks down with hesitation.... but ALAS! his legs have returned! What magic is this!? ,he exclaims. Christ responds, "you were never in any danger on earth, you just believed in danger". "You are an indestructible child of the living Father and have no cause for fear of any sort". Nothing real can be harmed, nothing unreal exists.

[Niemand]

It's mentioned above that Andrew had a Greek name - it means "man", so I wonder if his original name was "Adam" which means just the same. (As does the name "Charles/Carl" by the way)

[Thinker]

Which is the illusion? His saving us or us avoiding being saved? When a child has become lost in the forest, does a parent go out and save him? How about an omniscient father, knowing that his child would be lost in advance, yet also knowing that being alone in the woods for a while would be a productive experience for the child?

Can we really run from what is real? How long can we maintain our own illusions as reality awaits us, ever-present in the recesses of our minds? Why do we maintain our separateness? Is the apple really that tasty?

What do you mean by “There is no injustice, just the appearance of it”?

An injustice indicates that someone has impinged on someone else against the latter's will. Are we so sure that we didn't will all of this? Can what is real be hurt or destroyed at all? An example I gave earlier, on another thread:

A man is at war and his legs get blown off , the man looks down and watches the blood flow as his body goes lifeless. He gets to the other side and looks down with hesitation.... but ALAS! his legs have returned! What magic is this!? ,he exclaims. Christ responds, "you were never in any danger on earth, you just believed in danger". "You are an indestructible child of the living Father and have no cause for fear of any sort". Nothing real can be harmed, nothing unreal exists.

Lots of deep thoughts!
I like how you implied what we need saving from is being lost - & I’d add - not having oil/lamps to SEE our way clearly. So how exactly are we saved? Not by believing in Eusebius & Constantine’s corrupt dogma of human sacrifice scapegoating! What a distraction - though I suppose some symbolism is helpful if “likened to oneself.”

Many of us can run from uncomfortable truths for years - even lifetimes. But I believe as you may, that since we are demigods - children of God & as such, we are drawn to truth and good - eventually.

While I believe in some type of spiritual law of cause & effect (karma), it mostly evades our understanding, especially involving others, & so jumping to conclusions can cause moral issues. Eg., A friend suggested that aborted babies deserved being killed from past life sins. I argued that we don’t know & even trying to justify that is wrong.

As to what is real & what isn’t… pain tells us, without doubt, that it’s REAL! Its opposite joy, can also. From a spiritual perspective & when facing death, it’s reassuring to consider the permanence of some things (ie consciousness & Plato’s forms), which persist after death. Still, as it is, we have bodies with needs that can’t be passed off as unreal. We are alive now! Some suggest eternity is in the ever evolving present moment - enjoy it now!