D
Detales
Guest
Yes. Look at Jesus, and anyone outside the Church who espouses His teaching.
- Status
S
spockrates
Guest
True, that!
The big difference between Jesus and Socrates, that I see, is that Jesus said He was the truth, and Socrates admitted he was largely ignorant of the truth. I suppose that, in that sense, I have much more in common with Socrates than Christ.
B
Biggie
Guest
Well I think more properly Jesus said he is God, so I can certainly see you more in common with Socrates who made no such claim.True, that!
The big difference between Jesus and Socrates, that I see, is that Jesus said He was the truth, and Socrates admitted he was largely ignorant of the truth. I suppose that, in that sense, I have much more in common with Socrates than Christ.
B
Biggie
Guest
Gives rise to the question what you mean by “espouse his teaching” if Jesus taught we were to live in communion as a church.
D
Detales
Guest
We do. Some just don’t know it yet. Too busy chatting in the pews.
S
spockrates
Guest
Yes, I suppose that saying this,
“I am the way and the truth and the life.”
(John 14)
is much the same as saying this,
“I am the way [to God the Father] and the [One who is God the Son] and the [source of eternal] life.”
(John 14)
D
Detales
Guest
That only works, though, when you exclude the sense of the word “I” as most commonly used in Eastern and Middle Eastern Teaching.
BTW: “Spockratese” Great handle!!
BTW: “Spockratese” Great handle!!
B
Biggie
Guest
The first is no doubt included in the second but not comprehensive of it. To say that Jesus is God is considerably more than saying he is the truth.Yes, I suppose that saying this,
“I am the way and the truth and the life.”
(John 14)
is much the same as saying this,
“I am the way [to God the Father] and the [One who is God the Son] and the [source of eternal] life.”
(John 14)
S
spockrates
Guest
Thank you; I kind of like the paradox of logical Spock and playful Socrates!
But what is the sense of the word I that I should exclude, and why?
S
spockrates
Guest
Agreed! That God is wise is indeed just one piece of the Divine puzzle.
I can think of at least two more pieces of the character of God. What about you?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
D
Detales
Guest
Actually, Spocrates, what I meant was that the statement as you annotated it only makes sense if you ignore the usual meaning of “I” in those Wisdom Teachings. “I” in English as applied to person is emphatically not the meaning used in those teachings. In those Teachings “I” refers to the “I AM” as in “I AM THAT.” When used as it was in that statement ascribed to Jesus, it means more correctly “(The) “I AM” (of you, as pointed to by your unchanging feeling of “I” as distinct from the ever changing sense of “me” is) the Way, the Truth, and the Life.”
There are libraries written on this topic, not one volume of which is known to most Catholics. A good place to look for an introduction to this idea is to go and read the preface that is available to Basic Self Knowledge by Harry Benjamin on Amazon. Another useful volume to enhance one’s perceptive and cognitive tools regarding religious or any thought is a book by Gina Cerminara based on the principles of General Semantics. It has a very unfortunate title which puts a lot of people off, but it is used in many comparative religion courses nevertheless. It is called Insights for the Age of Aquarius: a handbook for religious sanity. It is very well referenced, in case you are the scholarly type, and very entertaining to read, as well. Maurice Nicoll’s* The New Man: an intrpretaion of some parables and miracles of Christ* is also very useful, if you can find it.
More later if you wish.
There are libraries written on this topic, not one volume of which is known to most Catholics. A good place to look for an introduction to this idea is to go and read the preface that is available to Basic Self Knowledge by Harry Benjamin on Amazon. Another useful volume to enhance one’s perceptive and cognitive tools regarding religious or any thought is a book by Gina Cerminara based on the principles of General Semantics. It has a very unfortunate title which puts a lot of people off, but it is used in many comparative religion courses nevertheless. It is called Insights for the Age of Aquarius: a handbook for religious sanity. It is very well referenced, in case you are the scholarly type, and very entertaining to read, as well. Maurice Nicoll’s* The New Man: an intrpretaion of some parables and miracles of Christ* is also very useful, if you can find it.
More later if you wish.
S
spockrates
Guest
D
Detales
Guest
As Robert Heinlein said in one of his novels, “In English only the present tense singular of the verb ‘to be’ is true to fact.” Therein lies the crux of the mistranslation and the misunderstanding of almost all of the differences between Western religionist thinking and Eastern philosophical understanding. And guess what? Christianism, starting with Catholicism, is a derivative of an Eastern way of understanding as that has been transmuted into a way of thinking about.
Before I say more, if you wish, go to Amazon, find that preface to Basic Self Knowledge and read it. If you are still interested, we can go farther.
Before I say more, if you wish, go to Amazon, find that preface to Basic Self Knowledge and read it. If you are still interested, we can go farther.
N
noi4noi4
Guest
Jesus said “I AM the Way and the Truth”. Jesus spoke the Truth about the Social Gospel. Believing in God and Salvation is up to you.
D
Detales
Guest
Yes, but why stop at belief?
S
spockrates
Guest
I will go to Amazon if you will answer this question, and those related: Do you think a picture really is worth a thousand words?
D
Detales
Guest
I don’t care if you go or not, Spocrates. An image is worth the understanding you bring to it or which it evokes for you. That could mean from zero words or less to a lifetime of writing/speaking/being.
S
spockrates
Guest
True. And yet, the artist, perhaps, would have an entirely different meaning in mind when he painted or sculpted the image than what you or I might imagine. Don’t you think?
Or when you or I see a photograph of someone who is sad (such as a photo I saw of Hillary Clinton just the other day). You might think she is sad because she was robbed of the Presidency. I might think she is sad because she knows her husband is up to his old habit of sleeping around while she is out of town. But the real reason she is sad, only she might really know. You know?
D
Detales
Guest
Being an artist I don’t think that, I know that. But that is exactly what I just said, isn’t it.
S
spockrates
Guest
Then why do you ask me to read a book?
You see, I cannot help feeling, Detales, that writing has one grave fault in common with painting, or sculpture, or photography. For the creations of the artist or photographer stand there true as life, and yet if you ask them a question they maintain a solemn silence.
And the same may be said of written words: You would imagine that they had intelligence, but if, out of a desire to learn, you ask for an explanation of something that has been said, they produce the same unvarying meaning, over and over again. And once they have been written down, they promiscuously knock about the world anywhere at all, among those who understand them, and equally among those for whom they are completely unsuitable!
They do not know to whom they should or should not speak; and if they are mistreated or unjustly slandered, they always require the author of their being to rescue them. For the book cannot protect or defend itself.
My guess is that, since I’m not sure I understand you when you tell me about this book, I’m pretty sure I won’t understand the book, either. However, if you were to discuss the meaning of the book with me. Well, then I’d have someone to explain things when I misunderstand.
- Status