Zone1 Humanity and Jesus

[Meriweather]

The same comment applies to you ( see above) though I feel sure you had some nice imaginary chats that convinced you that you had a new real friend ,

No, I've never had any imaginary chats with Jesus. Why? Have you?

Although it will not interest you , I am assured that the Essene Monk is well respected in the After Life( level6) but there are many spirits like him . He just happened to get the publicity and old style MSM support .
But he means well I gather and is still learning !!

Who is assuring you?

 

[Meriweather]

But seeing how we're not taking any of this literally, we're looking at the moral of the story. Maybe there is no God. Maybe God is just some idea to keep people happy, to stop people being "immoral" and the ike.

God said people are wicked. Literal or not?

Who wrote the story? God or man? The general consensus is that these stories, while inspired by God were written by man as a way to present life lessons. Knowing God is, I've always been quizzical (but accepting) about how some so easily dismiss him. People of faith are to be both admired and maybe even envied.

Let's address your 'Maybe'...that there is no God. Is there goodness and is there love? Do you go on to submit, there is no goodness and there is no love--both are human constructs? Or, can we consider the possibility that Goodness, Love, and God have always been a part of human life and were (correctly) identified, very early on by early man?

Consider if the story of the Great Flood began with: Wickedness, introduced by man, was encroaching upon all the Goodness in the world...A great flood washed away all of mankind accept for one good family...When the flood ended this good family began anew...

Since this was a story told years, centuries after the flood, when people again saw sprouts of wickedness sprouting in their midst, specifically, of what particular wickedness was the story warning the people? (To address your point of killing animals, the story specifically notes that this was not wrong or wicked.) So....What was causing wickedness to reinsert itself into society?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Who wrote the story? God or man? The general consensus is that these stories, while inspired by God were written by man as a way to present life lessons. Knowing God is, I've always been quizzical (but accepting) about how some so easily dismiss him. People of faith are to be both admired and maybe even envied.

Let's address your 'Maybe'...that there is no God. Is there goodness and is there love? Do you go on to submit, there is no goodness and there is no love--both are human constructs? Or, can we consider the possibility that Goodness, Love, and God have always been a part of human life and were (correctly) identified, very early on by early man?

Consider if the story of the Great Flood began with: Wickedness, introduced by man, was encroaching upon all the Goodness in the world...A great flood washed away all of mankind accept for one good family...When the flood ended this good family began anew...

Since this was a story told years, centuries after the flood, when people again saw sprouts of wickedness sprouting in their midst, specifically, of what particular wickedness was the story warning the people? (To address your point of killing animals, the story specifically notes that this was not wrong or wicked.) So....What was causing wickedness to reinsert itself into society?

The "general consensus" means nothing. The Bible was written by humans. God can't write books.

If we're looking at a book of "life lessons" what kind of a "life lesson" is it when God says "fuck me, I'm angry, let's smash everything I build down to the ground"?

Not the sort of message I'd put across.

And it's the sort of message that happens over and over in the Bible.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, you have in Joshua 1:9 where the Israelites are going to war and saying they are good, and God goes with them.

Plenty of violence being justified throughout the old testament.

If it happens once and someone's making a story and accidentally use genocide as a way of saying "don't be violent", then they might just be stupid. But to continually use violence throughout the old testament in relation with God, it's clearly a message that's being sent that violence is okay.

Is there "goodness"? Well, I'm sure we could have a conversation about what is considered "good". If we looked at the Bible and saw that warring is "good" then we might be able to justify many things. Wait, we do justify war... hmmm....

 

[Meriweather]

Not the sort of message I'd put across.

What I am trying to get across to you is that is not the message they were presenting.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What I am trying to get across to you is that is not the message they were presenting.

When two people communicate, it's not important what you mean to say, it's important what you do say.

You're trying to make an argument, that to me seems to be "I'm going to interpret the Bible however I like" so, it doesn't seem to matter what I say, you'll just say I'm wrong.

Even when the Bible literally paints God as a genocidal maniac.

 

[DudleySmith]

Stop embarrassing the Essene Monk , OP .

He was not an 'Essene', and neither was John the Baptist or Hillel.

The 'Essenes' were actually a collection of different sects, not just the specific Essene sect; dissenters of all stripes were typically banished to the wilderness, and referred to as 'Essenes' in a generic sense. Jesus was a fan of John the Baptist, and not an Essene himself.

Was John the Baptist an Essene? - The BAS Library

The Dead Sea Scrolls, found between 1947 and 1956 in caves on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, provide us with a picture of a first-century Jewish community that could well have been the home of John the Baptist. At the very least, the possibility is worth exploring. Whether or not the...

library.biblicalarchaeology.org

While there are thus many reasons to suppose that John the Baptist was an Essene who may have lived at Qumran, there are also impediments to this conclusion that must be as assiduously pursued as the correspondences.


First, John is never mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls that have been published so far.


Perhaps more telling is the fact that John is never called an Essene in either the New Testament or in Josephus. The absence of such a reference is especially significant in Josephus, because in both Antiquities of the Jews and The Jewish War Josephus discusses the Essene sect several times as a Jewish “philosophy” on a par with the Sadducees and the Pharisees. In The Jewish War (2:567), Josephus even mentions another John, whom he identifies as “John, the Essene,” who served as a Jewish general in the First Jewish Revolt against Rome. Josephus also identifies three prophetic figures as Essenes (although he does not call them prophets). All of this indicates that Josephus would have identified John the Baptist as an Essene if he knew him to be a member of that group.


Even more significantly, John the Baptist was outspokenly critical. of the civil government, which would be uncharacteristic of an Essene. The Baptist went so far as to criticize the tetrarch Antipas himself for marrying his “brother’s wife” (Mark 6:18). With his preaching, John created such excitement among the crowds that Herod became afraid that this might lead to a revolt (Antiquities of the Jews 18:118). John’s outspokenness seems unlike an Essene.


A similar objection can be raised regarding John’s courageous concern for the salvation of his Jewish countrymen. This too seems unlike the Essenes. Indeed, after some serious but unsuccessful criticism of the religious and political leaders in the second century B.C., the Essenes seem to have withdrawn from public life in order to work out their own salvation. They never developed missionary activity, but preferred simply to wait for those whom God chose to join their community of salvation.


John the Baptist, on the other hand, dared to address all the people. He became the incarnation of the divine voice, calling from the desert into the inhabited world: “I am the voice of one calling in the wilderness” (John 1:23). John did not relegate people to a sacred place in the desert, nor did he incorporate them into a holy community with monastic rules. Rather, after they had confessed their sins, he baptized them once and for all. Then he sent them back to their profane world—to their work and their families. There they were to enjoy the “true fruits of repentance” in a life of righteousness. This does not sound at all like an Essene.


For these reasons, we could easily conclude that John the Baptist was not an Essene. The Essene community, on the one hand, and John, on the other, seem to have lived in two different worlds: the one a closed community of saints whose sole concern was for their own salvation; the other, a lonely prophet who was concerned for all his people and their salvation.

More at the link, pro and con, but the differences are enough to distinguish John and his follower Jesus from the specific Essene group. Neither were monks in any sense.

 

[irosie91]

He was not an 'Essene', and neither was John the Baptist or Hillel.

The 'Essenes' were actually a collection of different sects, not just the specific Essene sect; dissenters of all stripes were typically banished to the wilderness, and referred to as 'Essenes' in a generic sense. Jesus was a fan of John the Baptist, and not an Essene himself.

Was John the Baptist an Essene? - The BAS Library

The Dead Sea Scrolls, found between 1947 and 1956 in caves on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, provide us with a picture of a first-century Jewish community that could well have been the home of John the Baptist. At the very least, the possibility is worth exploring. Whether or not the...

library.biblicalarchaeology.org

While there are thus many reasons to suppose that John the Baptist was an Essene who may have lived at Qumran, there are also impediments to this conclusion that must be as assiduously pursued as the correspondences.


First, John is never mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls that have been published so far.


Perhaps more telling is the fact that John is never called an Essene in either the New Testament or in Josephus. The absence of such a reference is especially significant in Josephus, because in both Antiquities of the Jews and The Jewish War Josephus discusses the Essene sect several times as a Jewish “philosophy” on a par with the Sadducees and the Pharisees. In The Jewish War (2:567), Josephus even mentions another John, whom he identifies as “John, the Essene,” who served as a Jewish general in the First Jewish Revolt against Rome. Josephus also identifies three prophetic figures as Essenes (although he does not call them prophets). All of this indicates that Josephus would have identified John the Baptist as an Essene if he knew him to be a member of that group.


Even more significantly, John the Baptist was outspokenly critical. of the civil government, which would be uncharacteristic of an Essene. The Baptist went so far as to criticize the tetrarch Antipas himself for marrying his “brother’s wife” (Mark 6:18). With his preaching, John created such excitement among the crowds that Herod became afraid that this might lead to a revolt (Antiquities of the Jews 18:118). John’s outspokenness seems unlike an Essene.


A similar objection can be raised regarding John’s courageous concern for the salvation of his Jewish countrymen. This too seems unlike the Essenes. Indeed, after some serious but unsuccessful criticism of the religious and political leaders in the second century B.C., the Essenes seem to have withdrawn from public life in order to work out their own salvation. They never developed missionary activity, but preferred simply to wait for those whom God chose to join their community of salvation.


John the Baptist, on the other hand, dared to address all the people. He became the incarnation of the divine voice, calling from the desert into the inhabited world: “I am the voice of one calling in the wilderness” (John 1:23). John did not relegate people to a sacred place in the desert, nor did he incorporate them into a holy community with monastic rules. Rather, after they had confessed their sins, he baptized them once and for all. Then he sent them back to their profane world—to their work and their families. There they were to enjoy the “true fruits of repentance” in a life of righteousness. This does not sound at all like an Essene.


For these reasons, we could easily conclude that John the Baptist was not an Essene. The Essene community, on the one hand, and John, on the other, seem to have lived in two different worlds: the one a closed community of saints whose sole concern was for their own salvation; the other, a lonely prophet who was concerned for all his people and their salvation.

More at the link, pro and con, but the differences are enough to distinguish John and his follower Jesus from the specific Essene group. Neither were monks in any sense.

John ---it seems to me---MAY have been a member of another monastic group out there in the wilderness----yanno----contemplative creature that he was----a "monk" who decided to COME BACK

 

[DudleySmith]

John ---it seems to me---MAY have been a member of another monastic group out there in the wilderness----yanno----contemplative creature that he was----a "monk" who decided to COME BACK

Given the difficulties under Jewish law re capital punishment, banishment was by far the most common sentence for 'heretics', there were all kinds of sects and individuals out in the fringes, so yes, definitely a possibility. The executions of John and Jesus were actually a novelty comparatively.

 

[ding]

Even when the Bible literally paints God as a genocidal maniac.

Have you read Psalms? How does Psalms paint God? Does Psalms paint God as a genocidal maniac? How do you reconcile Psalms with your interpretation?

 

[ding]

You're trying to make an argument, that to me seems to be "I'm going to interpret the Bible however I like" so, it doesn't seem to matter what I say, you'll just say I'm wrong.

Isn't that exactly what you are doing?

 

[irosie91]

Given the difficulties under Jewish law re capital punishment, banishment was by far the most common sentence for 'heretics', there were all kinds of sects and individuals out in the fringes, so yes, definitely a possibility. The executions of John and Jesus were actually a novelty comparatively.

Mr. Dud. Don't give up your day job----you are utterly unable to be elected as a judge on the Sanhedrin. The people who populated the monastic communities out there in the desert-----like the Essenes ---were not "banished" ---they were escapees from Roman oppression----to wit---essentially PHARISEES. Your sunday school "person" actually told you that
they were "banished people"? UHM----John the mikveh man was ANOTHER victim of DA JOOOOS? You could try stand-up comedy

 

[Meriweather]

You're trying to make an argument, that to me seems to be "I'm going to interpret the Bible however I like" so, it doesn't seem to matter what I say, you'll just say I'm wrong.

Even when the Bible literally paints God as a genocidal maniac.

It's not interpretation of the Bible, it's taking the time researching the "Everybody knows". Today, if someone included spats or chopines or even slide rulers in a story for teens, they would have to be explained, yet at one time no explanation necessary because "everybody knows" is in play. How about women having the vapors? How many know today what everybody knew at one time?

What did Everybody Know about God in Biblical times that did not have to be explained? It's noted in the Bible: God is good; God is loving; God is not like us; doesn't have our emotions. It was known people could only (and then barely) understand God through their own reality. Remain in God's ways, and God protected. Go outside his ways, and protection didn't cover those situations.

The Great Flood describes how people had begun to live outside the ways of God and what happened as a result. The Great Flood story starts with the people were wicked. A good family was saved to start over...but what happened and why?

People understood these things because of the Everybody Knows...that was in play. This is why the Book of Job is so fascinating. While everybody knew that God protected those who walked in his ways...what about the bad things that still happened to righteous people? Great Flood? Easy to understand, people had brought wickedness upon the earth and Good (God) could not allow this wickedness to prevail. Job? That wrestles with a question that could not be answered.

 

[DudleySmith]

Mr. Dud. Don't give up your day job----you are utterly unable to be elected as a judge on the Sanhedrin. The people who populated the monastic communities out there in the desert-----like the Essenes ---were not "banished" ---they were escapees from Roman oppression----to wit---essentially PHARISEES. Your sunday school "person" actually told you that
they were "banished people"? UHM----John the mikveh man was ANOTHER victim of DA JOOOOS? You could try stand-up comedy

lol more rubbish. We're still waiting on all those verses Constantine wrote as his bible, by the way. Nobody seems to know which ones. And, the Essenes community predates Da Evul Roamins by a couple of centuries or so, but your rabbis never tell you stuff like that when they're sniveling about Da Evul Xians, of course.

 

[irosie91]

Mr. Dud. Don't give up your day job----you are utterly unable to be elected as a judge on the Sanhedrin. The people who populated the monastic communities out there in the desert-----like the Essenes ---were not "banished" ---they were escapees from Roman oppression----to wit---essentially PHARISEES. Your sunday school "person" actually told you that
they were "banished people"? UHM----John the mikveh man was ANOTHER victim of DA JOOOOS? You could try stand-up comedy

Cyberbuddies----for the record----mr. dud has decided that "banishment" was a penalty imposed in Judea which is why there were outposts of monastic style communities in the "wild"---like in the Negev desert or the hills of Galilee----
Mr Dud got it wrong. Banishment was not a judicial thingy in jewish law even
though capital punishment was almost impossible to impose.. The out posts like the ESSENES and several other groups---like those that wrote the dead sea scrolls----were people who voluntarily set up their own communities to get away from Roman rule or even just to GET AWAY. They were religious idealists ----"zealots" and they depended on the natural resources of the wilderness which somehow turned out ok ---BITUMEN was a big time commodity. Logically---since they did write "the scrolls" ---with all kinds of religious allusions-----they were religious---in fact,---VERY. They were also very socialistic. And being Pharisees ---they were LITERATE. I believe that based
on the enthusiastic religiosity of John the Mikveh man and his ITINERANT way of life as described in the NT----that he did emerge from such a community. ALSO---very important is the fact that his persona is consistent with that of
ELIJAH---who is supposed to be the herald of the "WORLD TO COME"---
or the MESSIANIC ERA, the one in which "NATION SHALL NOT LIFT UP SWORD AGAINST NATION, AND THEY WILL NO LONGER LEARN THE WAYS OF WAR" SEE? the NT is worth something---historically. For the sake of
civility----leave a cup of wine for him---somewhere.

 

[irosie91]

lol more rubbish. We're still waiting on all those verses Constantine wrote as his bible, by the way. Nobody seems to know which ones. And, the Essenes community predates Da Evul Roamins by a couple of centuries or so, but your rabbis never tell you stuff like that when they're sniveling about Da Evul Xians, of course.

you remain confused, mr. dud----the fact of the ESSENES and the fact that they predate Jesus----and existed even during the time that the SYRIANS
(remember----wicked Antiochus?) occupied Judea aka Palestina ---is not
an innovative finding on your part. I is old---I remember when some christian guy whose name I forget was DESPERATE to find Jesus in the Dead Sea Scrolls------forget it----he failed. The Essenes were not BANISHED JOOOOS---the jelly bean lady was confused and John and Jesus were cousins---typical Pharisees.

 

[DudleySmith]

Cyberbuddies----for the record----mr. dud has decided that "banishment" was a penalty imposed in Judea which is why there were outposts of monastic style communities in the "wild"---like in the Negev desert or the hills of Galilee----
Mr Dud got it wrong. Banishment was not a judicial thingy in jewish law even
though capital punishment was almost impossible to impose.. The out posts like the ESSENES and several other groups---like those that wrote the dead sea scrolls----were people who voluntarily set up their own communities to get away from Roman rule or even just to GET AWAY. They were religious idealists ----"zealots" and they depended on the natural resources of the wilderness which somehow turned out ok ---BITUMEN was a big time commodity. Logically---since they did write "the scrolls" ---with all kinds of religious allusions-----they were religious---in fact,---VERY. They were also very socialistic. And being Pharisees ---they were LITERATE. I believe that based
on the enthusiastic religiosity of John the Mikveh man and his ITINERANT way of life as described in the NT----that he did emerge from such a community. ALSO---very important is the fact that his persona is consistent with that of
ELIJAH---who is supposed to be the herald of the "WORLD TO COME"---
or the MESSIANIC ERA, the one in which "NATION SHALL NOT LIFT UP SWORD AGAINST NATION, AND THEY WILL NO LONGER LEARN THE WAYS OF WAR" SEE? the NT is worth something---historically. For the sake of
civility----leave a cup of wine for him---somewhere.

Yes, we've all noticed you know squat about history, no news there. Your Rabbis probably didn't study it either, since like you they weren't interested.

 

[DudleySmith]

you remain confused, mr. dud----the fact of the ESSENES and the fact that they predate Jesus----and existed even during the time that the SYRIANS
(remember----wicked Antiochus?) occupied Judea aka Palestina ---is not
an innovative finding on your part. I is old---I remember when some christian guy whose name I forget was DESPERATE to find Jesus in the Dead Sea Scrolls------forget it----he failed. The Essenes were not BANISHED JOOOOS---the jelly bean lady was confused and John and Jesus were cousins---typical Pharisees.

lol yet you babbled some nonsense about Essenes 'fleeing Da Evul Roamins n stuff'. Make up your mind which fantasy you want to peddle. And, as was pointed out Essenes weren't the only ones living out in the wilds, you just needed to warp that for some rambling fantasy of yours or other. It's okay, lots of Jews prefer fantasy to real history, it's a common thing for some 1,500 years now.

 

[irosie91]

Yes, we've all noticed you know squat about history, no news there. Your Rabbis probably didn't study it either, since like you they weren't interested.

you have citations of JEWS IN COMMUNITIES OUT IN THE STICKS OF JUDEA because of "banishment" for heresy"? no you don't----what did exist was banishment for MANSLAUGHTER---in specific areas--sorta like colonies separating the convicted from general society. They were called "cities of
refuge" ---gee you are confused. Murder was almost impossible to prove.
This is the issue that confuses you. The cities of refuge have nothing to do
with the monastic communities out in the sticks. PS---I am not a rabbi---
I have no degree in jewish studies----unlike you----Ph-D Jelly Bean

 

[DudleySmith]

you have citations of JEWS IN COMMUNITIES OUT IN THE STICKS OF JUDEA because of "banishment" for heresy"? no you don't----what did exist was banishment for MANSLAUGHTER---in specific areas--sorta like colonies separating the convicted from general society. They were called "cities of
refuge" ---gee you are confused. Murder was almost impossible to prove.
This is the issue that confuses you. The cities of refuge have nothing to do
with the monastic communities out in the sticks. PS---I am not a rabbi---
I have no degree in jewish studies----unlike you----Ph-D Jelly Bean

Nobody accused Essenes of murder, for one, and Jews loved putting heretics to death or another, and of course other crimes were death penalty cases, like being Greek, for example, at some periods. 'Hellenism' was a serious offense. You should actually read a book once in a while, instead of relying on street begging rabbis on corners in NYC.

 

[DudleySmith]

--and existed even during the time that the SYRIANS
(remember----wicked Antiochus?) occupied Judea aka Palestina

Hey, my bad! I didn't know they were Roamins! Have you alerted the schools at Hebrew University yet? lol you can't even remember your own posts.