Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chris Beauchamp on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 4:18pm

The Enemy?    Are you living in the dark ages???  or in 2013?
 
Tim Lillie said:

There have long been people who say that the Truth is not the Truth. In the old days we might have said they were sent by the Enemy.

Chris Beauchamp said:

Greetings Jim:

This would be the first time I've been called modern.   I can tell you that 'modernist' does not fit me.  I'm old as dirt . . .and my beliefs and attitudes are likewise. 

So I would ask. . . are you sure?  And then I would suggest you go back and research some more. .   It is out there dear one.  Continue to research and you will find that and much more.  

 

Jim Wilson said:

Good Morning Chris:

Your view of Jesus is not the view that the Quaker founders had.  Your view is a new, modernist, interpretation.  I don't think it is supported by any evidence.  The earliest New Testament documents, the letters of Paul, are clear on the divinity of Jesus.  Likewise the Gospels articulate this message very clearly.  I don't see any evidence that the appelation 'Christ' was given 'much later'; it appears to have been used from the very beginning, even during the lifetime of Jesus.

Best wishes,

Jim
 
Chris Beauchamp said:

He was simply Jesus of Nazareth.  Christ was an Honorarium. . . given to him much later.  

He was not born Jesus the Christ. .  but studied with other Masters to fulfill this role as a world teacher.  A  role in which he tore apart people's assumptions and beliefs.  

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Beauchamp on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 4:19pm

As you prefer. 

Tim Lillie said:

More nonsense.

Spiny Norman said:

Chris, from the perspective of Buddhist meditation I'm familiar with the approach of accessing higher ( transcendental ) states of consciousness, but these experiences aren't dependent on a belief in God.  It's possible that we're talking about similar experiences but using different language, but I'm still not clear as to why you think a belief in God is necessary to experience pure consciousness ( or whatever ).

chris Beauchamp said:

Of course Spiny. . . belief in God is imperative.   They are the same. .  God is pure consciousness.. .  God is Truth. . . .God is Reality Itself.    God is all of that and more. . 

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Beauchamp on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 4:23pm

Only Human!  You may want to read my words again TL . 

I'm not intimidated by you. . or your demands.  And I wasn't a 1960's flower child either.  

You may want to do a liver cleanse. . . for all that anger. 
 
Tim Lillie said:

I am sorry for you Chris and will do my best to pray for your eventual convincement of the Truth. It is really incredible to see the notion that words mean nothing, yet from the same person the assertion that those they don't agree with are "childish" or that people's words show them to be not "open minded".

Do you really think that Christ is a sort of 1960s flower child, who wants to accept everyone as they are, who does not demand that people at least try to stop fooling themselves and that the Truth is not the Truth?

Yes, it's hard to be Christian and I have a long way to go and maybe will never be an example to others. But at least I am not trying to lead people away from God and towards an ethic that is only human.

TL

Chris Beauchamp said:

And Bill you can choose to be offended if you prefer.  It is your choice.    Unless we are sitting down in conversation. . most words spoken here are general at best.    That's all they can be.  And there is no emotion in a word. . .or a sentence..  or phrase.

 

Not very much offends me. . life is too short.  Acceptance is much gentler. 

 

When someone does not understand... . . they see it as arrogance. . which it is not.  If memory serves, Jesus was also often seen in the same light. . not that I'm comparing myself with him. . but I am named after him.   

 

I'm sharing words, that's all. .  words.  They actually have no meaning at all, but what we, individually, give them. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William F Rushby on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 4:25pm

Say, where is this "dialogue" headed?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ray Lovegrove on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 4:48pm

Perhaps it would be a good time to read the words in the original post for this discussion and give them some thought.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Timothy on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 4:51pm

Good Frends for Iesvs sake forbeare ! 

Agayne I saye:

"Dere Lorde and Father of mankind

Forgiue ovr foolysh wayes,

Reclothe vs in ovr rightfvl minde,

In pvrer liues Thy seuice finde,

In deeper reuerence prayse."

~Timothie~

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tim Lillie on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 4:56pm

Oh, Chris,

Now I am seeing that you are so judgmental and that your inability to have an open mind is harming you.... Or do you think that there is no Satan, no Enemy, no Evil?

But I am of course most saddened by the judgmental attitude....surely, words mean nothing? So why be so nasty? 

Perhaps I am so upset that I'm crying?

Chris Beauchamp said:

The Enemy?    Are you living in the dark ages???  or in 2013?
 
Tim Lillie said:

There have long been people who say that the Truth is not the Truth. In the old days we might have said they were sent by the Enemy.

Chris Beauchamp said:

Greetings Jim:

This would be the first time I've been called modern.   I can tell you that 'modernist' does not fit me.  I'm old as dirt . . .and my beliefs and attitudes are likewise. 

So I would ask. . . are you sure?  And then I would suggest you go back and research some more. .   It is out there dear one.  Continue to research and you will find that and much more.  

 

Jim Wilson said:

Good Morning Chris:

Your view of Jesus is not the view that the Quaker founders had.  Your view is a new, modernist, interpretation.  I don't think it is supported by any evidence.  The earliest New Testament documents, the letters of Paul, are clear on the divinity of Jesus.  Likewise the Gospels articulate this message very clearly.  I don't see any evidence that the appelation 'Christ' was given 'much later'; it appears to have been used from the very beginning, even during the lifetime of Jesus.

Best wishes,

Jim
 
Chris Beauchamp said:

He was simply Jesus of Nazareth.  Christ was an Honorarium. . . given to him much later.  

He was not born Jesus the Christ. .  but studied with other Masters to fulfill this role as a world teacher.  A  role in which he tore apart people's assumptions and beliefs.  

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tim Lillie on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 5:00pm

Are you serious? People here are pretending to be Quakers, to know Christ and are false and wrong. Would you suggest we forbear if those folks were making overtly racist comments? Or would you join in telling them to come to their senses? Or, would you say: "Well, we need overtly racist folks in the Society of Friends, to show our commitment to diversity"?

Timothy Bruffy said:

Good Frends for Iesvs sake forbeare ! 

Agayne I saye:

"Dere Lorde and Father of mankind

Forgiue ovr foolysh wayes,

Reclothe vs in ovr rightfvl minde,

In pvrer liues Thy seuice finde,

In deeper reuerence prayse."

~Timothie~

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Timothy on 9th mo. 30, 2013 at 5:13pm

If this arguing continues, I will just leave. I am sick and tired of debating. Let God and His Christ be True and every man a liar! What will it be?

If thee noticed, I never took sides? I merely tried to end this debate? I will be Silent. I will leave.

~Timothy~

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin on 10th mo. 1, 2013 at 4:20am

Tim, I am relatively new  to Quakers and just asking questions.   Have I described your beliefs as "nonsense"?  No.  Why do you find different views so threatening?

Tim Lillie said:

More nonsense.

Spiny Norman said:

Chris, from the perspective of Buddhist meditation I'm familiar with the approach of accessing higher ( transcendental ) states of consciousness, but these experiences aren't dependent on a belief in God.  It's possible that we're talking about similar experiences but using different language, but I'm still not clear as to why you think a belief in God is necessary to experience pure consciousness ( or whatever ).

chris Beauchamp said:

Of course Spiny. . . belief in God is imperative.   They are the same. .  God is pure consciousness.. .  God is Truth. . . .God is Reality Itself.    God is all of that and more. . 

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin on 10th mo. 1, 2013 at 4:25am

No, Tim, it's simply that people have different ideas of what it means to be a Quaker.   Some have traditional views, some have more liberal views.  

Tim Lillie said:

Are you serious? People here are pretending to be Quakers, to know Christ and are false and wrong. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin on 10th mo. 1, 2013 at 4:52am

Yes, Chris, I think that's a good way of saying it, and I suspect there is a commonality of spiritual experience beneath all the beliefs and assumptions.

Chris Beauchamp said:

  Developing a quiet mind is key. . . a gentle silence. . . and an open heart.    Is this more in alignment with you then?

 

 

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page