Archives for category: Christian

National Security and Worship

4/28/2018

Condensed Version: For full paper see: http://gadflyblog.com/tag/worship

Introduction

As a National Crises Troubleshooter for the past 55 years (with a short break for college where I graduated at the top of my class and received an offer to come to Livermore at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory where I earned the reputation as “The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter”), my interests, of course, include national security.  I learned about national security of the Israelite nation while teaching fourth grade Sunday school at TC.  It appears the Israelites had a slight problem understanding the guidelines that were given to them that would have made their new nation successful.  It also appears the Apostles had a slight problem with understanding the instructions that the messenger (the Representative of the Creator of the Universe, or “RoCoU”) they called Jesus gave to them on His exit from this planet Earth.

The Time Line:

  • The Israelites took the Ten Guidelines for a successful nation as literal commands.
  • The Israelites actually made a religion around these Ten Guidelines they took as Ten Commandments.
  • The Israelites were overrun by their neighbors the Babylonians and their elites forced into exile.
  • See http://gadflyblog.com/tag/worship for complete paper

 

Summary

In regard to national security, nothing that man has thought up could surpass this gift of a personal guide through life. There is no possibility that a “sacred cow” could be made of this gift and therefore not a threat to our national security or discourse within our nation among our citizens.

 Conclusion

In a nutshell, the Ten Guidelines, Ten Codes of Conduct, or, as the religious demand, Ten Commandments recorded in Exodus chapter twenty were given to a new-forming nation that was given land to build their nation.  These Ten Guidelines, when followed, would give this new nation a high economic operating efficiency.   Their national debt would not be skyrocketing out of control, exceeding their capacity to even make payments on the interest to the loans from other countries.  They would be a stronger nation than their competitors’ nations and would not be overrun by their neighbors.  These Ten Guidelines are all about national security and influence to the world.

Q.E.D.

Advertisements

The Path to World Peace ver. 1.2.7

A Case of Mistaken Identity

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired

http://gadflyblog.com/tag/world-peace/

1/17/2018

Abstract

See http://gadflyblog.com/tag/world-peace/ For the complete Post

Introduction

The path to world peace is much simpler than anyone has imagined. Peace on Earth could come down to one word: “worship” and a case of mistaken identity.

World peace has not been known since the Homo sapiens evolved on the planet and started their expansion across the globe.  Some other homos also evolved – such as the Homo Neanderthal – but the Homo sapiens (wise Homo) dominated the planet Earth.  Conflict often resulted from competition for natural resources or over territorial boundaries.  With the advent of ice ages and low sea levels, the Homo sapiens populated the globe.  Due to different climates, these Homo sapiens evolved to match their environment.  As populations grew and resources became scarce, wars of expansion dominated the globe for centuries.

There is a place in the Mediterranean known as the Fertile Crescent, where agriculture replaced the hunters and gathers and permanent communities and cities began to appear as the ice age receded.  As part of the evolution of man, worship was a key element in almost all of the societies on the planet.  Worship took on different forms, from sun worshipers to human sacrifices to the gods.

Conclusion

  • To repeat: the major focus of the new Paradigm is the “Personal Counselor”, a.k.a. The Holy Spirit that was sent to us by the RoCoU to guide us through life and teach us everything we need to know. [i] This is the New Paradigm shift and is exclusive of the Old Paradigm, and not a progression of the Old Paradigm. Thus, the path to world peace is this simple: just listen for this counselor and He will find you, guide you and teach you.

  • Do not make yourself an idol and worship your idol: not God, Jesus, Allah, Mohamed, Buddha, Confucius; the cross, the Star of David, the Bible, the New Testament, the Quran, or any written works. Anything that will take control of your decision-making, such as alcohol, tobacco, drugs of all kinds, etc. become idols, and addictions become sacred cows and sacred cows need to be defended at all costs until death! Therefore, The Path to World Peace is to eliminate all worship for it is worship that creates sacred cows and causes differences that must be defended. Worship is an artifact of ancient man.  Stay in control of your life by listening to the Personal Counselor that the RoCoU sent to you.

Q.E.D.

[i] The New Testament Bible NIV, John 14:16-26, 16:12-15

 

 

 

This Blog “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking” has been combined with “The Philosopher on Politics”to form a new Blog   http://gadflyblog.com/ effective 12/12/2016.

New Posts will appear on https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com and http://gadflyblog.com/

Thanks for your interest in these topics.

The Philosopher

Christianity is not an Offensive Weapon Ver. 1.1.2

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired

http://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/weapon/

The Philosopher

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/weapon/

4/19/2016

Copyright 2016

Introduction

As of late, there are several incidents in this first quarter of the twenty-first century that involve using Christianity as an offensive weapon.  The Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU) visited planet Earth twenty centuries ago and used parables to teach us that peace on this planet Earth can be obtained by “negotiating a workable compromise.”   This is a negotiating process that results in an agreement between individuals, organizations and nations and that works for all parties concerned.[i]

Case Study 1

The USA sought to oust the dictator of Iraq and did so effectively.  The overthrow of the dictator was justified from the fear that weapons of mass destruction were being constructed.  The driver for this operation was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the USA Armed Forces.  This was someone more knowledgeable of the military might of the USA than of negotiating a workable compromise.  However, the government installed a replacement for this dictatorship and, in turn, ousted the Islamic sect that was previously in power under this dictatorship. This resulted in their being disenfranchised from their home country.

The disenfranchised military members left their homeland with their weapons they possessed as being a part of the dictatorship’s army.  These disenfranchised military members formed their own group now known as ISIS-ISIL.  This new group rightly blamed the USA for their disenfranchisement and made their demands clear in a barbaric fashion. They did not want the USA involved in their objective to establish a home nation for this group in Iraq and Syria.

While under public pressure, the leadership of the USA retaliated against ISIS-ISIL with military air forces.  The USA leadership had an opportunity to negotiate a workable compromise at this time but instead chose to retaliate with force, and they did so under the label of Christianity.  ISIS-ISIL then retaliated against soft targets in Europe and, using propaganda on the internet, was able to influence USA citizens to retaliate against soft targets in the USA.  As they see the USA as a Christian nation, all citizens of the USA qualify as a soft target.

This progression of the USA targeting hard targets and ISIS-ISIL targeting soft targets has now escalated past the point of the present leadership of the USA to be able to negotiate a workable compromise with ISIS-ISIL.  A change in leadership with another leader not capable or experienced in negotiating workable compromises would effectively just be a change in the face of the leadership and would not result in a policy change from military action to negotiating a workable compromise. The RoCoU taught us during His visit twenty centuries ago to live in peace with our neighboring nations.  This leaves the only solution to peace as impeachment or resignation of the President of the USA, which would send a clear message to ISIS-ISSL that the USA is ready to negotiate a workable compromise.

Case Study 2

The leadership of a small local independent church was following the examples given in the New Testament of the Bible to guide and organize their church.  When their New Testament theology was threatened by the discovery of a scientific explanation of the events that were reported in the four Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles of this New Testament, the leadership chose to take offensive action to protect their religious tradition.

What could be the possible reasoning behind this aggressive offense by church and state?

  • The USA leadership was pressured by public opinion to take military action against ISIS-ISIL because of their barbaric method of sending a message to the USA to stay out of their fight.
  • The leadership of the USA mistakenly thought that an aggressive military action was consistent with Christian values.
  • The Commander-in-Chief’s responsibility is given to the President, when instead it should be delegated to a much wiser panel of mature statesmen (not the Joints Chiefs of Staff, as they have a conflict of interest, which was demonstrated by the invasion of Iraq).
  • Christian leadership in the church has become a professional Christian role. Professional Christians have a conflict of interest in their churches (Protestant), as they must maintain continued funding by a fickle membership to ensure the continuity of their salary.  The use of laypersons to perform leadership duties in the church mitigates this conflict of interest and would lead the way for debate on the Gospel in the church.  In another major non-Protestant denomination, this conflict of interest is mitigated by a corporate style of leadership.  In this case, it is a follow-the-leader style of church with a hierarchy of church leaders.  For this reason, the idea of open debate is unheard of in this denomination of the Christian church, as final authority rests with their chosen leader.
  • Debate in the church has been discouraged dating back to the Apostle Paul. Paul knew he was right even if he was not[ii] and the other orators were declared unreliable by Paul. [iii] Any interpretation of the Gospel other than that defined by the Apostle Paul was and is an imposter.
  • The RoCoU, on the other hand, stressed the use of negotiating a workable compromise to resolve differences of opinion in the church, in society microscopically and between nations macroscopically. [iv] Certainly he would have supported open debate in the church over the closed church doctrine that now exists in most present day churches.
  • A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it,” – Max Planck. [v] So it must also be true of a “New Paradigm in Christian Thinking.”

QED

 

 

[i]  Luke 12:58, http://biblehub.com/niv/luke/12-58.htm,  Luke 14:31-32,  https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+14:31-32&version=NIV

[ii] http://drleman.com, “The Firstborn Advantage”, Revell Pub. 2008, p69 “The Firstborn Personality”

[iii] 2 Corinthians 11:13-15, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Corinthians+11%3A13-15&version=NIV

[iv] Ibid i

[v] http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/max_planck.html

                            The Path to World Peace Ver. 1.1.4

The Philosopher

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/World-Peace/

http://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/World-Peace/

Revised 3/21/2016

Copyright 2016

Introduction

There are many factors that cause conflict in the world, but one of the largest divides between people on a microscopic social scale and between nations on a macroscopic social scale is religion.  Religion can be divided into two parts: faith and tradition. The difference between faith and tradition is that faith does not need to be defended, protected, preserved or expanded, while Tradition must be defended, protected, preserved and expanded.  The promotion of tradition can be by peaceable means or by aggressive armed conflict.  Faith is something that can be shared with others but only by the personal testimony and by example of/by the faithful.

The Visit by the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU)

Planet Earth received a visit by the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU, a.k.a. Jesus) in the Common Era (C.E.) (in common terms) or the Era after the Birth of our Lord Jesus (in religious terms). The RoCoU came to planet Earth in the most advantageous time and place.  He came when the Homo sapiens had developed to an agrarian society, making the transition from “hunters and gatherers” due to a warming climate moving from an Ice Age.[i]  The Romans had conquered much of the known world and had built roads that made communications from community to community possible.  The RoCoU arrived into a culture that was a monotheist society, making known the Creator of the Universe more possible versus a society that was multi-theist, as was most of the known world at this time.

The purpose of the visit by the RoCoU is best described in the book of Luke in the Book of Books, the Bible.  Luke was writing as a journalist reporting to excellent Theophilus, a person or a group of persons. [ii] He not only interviewed eyewitnesses of the events that took place during this visit of the RoCoU, but was an eyewitness himself in his travels with Paul on his missionary journeys as reported in the Book of Acts, a.k.a. Luke II.  More insights can be obtained in the Book of Mark, as Mark was writing as a historian and in haste, so he was direct and did not offer any interpretation of the events. He just recorded the events for history.  From the accounts of Luke, we see that the RoCoU was on planet Earth to teach the Homo sapiens how to live life successfully on this planet and that Homo sapiens’ existence on this planet Earth will be finite, as planet Earth’s existence will be finite.

The Resurrection Problem

The Resurrection of the RoCoU, a.k.a. Jesus, has been interpreted through history as a religious event. He died for our sins, was resurrected from the dead as a forecast of our own resurrection, and He ascended into Heaven as a forecast of our own ascension into Heaven. [iii]  It is important to note that Paul the Apostle was a Jew’s Jew, an Israelite’s Israelite and an expert in Jewish Law.  He was chosen to represent the RoCoU (Jesus) to the Jews and the Gentiles (non-Jews) because he was persecuting the followers of the RoCoU by Jesus Himself in a very dramatic way, and he had the leadership personality and skills to accomplish the mission of establishing the “Living Church” of the RoCoU and to accomplish the mission of the RoCoU on planet Earth. [iv]  Paul, therefore, was humbled by the RoCoU and he put the focus of the Gospel message on the RoCoU himself and tied this event to the Jewish religious teachings of the time.

The RoCoU, however, put the focus of his message as being totally independent from – not tied to or a progression of – the Jewish religion.  “He told them this parable: ‘No one tears a piece out of a new garment to patch an old one. Otherwise, they will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old. And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. Otherwise, the new wine will burst the skins; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined.  No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins. And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for they say, ‘The old is better.’’” This is clearly a teaching of a “Paradigm Shift” which is a term that was not coined until the seventeenth century by the Philosopher Immanuel Kant and Thomas Kuhn in 1962. This term was first applied to the paradigm shift of the mathematics of the Greeks and to Newtonian Physics, and was later applied to social science by H.L Handa and to the paradigm shift of Christianity by Hans Kuhn. [v]

In general, a Paradigm Shift is a new way of thinking or a new way of understanding or acting.  The New Paradigm is totally independent from – not tied to or a progression of – the existing Paradigm. Therefore, the message brought to planet Earth by the RoCoU was indeed a Paradigm Shift from the Jewish Religion, which was the religion of the Homos sapiens where the RoCoU made His appearance on planet Earth.

The Return of the RoCoU to His Home Base

The RoCoU came to planet Earth in the form of the existing Homo sapiens on planet Earth by the immaculate conception of Mary, His surrogate mother.  He was raised in the Jewish society to which he was born and had complete knowledge of this Jewish religion and tradition.  To return back to His home base somewhere in the universe, He needed a change in form that would allow him to make that transition.  If He were to be interned on this planet as a corpse, he would not be able to return to His home base and go onto His next assignment, another planet, like the planet Earth in the “Goldilocks Zone,” to advance the life that has evolved on that planet as it did on planet Earth.  Therefore, the death, resurrection and the ascension of the RoCoU was necessary for him to continue His work in the universe created by the Creator of the universe – His Father.

The Science behind the Visit of the RoCoU

Astrologers have determined that there are approximately four billion other planets like Earth in the universe.  These plants are in the “Goldilocks Zone,” which means they are not too hot, not too cold, and are not too large and not too small. And given the possibility that water exists on these planets, which along with amino acid [vi] are the two requirements to produce life on these planets, all the other elements to create life are readily available in the universe (a.k.a. “star dust”). The conclusions that can be drawn from this data are that the RoCoU may have a lot of planets like planet Earth to visit.  That makes planet Earth a very small number amongst all of its peers.  Therefore, planet Earth is not just a singular miracle as it has been reported in the past.  Astro physicists estimate that the sun has about four billion years of fuel left to burn, and then it will extinguish and life and the planet Earth will cease to exist in this solar system.  The RoCoU stated the end time would come like a “Bolt of Lightning.” [vii]

Negotiating a Workable Compromise is Key to World Peace

The RoCoU stated that negotiating a “workable compromise” was one of the most import things to do to be reconciled with an adversary.[viii] Only children, or children who are widely separated in age or distance from their siblings (functional only children), have the disadvantage of having grown up in their family of origin without near-in-age siblings and not gaining the natural ability to negotiate a workable compromise.  These special children, who are becoming more numerous in our and other nation’s societies, have also shown themselves to be world leaders.  There have been five Presidents of the USA, including our present President in this first quarter of the twenty-first century, as well as the leader of Russia, who have not developed the natural skill of negotiating a workable compromise. Who knows how many other world leaders did not have an opportunity to develop the natural skill of negotiating a ‘Workable Compromise’? Their communication style incudes statements like, “I want this” and “I want that,” and they usually got what they wanted in their family of origin and this communication style carried over into adulthood.[ix]  Being the oldest sibling with a near-in-age same sex sibling also tends to show an aggressive communication style and does not demonstrate they learned how to negotiate a workable compromise in their family of origin.  Learning to negotiate a workable compromise, once majority has been obtained, often comes only with intervention and intensive training.

The Effect of Divorce on World Peace

Looking at world peace on a microscopic scale leads to exploring the changing families of origin.  Sociologists have presented three perspectives on the cause of the increasing divorce rate in the USA and Western Europe, as only Japan has been able to minimize divorce and hold families together under the same roof.  The three perspectives are:  Symbolism, Functionalism and Conflict Theory. Taking Religion into account, a fourth perspective would be the effects of religion on the rate of divorce.  All of these four perspectives must be taking as parts of the whole, since each perspective only gives a partial view of the changing societies of the world.

Symbolism Interaction

Symbolism interaction is a microsociological examination on small-scale patterns of social interaction.  Its focus is face-to-face interactions and how people use symbols to create social life.  Industrialization and urbanization change marital roles and lead to a redefinition of love, marriage, children and divorce. The increasing divorce rate is explained in terms of changing symbols (or meanings) associated with both marriage and divorce.  Changes in people’s ideas—about divorce, marital satisfaction, love, the nature of children and parenting and the roles of husband and wife—have put extreme pressure on today’s married couples.  No single change is the cause, but taken together, these changes provide a strong ‘push’ toward divorce. ” [x]

Functional Analysis

 “The central idea of functional analysis is that society is a whole unit made up of interrelated parts that work together.  Society is viewed as a kind of living organism.  Just as a biological organism has organs that function together, so does society like an organism. If society is to function smoothly, its various parts must work together in harmony.  The group is a functioning whole, with each part related to the whole.  Whenever we examine a smaller part, we need to look for its functions and dysfunctions to see how it is related to the larger unity.

The family has lost many of its traditional functions, while others are presently under assault.  Especially significant is that economic production is no longer a cooperative, home-based effort, with husbands and wives depending on one another for their interlocking contributions to a mutual endeavor.  Husbands and wives today earn individual paychecks, and increasingly function as separate components of an impersonal, multinational, and even global system.  When outside agencies take over family function, this makes the family more fragile and an increase in divorce inevitable.  The fewer functions that family members have in common, the fewer their ‘ties that bind,’ and these ties are what help see husbands and wives through the inevitable problems they experience.” [xi] 

An early and similar living organism view of society was applied to the Christian Church by the Apostle Paul. “Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others.” [xii]


 

Conflict Theory 

Applying conflict theory to explain why the U.S. divorce rate is high, conflict theorist look at men’s and women’s relationship in terms of basic inequalities—men dominate and exploit, while women are dominated and exploited.  They also point out that marriage reflects the basic male-female relationship of society and is one of the means by which men maintain their domination and exploitation of women.

Conflict theorists see marriage as reflecting society’s basic inequalities between males and females.  Higher divorce rates result from changed male-female power relationships, especially as wives attempt to resolve basic inequalities and husbands resist those efforts.  From the conflict perspective, then, the increase in divorce is not a sign that marriage has weakened but, rather, a sign that women are making headway in their historical struggle with men.” [xiii]

Religion and the Rise in Divorce Rate

Following the lines of conflict theory with women gaining power in the U. S., religion is playing an important function with the diversity of religions in the U.S.  In western nations, the percentage rate of births to unmarried mothers (UMM) is increasing (from greatest to least of UMM rates is: Sweden, Denmark, France, United States, Great Britain, Canada and Germany).  Only the monotheist nations Italy and Japan have low UMM rates. [xiv]  Women have been gaining power; states have accommodated this change in the power structure of marriage with community property laws, no-fault divorce, and amicable attorney guided divorce.

A Lesson from History

“King Solomon, however, loved many foreign women besides Pharaoh’s daughter—Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians and Hittites.  They were from nations about which the Lord had told the Israelites, ‘You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn your hearts after their gods.’ Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to them in love. He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.” [xv] Historically this number of wives may have become inflated due to the verbal nature of passing down historical information in this time period, as there was not a great many people living in this area in this time period.

Effects of Men Marrying Wives of a Different Religion

There are several instances in which men find themselves married to a woman whose religious beliefs become objectionable.  This usually happens when the husband or mate attains the age of thirty-five to thirty-nine.[xvi]  At this age a maturation process begins [xvii] and the religious teaching of their youth (often from their mother) kicks in and they make a major life changing decision to follow the religion of their youth, which is now in conflict with the religion of their mate.  But as seen in Solomon’s case, these women do not change their religion, at least not easily.  Women are governed under different rules of life than men. They do not seem to go through this mid-life transformation; they have their own bodily changes at about the age of fifty.

In this changing of religions situation, mothers often take the position that they must protect their children form the heretical teaching of the new religion of their mate.  In community property states and no-fault divorce states, this can lead to some dicey situations and long discussions in courts, about the future of the children, and may result in court orders in regard to child custody.  Our courts do not seem to have the wisdom given to Solomon [xviii] when it comes to establishing what is best for the family, but they usually follow the letter of the law which does not put much substance in negotiating a workable compromise.

The Path to World Peace

What then is the “Path to World Peace?”  The Path to World Peace has two roads to follow.  Route one is to come to terms with the visit of the RoCoU to planet Earth twenty plus centuries ago and come to grips with the notion that He did not come to Planet Earth to set Himself up as a person or deity to be worshiped, but rather He came to instruct us how to live successfully on this planet Earth. [xix] This, in effect, was part of the evolutionary process of the Homo sapiens species.

The RoCoU taught that the teachings he was bringing to us was not tied to, in conjunction with, or a progression of anything that had preceded His visit.  “One does not put new wine into an old wineskin. The new wine is too volatile and will burst the old wineskin and he will lose both the new wine and the old wineskin.  New wine must be put into new wineskins.[xx]

Regarding The Path to World Peace, the RoCoU taught two parables that He hoped would be understood by his disciples and handed down through the generations.  Unfortunately His disciples were not at the development stage that they could understand these parables. They themselves were caught up in a religious society and could not separate their thinking in religious terms from that of scientific terms.  Parable 1, (One-on-One Peace): “As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate, try hard to be reconciled on the way, or your adversary may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison.” [xxi] Parable 2, (Nation-to-Nation Peace): “Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.” [xxii]

The Path to World Peace: Negotiate a Workable Compromise with your personal adversaries and with other nations that have a different view of the world than your own nation.  Accept the overwhelming evidence that planet Earth is but one of a billion or so other planets like Earth and the RoCoU paid us a visit in a special place that was most advantageous for Him to get His message to the world’s inhabitants.  The RoCoU’s message was to teach us how to live on this planet Earth peacefully with other people and other nations, and these teachings were based on science not religion.  “People who are unable to understand perfectly both the Bible and the science far outnumber those who do understand them.” – Galileo (1564-1642).

There is one caveat to negotiating a workable compromise.  Most of us grew up in our family of origin with another sibling(s) somewhat close to our own age (within five years).  We learned naturally how to negotiate a workable compromise and how to share with another sibling.  Only children and those with distant siblings (greater than five years) did not receive this natural training to share and negotiate a workable compromise.  As a result, they got most of everything they wanted without outcries from their siblings, resulting in a communication style of “I want this” and “I want that,” and they usually got what they wanted.  They never outgrew this early training.

Food For Thought

Our greatest economic competitor, China, has a one-hundred percent national population of people age about thirty-five and younger, in this first quarter of the twenty-first century, that are only children and are coming into power positions in their country. This could prove challenging for leaders of the world’s nations to deal with since they would have little training in how to negotiate a workable compromise and would be accustomed to getting everything they want.  If the USA continues to elect only children as their President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, this could be devastating to the USA, as neither nation would have leaders with the natural training to share and negotiate a ‘Workable Compromise’.

QED

 

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_society

[ii] Luke 1:1-4, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_1

[iii]I Corinthians 15,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection_of_Jesus

[iv] Acts 9, https://www.bible.com/bible/111/act.9.niv#!

[v] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

[vi] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid

[vii] Luke 17:22-24, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+17:22-24&version=NIV/

[viii] Luke 12:58-59, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+12%3A58-59&version=NIV/,

Luke 14:31-32, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+14%3A31-33&version=NIV/

[ix] http://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/adlerian-psy/

[x] James M. Henslin, Sociology “a Down-to-Earth Approach 5th ed. Allyn and Bacon, 2001 pp24-26

[xi] Ibid pp27-30

[xii] The Apostle Paul, Romans 12:4-5, The Book of Books, (The Bible), NIV

[xiii] Ibid vi pp 30-31

[xiv] Ibid vi p26-28

[xv] I Kings 11:1-3, The Book of Books (The Bible)

[xvi] C. G. Jung and personal observations

[xvii] The President of the USA must be Thirty-Five years old, USA Constitution

[xviii] 1 Kings 3: 16-28, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Solomon

[xix] Book of Luke, The Book of Books (The Bible)

[xx] Luke 5:36-39, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+5:36-39&version=NIV

[xxi] Luke 12:58, http://biblehub.com/luke/12-58.htm

[xxii] Luke 14: 31-33, http://biblehub.com/niv/luke/14.htm

The Origin of the Holy Spirit Ver. 1.0.1

The Philosopher

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/holy-spirit/

3/16/2016

Copyright 2016

Introduction

The Holy Spirit has been recorded as arriving on the day of the Pentecost Festival, fifty days after the crucifixion of the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU), a.k.a. Jesus. [i] However, Socrates was reported to be the wisest man on the planet in his time.

Socrates and the Source of his Wisdom

According to Plato’s Apology, Socrates’ life as the ‘gadfly’ of Athens began when his friend Chaerephon asked the oracle at Delphi if anyone were wiser than Socrates; the Oracle responded that no-one was wiser. Socrates believed the Oracle’s response was a paradox, because he believed he possessed no wisdom whatsoever. Socrates concluded: While each man thought he knew a great deal and was wise, in fact they knew very little and were not wise at all. Socrates realized the Oracle was correct; while so-called wise men thought themselves wise and yet were not, he himself knew he was not wise at all, which, paradoxically, made him the wiser one since he was the only person aware of his own ignorance.”[ii]

Socrates and His Guiding Spirit

 “Perhaps the most interesting facet of this is Socrates’ reliance on what the Greeks called his ‘daimōnic sign,’ an averting (ἀποτρεπτικός apotreptikos) inner voice Socrates heard only when he was about to make a mistake. It was this sign that prevented Socrates from entering into politics. In the Phaedrus, we are told Socrates considered this to be a form of ‘divine madness,’ the sort of insanity that is a gift from the gods and gives us poetry, mysticism, love, and even philosophy itself. Alternately, the sign is often taken to be what we would call ‘intuition;’ however, Socrates’ characterization of the phenomenon as daimōnic may suggest that its origin is divine, mysterious, and independent of his own thoughts.” [iii]

Conclusion

Therefore the Holy Spirit preceded the coming of RoCoU, a.k.a. Jesus, a.k.a. the Savior, a.k.a. the Counselor.  The events that occurred on planet Earth before and after the arrival of RoCoU, a.k.a. Jesus, would indicate that very few, if any, other than Socrates allowed this Spirit to guide them through life on Earth.

QED

 

[i] Acts of the Apostles, Act2:1-13, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+2%3A1-13&version=NIV

[ii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates#The_Socratic_problem

[iii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates

God’s Chosen Time and Place; Not God’s Chosen People Ver. 1.1.0

The Philosopher

https://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/chosen

Rev. 1/1/2016

Copyright 2015

 

Introduction

During this time of year – December – the birth of Jesus gets a lot of attention.  Was Jesus born to a promised people or was Jesus born in God’s chosen place?   The birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, and reared in Nazareth, is in an area known as “The Fertile Crescent.”   It is here that paleoanthropologists have determined was the birth of civilization as we know it in this first quarter of the twenty-first century.  The development of man from a hunter-gatherer and nomad transitioned from tending flocks and gathering to learning how to plant seeds and grow crops.  This new skill, planting, enabled men to reside in one place and build cities.  Jericho has been determined to be the oldest city on the planet and is located in this Fertile Crescent along the Mediterranean Sea.  The Romans were in power and had created roads throughout this region, so travel to distant places was made easier and communications between cities was greatly improved.

The families that Jesus was born into were of the Jewish religion and were known as Israelites.  Mathew traced the linage of Jesus’s paternal father back to David, the son of Abraham, who was the Father of the Israelites. [i]  Does this make Jesus Jewish and an Israelite or is this just the mode of his appearance on earth?  It was pointed out to me and other class members by one of our classmates that Jesus could not have arrived in a more advantageous place on Earth.  “This is the only region on Earth that Jesus could have had the impact that He did on the world.” [ii]  So the question remains, are the Jewish Israelites God’s chosen people or is this just God’s chosen time and place for Jesus to enter the world?

A Monotheist People

The Jewish Israelites were a monotheist people, believing in one God.  This was to be an advantage to Jesus by teaching this monotheist people about a new relationship with their God, who was “Their Father in Heaven.”  This advantage turned out to be more of a stumbling block for the Jewish Israelites, as even to this day, in the first quarter of the twenty-first century, many of those in the Jewish religion still find Jesus as an upstart and a threat to Jewish religion.  Saul, who became the Apostle Paul, was assigned by Jesus to take his message to the Gentiles (Non-Jewish Israelites) Paul found the acceptance of these people mostly receptive to his message of this new relationship with the one God, our Father in Heaven.  It follows that the teaching of Jesus about the new cloth as a patch on the old cloth, the new wine into new wineskins and the old wine being better than the new, detailed below, proved to be very accurate as the Jewish Israelites’ rejection of His message of this new relationship with our Father in Heaven.  This writer’s observation is that the time required for someone to accept a new paradigm is proportional to their education, especially in the area of the old paradigm.

Jesus Was Way Ahead of His Time

Jesus was teaching the Jewish people advanced concepts that would not even be discovered by man until many centuries later.  One of these teachings was the description of a “paradigm shift,” which was a phrase that was not coined until Immanuel Kant used the phrase in the preface to his Critique of Pure Reason (1781), referring to Greek mathematics and Newtonian physics:

 “A paradigm shift is a phrase that was popularized by American physicist Thomas Kuhn to describe the nature of scientific revolutions, or fundamental changes in the basic concepts and experimental practices of a scientific discipline.  Hans Küng applies Thomas Kuhn’s theory of paradigm change to the entire history of Christian thought and theology. He identifies six historical “macromodels”: 1) the apocalyptic paradigm of primitive Christianity, 2) the Hellenistic paradigm of the patristic period, 3) the medieval Roman Catholic paradigm, 4) the Protestant (Reformation) paradigm, 5) the modern Enlightenment paradigm, and 6) the emerging ecumenical paradigm. He also discusses five analogies between natural science and theology in relation to paradigm shifts. Küng addresses paradigm change in his books, ‘Paradigm Change in Theology and Theology for the Third Millennium: An Ecumenical View.’ ” [iii]

Jesus taught the process of a paradigm shift to his Jewish disciples to show that what He was bringing to Earth was totally different and not dependent on the Jewish religion, history, or tradition, but was a new relationship with our Father in Heaven – a completely different and a standalone relationship.  “No one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one.  If he does, he will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old[iv] [or the new unshrunk cloth will pull away from the old, making the tear worse][v]. And no one pours new wine into old wineskins.  If he does, the new wine will burst the skins; the new wine must be poured into new wineskins.  And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says. ‘The old is better.’” [vi] Jesus was certainly way ahead of His time on the subject of new paradigms, for He was teaching them that they must scrap the old Jewish religious practices, traditions and history and welcome this new relationship with our Father in Heaven. 

The Apostle Paul and His Message

Saul, who became Paul, was well educated in the Jewish religion, tradition and history.  Paul was born to an aristocratic Pharisee father in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in Jerusalem. He was a Roman citizen by birth and educated in the Jewish religion by Gamaliel. [vii]  Paul was converted from a persecutor of Christians (People of the Way) on his way to Damascus to arrest the Christians there.  He was temporarily blinded by a bright light on the road to Damascus by Jesus, who assigned him to take His message to the Jews and Gentiles.[viii]

In preparation for his visit to Rome, Paul recorded his theology on the message of Jesus in the book of Romans in the Book of Books, the Bible.  Paul did not have the knowledge of all the things of which Jesus had knowledge, and related the Gospel of Jesus to the old Jewish religion, tradition and history, giving a different perspective on the Gospel than that presented by Jesus himself.   Paul made Jesus the centerpiece of his Gospel and Jesus made our relationship with our Farther in Heaven and His Personal Counselor – the Holy Spirit – the centerpiece of His Gospel.

The Apostle Paul exhibited much of the Adlerian Physiological traits of a first born male and was possibly the only male child raised in this family. The firstborn male is aPerfectionist (does everything well.  Overly critical and dissatisfied with his own performance); Driven (Ambitious, headed for success. Always under great pressure); Organized (Able to stay on top of everything.  No room in life for flexibility); Scholarly (Able to think problems through and solve them.  Sometimes thinks too much; is overly serious); List Maker (Gets things done; knows where he’s going.  Boxes himself in’ becomes a slave to his list); Logical (Avoids pitfalls of compulsive behavior.  Knows he’s right, even when he isn’t); Leader (Plays an important part in his family, community, etc. [He is] expected to do too much; always leaned on by others); Compliant (Known as a good guy.  Known as an easy mark); Aggressive ([He] gets ahead in life; others look up to him.  [He] tends to be selfish and to disregard the feelings of others).” [ix]

The Grand Conclusion of Christianity

The axiom of philosophy that states that, “when you choose whom to ask the question, you have already determined the answer,” holds true for Jesus and the Apostle Paul.  They are two very different individuals, both well educated in the Jewish Israelite religion, traditions and history, but both of different character and knowledge.  The Apostle Paul was relating his message of the (Gospel) of Jesus to the Jewish religion, tradition and history making Jesus the focus of his Gospel, while Jesus taught that His message (Gospel) was totally different and separate from the Jewish religion, tradition and history and put His focus on our new relationship with our Father in Heaven and His Personal Counselor.  Is it any wonder the world is confused about the Christian religion or if it even is a religion?  The idea that Jesus should be worshiped came from the followers of Jesus, not from Jesus who pointed to a new relationship with our Father in Heaven and the guidance of His Personal Counselor, the Holy Spirit.  This looks to be more science than religion, science that we in this first quarter of the twenty-first century have not yet defined.

 

QED

 

[i] Mathew 1:1-17

[ii] Mathew Heart, Private Communication, Explorers,  Cedar Grove Community Church, Livermore, CA, 2015

[iii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

[iv] Luke 5:36-39

[v] Mark 2:21

[vi] Ibid iv

[vii] Acts 22:3

[viii] Acts 9

[ix] Dr. Kevin Leman, “The First Born Advantage” Revell pub. 2008, p 69