How to approach the teachings of Jesus

[TSherbs]

This is a spill over thread because another became way off topic.

Continue here if you are interested in a discussion about the New Testament.

[Cool Breeze]

This is a spill over thread because another became way off topic.

Continue here if you are interested in a discussion about the New Testament.

100 or 1 million people could read something and have exactly that many interpretations as to how to correctly do so. As such, there needs to be an authoritative source as to what the proper or correct interpretation is. Our Blessed Lord gave that authority to the Catholic Church. You need to find older sources that have been adopted as authoritative and without error (a difficult thing to do if you don't know where to look). If I were you, I would look first at anything by St. Thomas Aquinas. He developed the entire moral philosophy (first started by Aristotle) that the Church as adopted as Her own. He has been declared a Doctor of the Church and his writings are amazing.

If, for some reason, you don't like the idea of what I just wrote because you are protestant, etc, you should still look at his commentary on the virtues as they are a completely OBJECTIVE (NOT subjective/relativist) way to look at literally every single situation you face in your life.

ETA - the Order of Preachers/Dominican Order follow St. Thomas Aquinas in their teachings. So you can look up anything they write as well. Look for "OP" after the author's name and it should be a good starting point as well.

[Medievalist]

100 or 1 million people could read something and have exactly that many interpretations as to how to correctly do so. As such, there needs to be an authoritative source as to what the proper or correct interpretation is. Our Blessed Lord gave that authority to the Catholic Church. You need to find older sources that have been adopted as authoritative and without error (a difficult thing to do if you don't know where to look). If I were you, I would look first at anything by St. Thomas Aquinas. He developed the entire moral philosophy (first started by Aristotle) that the Church as adopted as Her own. He has been declared a Doctor of the Church and his writings are amazing.

If you want to read Aquines, learn Latin. Don't rely on a translation.

If you want authoritative sources for the New Testament, learn Koine (you can learn enough to read a modern editon in about six weeks).

If you really want autoritative sources (vs. authorities; sources are primary, authorities are secondary) the entire extant mss. of the two oldest complete NT Bibles, Codex Sinaiaticus and Codex Vaticanus are both availiable in high quality images online, for free.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

100 or 1 million people could read something and have exactly that many interpretations as to how to correctly do so. As such, there needs to be an authoritative source as to what the proper or correct interpretation is. Our Blessed Lord gave that authority to the Catholic Church. You need to find older sources that have been adopted as authoritative and without error (a difficult thing to do if you don't know where to look). If I were you, I would look first at anything by St. Thomas Aquinas. He developed the entire moral philosophy (first started by Aristotle) that the Church as adopted as Her own. He has been declared a Doctor of the Church and his writings are amazing.

Really? At the last count there are more than seven churches that make the claim to being the 'authorised church'. Can't all be right, can they? Choices, choices.

[Mags]

Churches: I would think all Christian Churches retain some moral autonomy and authorities. The Orthodox Catholic, Roman Catholic and Anglican Church of England are simply early churches and Anglican's are the root of several branches of new churches that broke away. Then taken all together as one small c catholic or universal church of Christianity they form something like an authoritative source. It is entirely complicated with Calvin, Luther, influences and contrasted with apostolic successions and claims of broken lines of laying on of hands for Church Bishops and such. Both Roman Catholic and Anglicans claim the unbroken line from the early Orthodox Churches along with the Orthodox Catholic denomination.

Maybe the best we can all do is listen, read, learn and be as patient and tolerant of each other's views in our faith journey. I have enjoyed some recent studying of Hebrew Scripture to better dive deep in to Torah and Wisdom books.

100 or 1 million people could read something and have exactly that many interpretations as to how to correctly do so. As such, there needs to be an authoritative source as to what the proper or correct interpretation is. Our Blessed Lord gave that authority to the Catholic Church. You need to find older sources that have been adopted as authoritative and without error (a difficult thing to do if you don't know where to look). If I were you, I would look first at anything by St. Thomas Aquinas. He developed the entire moral philosophy (first started by Aristotle) that the Church as adopted as Her own. He has been declared a Doctor of the Church and his writings are amazing.

Really? At the last count there are more than seven churches that make the claim to being the 'authorised church'. Can't all be right, can they? Choices, choices.

[TSherbs]

A central tenet of existentialism is the ethical obligation of the individual to construct a rational morality without a godhead. It's our duty, and Sartre calls it cowardice to shirk it or to rely on the false certainty of godhead to reinforce "right" and "wrong."

[TSherbs]

This is a spill over thread because another became way off topic.

Continue here if you are interested in a discussion about the New Testament.

100 or 1 million people could read something and have exactly that many interpretations as to how to correctly do so. As such, there needs to be an authoritative source as to what the proper or correct interpretation is. Our Blessed Lord gave that authority to the Catholic Church. You need to find older sources that have been adopted as authoritative and without error (a difficult thing to do if you don't know where to look). If I were you, I would look first at anything by St. Thomas Aquinas....

It's this addressed to me, specifically?

[Cool Breeze]

This is a spill over thread because another became way off topic.

Continue here if you are interested in a discussion about the New Testament.

100 or 1 million people could read something and have exactly that many interpretations as to how to correctly do so. As such, there needs to be an authoritative source as to what the proper or correct interpretation is. Our Blessed Lord gave that authority to the Catholic Church. You need to find older sources that have been adopted as authoritative and without error (a difficult thing to do if you don't know where to look). If I were you, I would look first at anything by St. Thomas Aquinas....

It's this addressed to me, specifically?

Yes, of course - you started the thread "How to approach the teachings of Jesus"

[TSherbs]

This is a spill over thread because another became way off topic.

Continue here if you are interested in a discussion about the New Testament.

100 or 1 million people could read something and have exactly that many interpretations as to how to correctly do so. As such, there needs to be an authoritative source as to what the proper or correct interpretation is. Our Blessed Lord gave that authority to the Catholic Church. You need to find older sources that have been adopted as authoritative and without error (a difficult thing to do if you don't know where to look). If I were you, I would look first at anything by St. Thomas Aquinas....

It's this addressed to me, specifically?

Yes, of course - you started the thread "How to approach the teachings of Jesus"

I started it, but really only to move the discussion that was derailing the other thread.

I'm all set on the Jesus stuff. I have decades of history with the church and with the writings of many saints and Christian writers.

[kazoolaw]

I'm all set on the Jesus stuff. I have decades of history with the church and with the writings of many saints and Christian writers.

Neither of which is the teaching of Jesus.

[Cool Breeze]

I'm all set on the Jesus stuff. I have decades of history with the church and with the writings of many saints and Christian writers.

Neither of which is the teaching of Jesus.

The specific books that were read were never mentioned so how can you make that assertion?

[kazoolaw]

I'm all set on the Jesus stuff. I have decades of history with the church and with the writings of many saints and Christian writers.

Neither of which is the teaching of Jesus.

The specific books that were read were never mentioned so how can you make that assertion?

Books about the history of a church, and writings by "saints" and writers are not in themselves Jesus' teaching. They may be writing about Jesus' teaching, but they are not, themselves, Jesus' teachings.

TS likes to characterize anything which challenges his assertions as trolling.

[TSherbs]

I'm all set on the Jesus stuff. I have decades of history with the church and with the writings of many saints and Christian writers.

Neither of which is the teaching of Jesus.

The specific books that were read were never mentioned so how can you make that assertion?

He's just trolling me. Don't worry about it. If you want to discuss something with me, I'm open to it, but you should know that I no longer believe that the Bible is the word of a god. I have no confidence that any god exists, particularly not the Christian idea of one. But I read the Bible and also teach stories from it as part of my literature classes.

[Cool Breeze]

I'm all set on the Jesus stuff. I have decades of history with the church and with the writings of many saints and Christian writers.

Neither of which is the teaching of Jesus.

The specific books that were read were never mentioned so how can you make that assertion?

He's just trolling me. Don't worry about it. If you want to discuss something with me, I'm open to it, but you should know that I no longer believe that the Bible is the word of a god. I have no confidence that any god exists, particularly not the Christian idea of one. But I read the Bible and also teach stories from it as part of my literature classes.

Trolling - gotcha. I should have known. I was not part of the other series of posts you mentioned and didn't read it. These kind of discussion tend to get heated and no one really changes their minds - so I never bother. I saw the subject to your post on the main board as I was scrolling and it was a slow fastball right over the middle of the plate and I could not help but hit a home run especially for the little effort it took me. It all seemed legitimate to my very fast glance.

As for your current beliefs - I am sorry to hear that and I am not prepared to have a long discussion about that. But I will put my money where my mouth is and present to you the advice I gave in my first post. St. Thomas Aquinas's famous work called "Five proofs/ways of the existence of God". There is an 8:53 min video about it on youtube that is entertaining as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42Eg6UUBqqo - If curiosity ever strikes you! Best wishes.

[Bold2013]

I'm all set on the Jesus stuff. I have decades of history with the church and with the writings of many saints and Christian writers.

Neither of which is the teaching of Jesus.

The specific books that were read were never mentioned so how can you make that assertion?

He's just trolling me. Don't worry about it. If you want to discuss something with me, I'm open to it, but you should know that I no longer believe that the Bible is the word of a god. I have no confidence that any god exists, particularly not the Christian idea of one. But I read the Bible and also teach stories from it as part of my literature classes.

Trolling - gotcha. I should have known. I was not part of the other series of posts you mentioned and didn't read it. These kind of discussion tend to get heated and no one really changes their minds - so I never bother. I saw the subject to your post on the main board as I was scrolling and it was a slow fastball right over the middle of the plate and I could not help but hit a home run especially for the little effort it took me. It all seemed legitimate to my very fast glance.

As for your current beliefs - I am sorry to hear that and I am not prepared to have a long discussion about that. But I will put my money where my mouth is and present to you the advice I gave in my first post. St. Thomas Aquinas's famous work called "Five proofs/ways of the existence of God". There is an 8:53 min video about it on youtube that is entertaining as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42Eg6UUBqqo - If curiosity ever strikes you! Best wishes.

Cool Breeze we might not see eye to eye on some theological matter but I appreciate your wisdom and genuineness.

[Bold2013]

Just out of curiosity what Bible stories do you teach?

[Empty_of_Clouds]

There are two main problems with the 'Five ways' presented by Aquinas.

1. They are all based on assumptions without evidence.
2. They are all sufficiently explained by science - physics, biology, chemistry.


In his struggles to understand the phenomena of our Universe at large and the world in local (bearing in mind that he lived in the 13th century CE), and being already massively biased toward religion, it is hardly surprising that he ascribed anything unexplainable (for the time) as a product of a mythical all-powerful being. It was a convenient get out of jail card if you will. This is not to say that his works are completely without value.

[Cool Breeze]

There are two main problems with the 'Five ways' presented by Aquinas.

1. They are all based on assumptions without evidence.
2. They are all sufficiently explained by science - physics, biology, chemistry.


In his struggles to understand the phenomena of our Universe at large and the world in local (bearing in mind that he lived in the 13th century CE), and being already massively biased toward religion, it is hardly surprising that he ascribed anything unexplainable (for the time) as a product of a mythical all-powerful being. It was a convenient get out of jail card if you will. This is not to say that his works are completely without value.

1. What assumptions?
2. Science does not and cannot explain the first cause.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

There are two main problems with the 'Five ways' presented by Aquinas.

1. They are all based on assumptions without evidence.
2. They are all sufficiently explained by science - physics, biology, chemistry.


In his struggles to understand the phenomena of our Universe at large and the world in local (bearing in mind that he lived in the 13th century CE), and being already massively biased toward religion, it is hardly surprising that he ascribed anything unexplainable (for the time) as a product of a mythical all-powerful being. It was a convenient get out of jail card if you will. This is not to say that his works are completely without value.

1. What assumptions?
2. Science does not and cannot explain the first cause.

What first cause? The universe is eternal, a first cause is not required.

[kazoolaw]

The universe is eternal, a first cause is not required.

What a clear example of a statement without proof, taken on faith.