To return to "What does 'Christ' mean?", I would see "Christ" as the "Gnosis", or rather that foundation stone of consciousness itself through which all creation takes place. It would be beyond time and space as we know it and would be the connection of all phenomenom in the sense that God is One. Christ has historically been associated with the concept of "forgiveness of sins" (Bhagavadgita, for example) in that a clear truthfull understanding and acceptance of one's actions breaks the bondages of ignorance that keep us recycling painful untruths.
Annointed one? To be "annointed" would be like "being chosen", right? I would assume any physical manifestation of Christ would have had all decisions made as to who, where, why, etc. done without a need for choice. Or perhaps annointed is some type of seal? It has always puzzled me. Perhaps someone has good information on this. The act of "annointment" is something so far removed in time from us now I find it difficult to understand. Would Christ, who was in the beginning, need to be annointed? If so, why? Peace Alsophia Theophilos
if you look up anointed in wikipedia, it talks about the religious symbolism of anointing with oil or other substances. this is symbolic of bestowing a divine influence. symbolic of, imo, an anointing of the holy spirit. the body is supposed to be a temple, or a vessel, of this spirit for those who are the church. we are anointed with the spirit.
Yes. If that were true, he would not be human in my eyes. Or at least not fully human. Ask someone else because I don't believe Christ was God- why not ask how can he be the 'begotten son'- To beget means that it comes later. Peace be unto you Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Lori: I believe that the question of whether your statements above are correct, or instead that Q's criticisms are on the mark, hinges on the meaning of your statements in this post: I think most of us would agree that here you appear to be expressing Christian faith. If this is true, then the essence of Q's remarks are correct, although as usual I would counsel him to dial back the snide hostility. You appear to be expressing faith in the existence of a supernatural creature called "god" who communicates with people in the natural universe. You also appear to be expressing faith in the supernatural nature of Jesus and his power to violate the laws of the natural universe such as entropy and conservation of energy, as well as to violate several principles of biology. Bear in mind that this is a science website and this particular subforum is an integral part of it, unlike the "Religion" subforum where the rules are relaxed. The scientific method is to be observed at all times, or at least not flouted except in jest. The claims you appear to make contradict the fundamental premise that underlies all science and is the basis of the scientific method: That the natural universe is a closed system whose behavior can be predicted by theories derived from empirical observation of its past and present behavior. Therefore your claims qualify as extraordinary assertions, and by the Rule of Laplace they must be supported by extraordinary evidence before we are obliged to treat them with respect. If my interpretation of your remarks is mistaken and you are merely being metaphorical or literary, then I apologize. Nonetheless since I'm not the only one who jumped to the wrong conclusion (a professional communicator at that) you will have learned something about how to communicate effectively on this website. If, however, our interpretations are correct, then in accordance with the scientific method and the rules of SciForums, Q is welcome (although not required) to disrespect what you say. My only request is that he do so civilly and in such a way as to keep this discussion moving forward, rather than stalling it on personalities, or even worse, goading someone into a flame war. You are invited to answer this question, or else be satisfied with the interpretations of the readers.
Re: this thread and getting back to the original point. John the Baptist is considered by some to be the last of the old prophets- living in the outskirts of town "down by the river" eating raw honey and wild plants, dispensing the Holy Anointing Oil to those who wished to be "purified by God etc..etc.." Here comes Jesus, who John recognizes and knows is most holy. John anoints Jesus and He becomes Christ. Off goes Christ to spread the word and off went John to a beheading. Jesus knew the properties (and real powers... you really do get stoned, after all) of the Holy Anointing Oil and believed it was God's gift to men. But you could only get the stuff from the rabbis and they really didn't give the stuff out. But the recipe was right there in the Torah, which Jesus knew backwards. Put 2 and 2 together. MY POINT BEING... I believe marijuana is the schism between Catholics and Jews. The Jews used it to anoint holy things and Jesus used it to anoint people and illnesses. FURTHERMORE... The establishment of the Catholic church was centered entirely around marijuana use. Think about it- you go to church, the incense gets passed around and everyone gets stoned, then they say a few prayers, have a few readings and a couple of speakers then they pass out free bread and wine (right when the munchies kick in). I know there is a touch of cynicism in this, but really think about it. If such a church existed today, would you go to it? I am saying such a church existed like that 2,000 years ago- the Catholic church! Four hundred years, we have total Catholic chaos. There's parishes popping up everywhere and there's hundreds of gospels. The pope calls in all the bishops and all the books all over the place and they formally declare the written New Testament and toss out half of the gospels. The churches are all brought in line and the message becomes divine Catholic faith- the faith Catholics believe today. (And they make sure they figure out how the donations "go up the ladder" too.) I grew up Catholic and today see it for what it really is- something that was fabricated and distorted 1600 years ago and turned into something abhorrent to what Christ truly was about. Merry "Christ"mas to you all!
