It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: 2012newstart
a reply to: Matrixsurvivor
I will use this reply (as all the others as well) to deepen my own contribution to the discussion, not necessarily answering only you (or someone else, pls do not be offended if you feel something I write has nothig to do with your posts!)
Mother Theresa experienced "dark night of soul" as most mystic saints have. Vatican explained that after the information w as leaked to the MSM who were quick to conclude Mother Theresa has lost her faith in God...I think our problem is not that though. She proved how one could be good and show the goodness of the Lord in practice, and not necessarily goodness only to Christians from your own town (and many do not show even that to their own neighbors or relatives).
I often wonder why preachers answering questions of suffering in the world preach how Jesus "didn't promise earthly happiness in this world". Perhaps they speak otherwise when they go to convert people to Christianity in the Third world. Number of hospitals and other aid show the opposite - but there. Perhaps they forgot those hundreds millions who live in the already Christianized part of the world and who continue to need generation after generation the mercy of the Lord in their everyday needs, not spiritual but practical physical. As Mother Theresa showed with her houses even in the heart of New York.
Who stripped the gospel of Jesus from much of its humanity? Not entirely, we still have the sermon of the mount and other instances when Jesus talked "social justice" and "concrete acts of love" - "I was hungry and you gave me food" - to the saved ones at the final judgment day, "I was hungry and you didn't give me food" - to the damned. if we may say that way. Otherwise there wouldn't be brave souls like the Albanian Theresa to go forth and show it in India. They were inspired by that goodness in the physical life, therefore IT WAS ALSO PROMISED. But apparently, theologians of old and new used skillfully the trimmed gospels to justify a non-physical approach to Jesus and much more - to the world we are living in everyday. Thus, the promises of Jesus become surreal of some future judgment and obscure reward, and doing good only to die good.
Let remember again the words of John in his epistle who warned, whoever denies Jesus came into flesh, has the spirit of the antichrist. In t he time when many intelligent people looking for explanations of the world's absurdity, are tempted to seek antichrists as a proof of the end times, that strangely why the people want upon them, may be the place to look for such is not the right one.
There is nothing bad if the Good God promised good things to happen in this life. And He did, He promised that to Abraham and his descendants FOREVER, as well as to all nations (and people therefore) who would bless the nation of Abraham. It is that simple! Jesus never denied that. Or perhaps those who trimmed the gospels wanted him looking like denial of those promises of God for well being in this life? Christian history proves how that could be negatively accomplished, instead of what Jesus preached as Kingdom of God is among you, it already arrived.
So I go back to the title of this thread. What the Christianity did so wrong, that in all those 1987 years after Jesus we saw very little of that goodness promised in the REAL LIFE, and we saw it thanks to people like Mother Theresa who walked AGAINST the mainstream of church practices at their time, every now and then? And if the Christendom did it wrong for most of those years, what is wrong if we want now to do it right? Shall we be called antichrists and his servants? It is absurd, but the team to call us that seems already formed. I have no illusion they would ever change. Seem they never accepted the quote of John as correct one. But that doesn't mean we to stop our efforts to bring the goodness in this life, the life that we should gain heaven with. Today it might be service of the poor mostly, under so many various forms not necessarily the form of Mother Theresa. Tomorrow it may take completely other form, such as believing God's promises to Abraham are going to fulfill before our eyes and for our children too.
a reply to: 2012newstart
I thought of the sacrifice of animals, why so. Compared to sacrifice of people in other religions, it is quite much more merciful, first to the people. I really don't know, it seems rooted back in the fall of Eden garden.
originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: enterthestage
I think you mean the 72 letter name of God, not 72 names of God. And that comes from the Talmud and Midrash, not the Tenakh. The Name of God used over 8000 times in the Tenakh is YHWH.
Jesus' Hebrew Name is Yeshua, meaning Yah is salvation. He said He came in His Father's Name, which is YHWH (Yah is short for Yahveh/Yahweh).
originally posted by: enterthestage
a reply to: NOTurTypical
"God" has at least 72 names and YHWH isn't one. Thats called the Tetragrammaton and It has a deep meaning to the Hebrews and has feminine and masculine properties.
El is the original name of God from old Canaanite mythology and he had a wife (Asherah, who later was wife of Yahweh and was worshipped in the Temple until Jeremiah (?) got rid of the Asherah pole and the Brazen serpent) and 70 little Elohims who were each God of a nation (sounds familiar right?).
Baal was his most powerful descendant out of the 72 Elohim and would eventually come to be known as Yahweh to the Hebrews but the Greeks easily recognized he was the same as the Phoenicians (Canaanite's) IAHU.
I might be off on a minor detail like spelling but nothing major and not that I am aware of. This is information available to any who want it.
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: enterthestage
How can God have a name IF a name is given?