The Ego hates Jesus because he taught what The Ego hates most REPENTANCE!

Jesus taught people to repent (be sorry for what they do). Even though Jesus could preform miracles he said "it is YOUR FAITH that healed you" and that all things were done by "The Heavenly Father". He said to pray saying "Our Father in Heaven"...

He gave credit to "The Father". He called himself "Son of Man". Jesus even told people to say nothing when he healed them.

Jesus had HUMILITY! When Jesus tell people to be repentant the ego hates that because the ego always wants to be right. The ego believes that it "can do not wrong" and it has a RIGHT to do whatever it wants.

Jesus taught surrenderance:

"Resist NOT Evil"

"Love Your Enemies"

"Bless Those Who Curse You"

"Turn The Other Cheek"

Jesus understood that by fighting back you are also developing ego even when you are fighting against one who has ego. Ego likes to compete and even "Ego vs Non-Ego" is a competition that ego enjoys, so the only solution is to "love the enemy" and "turn the other cheek" and such conflicts/competitions will fade away.


Jesus said do NOT try to judge another because it is Hypocrisy in and of itself!

Jesus says judging others is condemning oneself, so if you are judging you do not have righteousness anyway since you are automatically condemning yourself in the process!

So your judgement cannot be righteous because judgement in itself is ego/condemnation.

Humanity believes they are "entitled" to do whatever they wish on the planet, when the truth is - it is by Grace (or Luck) that we are here. That we are able even able to be individual humans on this planet to build our character into the person we wish to be.

The only hope of giving up Ego is to say "sorry" for everything you receive in life (See: True Appreciation). Also, to Pray (or Hope) that your heart be changed for the betterment of mankind and the universe in general; or as Jesus says "the Father's will be done".

reply to post by arpgme


That same ego is used to estimate God's view on important social and ethical topics.

This Neuroscience study done back in 2009 on the effects of a person estimating God's view, their own view, and the views of others about several contentious topics demonstrates that views about God are more egocentric.

Isn't it funny how the human mind operates?

reply to post by arpgme


One of the truest posts I have ever read.. It is my only issue ever in being good... It's my only issue that would shame me in any way. I'm not always right. Sometimes I have to let go...
This is why I love Jesus while judging Christians. This is why I still have work to do.

You hold on like a child with a new toy. Really you are surrounded by goodness, but you hold on to yourself so strongly that the water can't come in and wash away your castle made of sand. Hendrix knows.

I'll keep trying and someday my scorpio stubborn-ness will erode.

Congratulations. Link to amazing music.

Not sure I understand the point of this post?
As far as I can read you are just stating what has been said for centuries. Jesus was a good guy, sacrificed himself for other, and we could all learn from him - or at least the from the story about him.

I am sure that "The Ego" dislikes a whole bunch of things. Anything that has to do with self-sacrifice basically. Charity or at least the anonymous kind of charity doesn't please "The Ego" one bit. Sharing, caring and all that jazz.

(whats with always personifying inanimate objects guys?)

The ego is our survival instinct, and in most cases it does a pretty decent job. However, we can be tricked to fear stuff, which basically doesn't have to be feared, and when this happens people do bad things.
Like prosecute their fellow human beings. Murder, steal and so no.

Our survival instinct doesn't like to be told not to be afraid, cause it's trying to keep us alive.

reply to post by Mads1987


You seem to be surviving.

haha but sometimes you have to let go.

And some times you have to hold on.

We can learn so much from this sort of wisdom this Man brought to our consciousness. Shame more and more people overlook it.

The snake in the Garden of Eden is the Devil, who is the embodiment of our negative qualities.

Adam and Eve represent humans throughout history, they are the archetypical couple, male and female.

The snake, then, was Adam's evil nature.

"Do not eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil." God told them not to, but didn't explain why. Adam, being tempted of himself to find out what was so forbidden about it, tempted Eve to eat it first. She did, and then so did Adam.

We fell because, out of ignorance, we discovered the concepts of good and evil. We began placing these labels on everything, thus gravitating towards pleasures and pushing away pain, but we always fail in that goal. So, out of ignorance, we think of worldly matters as good or evil, and we suffer. The paradise we once knew, we lost because of our ego.

We can return to paradise by the shedding of our ego through the realization of its illusion and futility.

reply to post by arpgme


Repentance, (metanoia in the Greek) isn't 'sorrow for what you do', it means to change one's mind.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Repentance, (metanoia in the Greek) isn't 'sorrow for what you do', it means to change one's mind.

That's a common fallacy that you have fallen into, looking at the Greek word origen, as if you can take the two original words that were put together to make a new word, as if you can find the definition by reading those two words as if it was a sentence that explains it.
It doesn't work that way and words are defined by their usage.
I think you should have learned that in grade school.
What is making you take stupid positions like that I have to attribute to your cult membership, where your great leader says to think repentance involves merely an intellectual assent, rather than a change in lifestyle.
Your cult is of Satan, not of God, and you will not be able to present cult teachings as a defense come judgment day.
You will be judged on your actions, not by what you think.

Jesus' two great commandments of love are his way of showing Christians (and really, everyone) that firstly they are failing to fulfill the spiritual law of love fully if they are only living based on the ego principle of separation. Jesus taught fundamentally that no one is separate from God.

This wisdom is also inherent in the commandments of love - as they cannot be fulfilled until one fully recognizes and thereby lives this inherent non-separation from God through communion with God. His second commandment to love one's neighbor as oneself also clearly demonstrates this inherent principle of non-separation (unity) rather than the separative ego principle.

Repentance is seeing that our constant sinning is based on living as though we are separate from God - in other words, choosing to live as an ego rather than surrendering in communion with God. When one is in communion with the Divine, the inherent morality of the Divine is granted to the being as love - and this is the capacity to release sin (or separative unlove) in each and every moment of such communion.

The constant deepening of this communion with God allows the commandments of love to be lived more and more fully, rather than just always being a reflection of one's failure to do so as a separate and unloving ego.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Going back to the original Greek and Hebrew is not a "stupid position", it's the proper position and the only way you'll ever figure out the original intent of the words.

reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit

Going back to the original Greek and Hebrew is not a "stupid position", it's the proper position and the only way you'll ever figure out the original intent of the words.

Read the book,

Exegetical Fallacies
by D. A. Carson

Number one is the one I mentioned in my earlier post.

"Going back to the original Greek and Hebrew" is OK. What is not OK is looking at compound words that since their being coined have taken on a meaning of its own, by thinking you can understand them as the sum of their ancient parts, whose combining happened in the dim prehistoric past.

reply to post by jmdewey60


What is Strong's definition of Metanoia (G3341)?

Originally posted by FollowTheWhiteRabbit
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Going back to the original Greek and Hebrew is not a "stupid position", it's the proper position and the only way you'll ever figure out the original intent of the words.

Or in other words exegesis. I don't consider that I said something factually incorrect when Strong's Concordance of the Bible says the exact same thing. (Strong's #G3341)

reply to post by jmdewey60

eader says to think repentance involves merely an intellectual assent, rather than a change in lifestyle

And as I pointed out before since you must not have been paying attention at the time, is that without a change of mind about one's sin there will be no long-term change in lifestyle. That's why a fundamental change of belief about a sin is necessary as a primary step. Repentance manifests itself as a change in lifestyle as maturity, but that's not what the word means, that's a natural secondary consequence of a chance of mind about a particular sin.

And the object is to have a lasting change in lifestyle instead of a person going through sin cycles because they never changed their mind about their sin. The point is to have permanent results, not cyclical results.

reply to post by arpgme


When you watch a movie,show,anime. You will notice there is a monk/teacher who is indifferent in his actions but takes under his wing and under study. The under study usually becomes the hero!

Why doesn't the teacher save the world? Because he is egoless. He basically sees things that happen as the will of the universe. If it happens it's meant to happen the universe will balance itself.

It does balance itself through the monk with an ego who has not lost his ego.

The ego is the hero! Why? Because it takes action.

The ego says I've got to do something about it. And believes in black,grey,white.

The egoless sits in grey whenever too much black or white comes in he determines on the ego to balance it back to grey.

I hope this was easy to understand. To me it's pretty clear and simple.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

What is Strong's definition of Metanoia (G3341)?

From Strong's Exhaustive Concordance:

repentance.

From metanoeo; (subjectively) compunction (for guilt, including reformation); by implication, reversal (of (another's) decision) -- repentance.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

And as I pointed out before . . .

. . . and so much philosophical tripe from your "Free Grace" cult. (notice your signature, hating godliness, what your cult leader calls "religion", in a derogatory manner)

I'm talking about biblical Christianity.
The word is repentance. You seem to have a strong aversion to that word.

For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death.
2 Corinthians 7:10

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

What is Strong's definition of Metanoia (G3341)?

From Strong's Exhaustive Concordance:

repentance.

From metanoeo; (subjectively) compunction (for guilt, including reformation); by implication, reversal (of (another's) decision) -- repentance.

edit on 16-4-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Here ya go, you seem to be struggling:

d: μετάνοια, ας, ἡ

Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine

Transliteration: metanoia
Phonetic Spelling: (met-an'-oy-ah)
Short Definition: repentance, a change of mind
Definition: repentance, a change of mind, change in the inner man.

Strong's Greek #3341

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

And as I pointed out before . . .

. . . and so much philosophical tripe from your "Free Grace" cult. (notice your signature, hating godliness, what your cult leader calls "religion", in a derogatory manner)

I'm talking about biblical Christianity.
The word is repentance. You seem to have a strong aversion to that word.

For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death.
2 Corinthians 7:10

Save the pithy ad hom attacks, you're trying to illicit an emotional response by trolling/flaming.

So repentance is sorrow or grief? Your verse you linked said grief PRODUCES repentance, it doesn't say it IS repentance.