So after filtering the Gospel, the one I have in the least and concerning Jesus sayings and life only, — KerimF

Are you familiar with the Jefferson Bible? Thomas Jefferson was the third president of the United States, and a Deist. He distilled his own copy of the New Testament down into a small book, he called The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. :smile:

Jefferson Bible : "In extracting the pure principles which he taught, we should have to strip off the artificial vestments in which they have been muffled by priests, who have travestied them into various forms, as instruments of riches and power to themselves."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Thomas_Jefferson

Thank you for mentioning this reference. This is the first time I hear of it. I seldom read non-scientific books (written in any language).

By curiosity, I will read his book.
From what is explained on Wikipedia, Jefferson seems to see in Jesus a source that represents the (best) morale. But I ended up seeing Jesus the source of perfect knowledge (Science of Life Reality), that defines my own existence in the least, besides the real world in which I have to live for a certain period of time.

Although I am 71, I didn't write any book about this. I am a bad writer (in any language) due to lack of reading other's literary works and being busy always in working with numbers, symbols, equations and various scientific problems (related mainly to electronics).

So if, I say if :), I will be able to write someday my filtered Gospel, I will certainly present, with it and in details, all the natural truths that Jesus, unlike any other man throughout history, has revealed clearly (though in simple ways) and had the chance to reach me, even after 2000 years, despite most people in the world (past and new generations) are supposed to follow their instincts of survival only and have, therefore, no interest to learn anything else.

Yes, even in science, what could be, in your opinion, the percentage of people on earth who really need learning advanced math? I doubt it exceeds 1% (if not much less). Does this mean that the knowledge of advanced math is superfluous and should be disregarded?

due to lack of reading other's literary works . . . .
all the natural truths that Jesus, unlike any other man throughout history, has revealed clearly — KerimF

Unlike some philosophers, I don't think it's my duty to undermine the faith of other people. But since you noted that you are not well-read in literary works, I don't think you should say that Jesus' "revelations" are "unlike any other man throughout history". Instead, they are simply "natural truths".

I agree that Jesus taught some good lessons to his followers. But much of what is recorded in the Sermon on the Mount, for example, came from ancient Jewish Wisdom Literature, such as those collected by the Essenes, a sort of reclusive monastic order. Parts of their collection have been discovered in modern times, and labeled the Dead Sea Scrolls. Of course a lot of imaginative speculation has filled-in the gaps in their secretive history. But, due to some parallels between their beliefs, and those of Jesus, several scholars guess that Jesus may have studied with them, during the "lost years" between the ages of 12 and 33. I don't know if that is true, but it's clear that most of Jesus' moral & escatological teachings can be found in the ancient literature of the Israelites and Jews.

I won't belabor that point, but the essence of Jesus' moral teachings is the Golden Rule, which is also characteristic of moral instructions of many cultural traditions. So, I don't think Jesus was unique in his analysis of human immorality and suffering. And his promise that the kingdom of heaven would come "soon", to bring an end to the suffering of the Jews, has still not been fulfilled 20 centuries later. So, I wouldn't believe everything you read in Christian Literature. :smile:

The Golden Rule : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

Unlike some philosophers, I don't think it's my duty to undermine the faith of other people. But since you noted that you are not well-read in literary works, I don't think you should say that Jesus' "revelations" are "unlike any other man throughout history". Instead, they are simply "natural truths". — Gnomon

From what you say, it seems, in your knowledge, it is possible that someone, other than Jesus, said clearly that a rich man cannot, even if he wants to, be honest and sincere before the multitudes. This is a real fact because if a rich man (a real rich one who is approved by the powerful rich group that rules his region) reveals one or more of the hidden truths (he knows) he would affect badly the interests of his rich colleagues (if not his own interests as well). If he does it, he likely risks his life, if not much worse.

I am all ears always, to hear about someone who could be seen as an equivalent to Jesus as the teacher of 'Life Reality'.

About the Golden Rule, does any religion/culture, you heard of, precede it with what Jesus said?
The greatest first advice of Jesus that is addressed to humans as individuals not as groups, is about LOVING (not obeying, glorifying or worshiping) the Creator (the intelligent energy/will behind the existence of our universe). In reality, one has a very little chance to live the Golden Rule (the 2nd advice of Jesus) if he couldn't get first how one can love his maker without the need of obeying, glorifying and worshiping.

In brief, since many may say that what I will say is off topic:
The acts of obeying, glorifying and worshiping are one-way
Love is bi-way.

In short, yes, although it may depend on how you define religion. For a Middle Way Buddhist, Taoist, Sufi, Advaitan etc there are no rules. There are just actions that help one progress and those that hold one back. Note that even Jesus denies the existence of sin and dismisses the need for guilt. This is a subtle issue, partly because the monotheistic dogmatic Churches have so muddied the waters with their folk-ethics.

In short, yes, although it may depend on how you define religion. For a Middle Way Buddhist, Taoist, Sufi, Advaitan etc there are no rules. There are just actions that help one progress and those that hold one back. Note that even Jesus denies the existence of sin and dismisses the need for guilt. This is a subtle issue, partly because the monotheistic dogmatic Churches have so muddied the waters with their folk-ethics. — FrancisRay

Just to be sure I got what you said.

A totally independent person who doesn't join any other believers in their religious gatherings (usually known as rituals) could also be seen as a real Buddhist, Taoist, Sufi or Advaitan.

Note that even Jesus denies the existence of sin and dismisses the need for guilt. This is a subtle issue, partly because the monotheistic dogmatic Churches have so muddied the waters with their folk-ethics. — FrancisRay

Indeed, Jesus gave me many simple but effective hints to help me discover other's natures. These hints work if someone has no intention to judge others or ask to apply on them any man-made justice.
But as you said, such teachings are not suitable, at all, to run any formal Christian Church or Denomination :)

"A totally independent person who doesn't join any other believers in their religious gatherings (usually known as rituals) could also be seen as a real Buddhist, Taoist, Sufi or Advaitan."

Those who attend such communal rituals on a regular basis are unlikely to be serious practitioners, who usually have better things to do. I think perhaps you are not a student of comparative religion. Communal gatherings and rituals are not necessary for a truth-seeker and if we are not this then we are not a Buddhist or Taoist. . .

You may have missed my point about sin and guilt,and I feel it it is a vital one for anyone interested in religion. It is not just that we should not judge anyone sinful, says Jesus, but that there is no such thing as sin and no need for guilt. He say this in the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, and in 'A Course in Miracles'.

In my opinion such teaching are eminently suitable and vitally-needed at this time in the Christian Church. It angers me that the Chrch so misleads people.and brings discredit on all of religion in the process. . . .

rituals are not necessary for a truth-seeker and if we are not this then we are not a Buddhist or Taoist. — FrancisRay

You are right. But do you have a clear idea of what kind of truths in such religions (or whatever they are called) a truth-seeker may be interested to know?

but that there is no such thing as sin and no need for guilt. He say this in the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, and in 'A Course in Miracles'. — FrancisRay

On one hand, those who have/perceive a human living flesh only to take care of, at any cost, they are, by design, free to do whatever they like, without feeling any sort of guilt/fear as long what they do is hidden.

On the other hand, the prerequisite for someone (who has also a living soul) to be able feeding his soul with a permanent joy by living the unconditional love towards all others, is discovering the world as it is taking into consideration that the nature of every human is somehow unique. Since it is usual that most people in the world present themselves behind various masks (not for coronavirus :) ) Jesus gives the necessary hints to discover other's deep inners/natures, no matter how clever they are in wearing their masks :)

But do you have a clear idea of what kind of truths in such religions (or whatever they are called) a truth-seeker may be interested to know?


The generic method is Yoga, the meaning of which is union. The goal is union with reality and thus knowledge of the true nature of reality and the transcendence of life and death. The goal is that 'I and the Father are One'. For mysticism Jesus is a son of God, not 'the' son.

I would say it is not possible to 'discover other's deeper nature' without discovering your own. which is Yoga. This is the 'classical' Christianity of the early church. . . . . . , . . , ,

The generic method is Yoga, the meaning of which is union. The goal is union with reality and thus knowledge of the true nature of reality and the transcendence of life and death. The goal is that 'I and the Father are One'. For mysticism Jesus is a son of God, not 'the' son.

I would say it is not possible to 'discover other's deeper nature' without discovering your own. which is Yoga. This is the 'classical' Christianity of the early church. . . . . . , . . , , — FrancisRay

I can agree with you on all what you said excluding Yoga on which I have no idea (I just heard of it in movies :) )

It took me 30 years to stop seeing the world the way I like it to be, and start discovering it as it is in reality (on the ground, far from the great speeches). Of course, I did it after analysing carefully (methodically) the nature of my own being.

Since you mentioned it, I also knew how to be one with my Father in Heaven, as Jesus and the Father are one too. It is somehow like two independent persons who are seen as if they were One being having One will and power by 'any outsider' if they are real friends (unified by the spirit of friendship).
Similarly, the divine Spirit of Love, known as the Holy Spirit or the Holy Ghost, unifies, in the spiritual realm, two independent beings if they want to.
This explains why the perception of the Holy Spirit is the crucial prerequisite to learn anything from Jesus message that describes 'Life Reality'. After all, Jesus message has no value to those who have a human living flesh only to take of (their instincts of survival can guide them instead).

All good. If you want to know my view then it is explained by Sadhguru and Alan Watts in their youtube talks on Jesus.

All good. If you want to know my view then it is explained by Sadhguru and Alan Watts in their youtube talks on Jesus. — FrancisRay

Thank you for the invitation. But I may not be able to watch the video... let me say for technical reasons.

Does the First Amendment protect religious liberty, or religious authority? Is it really a proper function of government to support the imposition of doctrine even upon church members, let alone non-member employeses?

Maybe take a peek at Satanism and Witchcraft, by Jules Michelet.