ok george motivated seems applicable..but then many arnt motivated by spirit...though it would be a foolishness to judge others motivations,..maybe..as a form of motive-ation..as in moved...

but..the matter is as nothing..to our thoughts on spirituality...so despite the word limitations..let us..try to begin to define spirituality...lol

first..i feel we need to find the underlying motivation of..life/love logic/light...grace/mercy..

all..we can presume to be affectations of the positivity of spirit...though spirit straddles a far greater being..than just the positives..manifested in these realms

thus spirituality is the gnosis..of the realised powers of spirit,..that together with law,..moderation and generosity realise the proper/eternal..and infinite fruits of spirit

sprituality is to spirit..what music is to dance...what melody is to song..without spirit there is no life/no light...no logic/no love..no emotions/no wisdom..no knowing of the difference of good and bad

spirituality thus..is the applied..wisdom/knowledge...combined with the intent and purpose inherant in realising the unseen...inextricably interwoven..in life and living...reality and communinality...logic and widoms...understanding and comprehention

which..via that able to be seen/heard/known..and that unseen/unheard unfelt/unknown...or beyond obvious knowing..yet has become know-able..at the personal[then communal/institutional area'S]..usually via personal revelations..past wisdoms/stories/lessons and learnings

..and that thus..is yet remembered and recorded,..applied and taught[preferably by egsample]..by deeds and by words to be...used or applied to better mankinds life experiences...into its better realisations..

..at this time and..in this place...hopefully to the betterment of all...as an act of love..that unites the percieved/reality with the hoped better possability..with the truth..best applicable to the knowable knowns..within the spirit of the beliefs..as commonly/intermitantly believed...or applied

sadly this ideal..is not..an ever/present..good fruit..of spirit and spirituality...fully realised or indeed reaLISABLE..at this time or place...

but..we may be comforted..that this perfect spirt/state..is not intended for in this realm..[but is promised and fullfilled in the next]

david f,

Is it your understanding that Herod the Great was appointed by Julius Caesar and that by the time of Augustus that the Annas were gaining ascendancy? These timelines suggest to some researchers that Jesus Christ was born 6/7 BCE.

Thiering suggests that the Herodians delegated teaching to the gentiles (godfarers) to the House of David with implications for Jesus ministry (and religo-politics). Moreover, Gibbon suggests that the first fifteen (so called) Christian bishops were Jewish. Only after Hadrian did the Christian Jews become a Latin religion.

I doubt Christans would recognize the historical account of the Jewish ministries and the exile to Pella. Do Jews recognize with the histories presented here?

PetertheBeliever,

Coronation Oath or Coronation Affirmation?

To be true to Christian scripture "yes" or "no" are affirmations not oaths, I suggest, and now cite:

"But I say to you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shall you swear by your head, because you can not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yes, yes; No, no: for whatever is more than these comes of evil." Matthew 5:34-37

Regards,

Oly.

Oliver wrote: "Do Jews recognize with the histories presented here?"

Dear Oliver,

I don't know what Jews generally recognise concerning Jesus' ministry. The statements I have made I get from my own reading.

Jesus' ministry really isn't of particular interest in Jewish history any more than those of Jacob Frank, David Reubeni, David Alroy, Shabbetai Zevi or the other false messiahs. Although Jesus lived and died a Jew a new religion was founded in his name. The history of that religion is generally of no more interest to Jews than the history of Islam is to Christians. It is of interest to Jews when Christians have engaged in persecuting or massacring Jews. Then it became part of Jewish history. Judaism has much more in common with Islam than it has with Christianity.

In my reading I gather the two most significant events in splitting Judaism from Christianity were the Jewish revolt of 70 CE and the reign of Hadrian. The followers of Jesus in 70 CE were divided into the followers of Paul and the followers of James, Jesus' brother. Paul sought and accepted gentiles, and James' followers were all Jewish. With the failure of the 70 CE revolt the followers of James were wiped out. Hadrianic law banned the circumcision of those who were not born Jews. Therefore, converts could not be circumcised. That was a great departure from Jewish custom, and the Jewish Christians decided to accept converts anyhow.

Gibbon is more read currently for the beauty of his prose rather than for his historical accuracy.

Almost all my knowledge concerning Jesus and the history of Christianity is from Christian sources. http://www.johnshelbyspong.com/bishopspongon_jesus.aspx is one source on Jesus. I have read other works by Spong. I have also read material by Karen Armstrong, Owen Chadwick, Hans Kung, Steven Ruciman, Elaine Pagels and James Carroll.

Dear david f,

An informative post. Thank you.

The First Jewish-Roman war is very significant in Jewish history, especially the demise of The Temple. Until reading your post, I didn't appreciate its importance to the Jesus ministry. If memory serves, the final straw from the Roman's perspective was the Jews (zealots?)attacked a Roman garrison, after the Greeks were permitted to contact a religious cerimony close to the Jewish Temple.

Robin Lane Fox is an interesting scholar/writer on the Christians and the Pagans.

Your point on Gibbon is well taken. Although, we are separated by a further two hundred years, our knowledge of the ancients is certainly greater than Gibbon and his contemporaries. Moreover, we have the Dead Sea Scrolls and rediscovered Gospels to evaluate.

Writing objectively about God seems to be thwart with risks or perceived risks, even into recent times and not only Salman Rushie's, "Satanic Verses". Wells, normally an excellent writer, seems nearly apologetic about the facts he presents in his Outine of History. I wonder if Dawkins could have written and published, "The God Delusion" as recently as 1930?

Despite history and science, I suspect, the God of the Gaps, will endure, pehaps for centuries. Yet, I wonder whether the traditional church (as an intermediary between Man and God) will continue to exist in its present form?

UOG! Humans have dug themselves into a no go situation and this does not help our collective minds reach our evolutionary goals. Religion is the product, and our minds, is the stage, and if we run it, neanderthal,s we become the common running.

Is this your foreseeable out-come?

Sock