I can not stand prattleing old turds like this; I'd sooner engage in small talk with a drunk.
The Christmas "silly" season is once more coming upon us; as a counterbalance to all that childish trash, I am rereading Bultmanns masterpeice commentary: "The Second Letter to the Corinthians". For the greatest benefit at least a modicum of Greek is recommended. It's a gem if you can find it.
These two piss-ants are not qualified to critique Bultmann.
I don't know where he got the idea that Bush was a christian try to convert others to it by war. Bush just wanted a military industrial complex to pay back his friends who put him in office. That is a folly on Pierre.
you should look a little deeper. Start with a great DVD called "Faith in the white house." Work on simple grammar before you start trying to call rhetorical fallacy. What do you mean Bush wanted a M/I Complex? Said complex has existed for many decades, long before Bush 1 or 2. The war was about the oil of course, but Bush was and is thoroughly and deeply caught up in all this bible thumping crap. This is a fact, not a folly.
@RightCitizen If you actually study the words of Bush himself he clearly shows either ignorance or his own personal philosophy about what the Bible actually states. He is far from being a Christian as you say as defined by Biblical statement. Bush is not trying to build a Christian crusade-a religious crusade sure, but not Christian. He's promoting world "democracy", straight from the mouth himself. Ultimately leading for what Lenin called Socialism, leading to Utopian Communism.
Right On Target! All Christians need to consider this and examine just what they believe and why. Big difference between Jesus, Paul, Martin Luther, and others. Who do you really follow? Is it Jesus of Nazareth ...or somebody else? Mant Thanks Pierre!
This is so clearly lacking sound academic, rational, and empiracle verification. Pierre has no open mind but clear prejudice. Bultmann, his authority, likewise uses pseudo psychology and sociology to produce a theory that anyone with any understanding of historical evidence for Jesus and the early authorship of the NT will see through. Arrogance and empty claims are not convincing for the serious student. Sorry but I would like to hear someone that was not so complacent about such issues.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Paul was actually the greatest of all apostles, he did more work and got his ass kicked for preaching the word. But he considered himself the least because he persecuted Israelites before the Lord put the spirit on him. The Most High is not the author of confusion.
Has Pierre ever talked with Jordan Maxwell or Anthony Hilder? I think those guys are there in Northern California - I'd be very interested to know what Pierre thinks of their scholarship, especially Jordan? Pierre & Jordan both understand the power of words.
Regarding religion, someone once said "Good men will do good & bad men will do evil, but you need to make good men do evil, that requires religion".
Once you think about it, things like The Crusades, Inquisition & 9/11 make sense!
you could say that, or you could say modern religon is the total misunderstanding of teachings.
Some people bring teaching to their current level, some rise to the level of the teaching to understand it. People should remember that Christians were killed by the inquisition too. meaning thier were many views, and the ones with the right view might have been the ones killed.
That's right Pierre, those creeds have taken the God out of man & now they've set up a system that makes the priest the portal to god. Cha-Ching! It's the COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUSNESS that must be changed --this is where the manipulation lies. It's rampant in government, religion, everywhere! Those are the DUALITIES that must be seen...knowing the truth & seeing the deception EVERYWHERE!
Politically speaking, Obama/Hill/McCain all sing from the same book & page - the CFR & Wall Street reign
The NeoCons have the military industrial complex entrenched...the same brainwashing that allows $400mil/day in war spending also keeps the citizens in perpetual fear. The "convincing" is what allows otherwise decent people to be tricked -- this collective unconsciousness gets projected across the globe in the form of tyranny, sparked by fear. How else can you explain hunting down men in caves in 3rd world countries...so what if it's making corporations rich & breaking the US economy, so what?!
You got that right. Although, I think it's the collective unconscious that the great manipulators have been tampering with, and attempting to re-program. It seems that we need to liberate our collective unconscious from the intentions of a small group of extremely evil and greedy people.
Until Scholars decided to compare the philosophical tradition that was prior to Jesus, they simply will not understand that the Cynic Philosophers followed the Stoics and they in turn were inspired by Platonic Tradition. Take a look at Socrates, Cynic Philosophers, and Jesus and you can see something interesting. If you don't you will still think that the Jesus of the Gospels brought a new teaching.
If Christians were to follow the instructions that Jesus gave to his disciples they would easily be likened to the manner and style of Cynic Philosophers. They confronted their fellow man whenever they encountered an injustice. You can see this in "Q", the sayings of Jesus that are recorded in Mathew and Luke but not Mark or John. However it is more obvious to see this linkage in the Gospel of Thomas
Very fashionable stuff. Today the true revolutionary must embrace orthodoxy.
As for Bultmann, he's been refuted by Joseph Ratzinger, among others. As for what Christians really believe, Pierre has set up a straw man, and he knows it. As for evangelism, Pierre is himself an evangelist and belligerent crusader.
Absolutely! It is very dubious to present Bultmann as if his "scholarship" is some how the ultimate in exegesis and his claim that Christianity is not rooted in the Gospels is totally absurd! He surrounds himself with very ignorant people, tells them what they want to hear whilst using "philosophy" to dazzle them into submission. He is a liar! "They don't have to use their mind."
Jksoren must have quite the imagination to think this video presents Bultmann's ideas as "the ultimate in exegesis." As for ignorance, clearly you do not understand the relationship between the gospels and the Christian church. Go do some reading and reflecting instead of relying on blind belief and ignorant name calling.
I am pretty familiar with the relationship of the Gospels with the early Christian Church and the history of their origins and eventual canonical status...I suppose you have a specific thing in mind when you suggest that I do reading and reflecting, what "blind" presuppositions do YOU have in mind for ME? The video relies on Bultman and Bultman's work hasn't exactly stood the test of time, but here it is for all of us as if canonized Gospel...you know, for blind belief.
What a strange idea of a canonized gospel! Perhaps you need to watch the video to see that Bultmann is only briefly mentioned. What does it take for something to be canonized gospel in your world?
Bultmann was one of the first to show that the kerygma cannot be found in the 4 gospels - something that cannot be refuted even if Bultmann made many other errors in his scholarship. "Pauline" christianity relies heavily on other canonized texts and interpretation.
The entire corpus of early writings are the product of the community's thriving oral tradition...Paul and his scribe did not invent the Kerygma but proclaimed it in union with other apostles such as Peter whom he verified his teaching with...and of course disagreed on specific points. The canonization of the gospels is not a strange idea but was done in accord with the oral apostolic teaching tradition and the the early liturgies.
I'd just like to add that many younger scholars have moved away from "internal textual criticisms" in light of various objections. Many of us our unconvinced by the conventional arguments that are based almost exclusively on "internal criticism" left ungrounded in any empirical historical evidence. Internal criticism, it can be argued, is actually prone to a great deal of arbitrariness and bias that often goes farther in reflecting one's preconceived notions than much else.
religion is not yet ripe in its outer bands in many inner pockets the mosaic changes have in some way retarded its spread and i do not mean its existence but its one singular unification as the whole or as much of it that is allowed by the force of god
Interesting discussion; thank you once again. I wonder what you think of the role of the Interfaith movement and how that might go some way to addressing many of the issues touched on.
Interesting discussion. I would like to know what Pierre thinks about the idea of Christianity being assembled from ancient pagan sun-worshipping traditions. Maybe he or you have seen Zeitgeist the movie. I didn't care for the second and third parts but the first was truly illuminating.
I don't know if Jesus existed or not, but i do know one thing. Atheist and Christians have one thing in common, they both take the bible literally. When the bible is taken literally we find it contradicts itself all the time. Perhaps the bible is not a history book? Should we not take it for a literal meaning?
I'm amazed that atheist actually read their bible more than christians do... Sorry to go off topic :D
Christians follow their preacher, but they don't seek to understand the bible. Christianity is a "follow the leader" and the Pope is a leader of leaders, and if he couldn't answer your questions then he must lead people that don't ask questions, such as you posed.
with all due respect to Pierre and i do agree on some of his points but he misses a fundamental part in Christianity: Jesus is the way the truth and life. The church is a person, not a building. The preacher is the Bible. The truth is God
It would be interesting if defenders of Christianity such as yourself had taken the time to take a course on Q and an introduction to metaphysics. Your idea that the preacher is the bible is a classic example of the misuse of metaphors. Equally your idea that truth is God lacks a fundamental insight into the nature of God and of truth. But believe what you want it probably makes you feel good.
My reference to metaphysics should have included, that in terms or Platonic metaphysics-- which proceeds from rational principles--that a knowledge that is able to grasp reality apprehends truth ( which it does by means of the Intellect) but God is beyond that which exists as reality, and so is also beyond Truth. In Platonic terms in the experience of divine luminosity the nature of Reality is revealed as truly existing and so truth is reached.
God actually is the preacher but since the Bible is the word of God, reading a bible is the same as God communicating to the reader. searching for ultimate reality through human effort alone is a useless pursuit. Ultimate reality has to be shown to us. God has shown his nature to us and that is Jesus Christ. God said if you really wanna know my nature observe my Son
People in most if not nearly all societies have the right to determine whether they want to discover divinity/God by themselves or choose a religious institution to do this with/for them.
We do a similar thing with our monetary systems we go from trading something like walnuts to ineatables like silver and gold then to fiat currencies (CONfidence systems).
Then back to trading things of substance and value.
I think our understanding and changes in our understanding of divinity over the ages is worthy of discussion and may enlighten us all.
it would be nice if we could get a some type of references... for how do you spell that guys name: rudolf bulman(?), and the first one mcdonald (?)....
I still love jesus...I ditched the priests when i was seven years old...and i was intellectually left with jesus.....and i just love him ...i couldn t think my way to all that love.
I can not stand prattleing old turds like this; I'd sooner engage in small talk with a drunk.
The Christmas "silly" season is once more coming upon us; as a counterbalance to all that childish trash, I am rereading Bultmanns masterpeice commentary: "The Second Letter to the Corinthians". For the greatest benefit at least a modicum of Greek is recommended. It's a gem if you can find it.
These two piss-ants are not qualified to critique Bultmann.
Unlike Bultmann, I'd Tax the Churches.
97448able 3 months ago
Pierre is so fukken badass.
malkooth 5 months ago
LOL Did anybody else see that coming 2:24.I was waiting for him to finish up on that quote also.
lopytube 10 months ago
Is Pierre an atheist?
What is Pierre's view on God?
JinxOz 10 months ago
Thank you Pierre, and Opening Mind Associates. I never looked at Christianity in that particular angle.
AnichoM 2 years ago
Pierre is quite rude.
IKNOWALLABOUTALL 2 years ago
I don't know where he got the idea that Bush was a christian try to convert others to it by war. Bush just wanted a military industrial complex to pay back his friends who put him in office. That is a folly on Pierre.
RightCitizen 2 years ago
you should look a little deeper. Start with a great DVD called "Faith in the white house." Work on simple grammar before you start trying to call rhetorical fallacy. What do you mean Bush wanted a M/I Complex? Said complex has existed for many decades, long before Bush 1 or 2. The war was about the oil of course, but Bush was and is thoroughly and deeply caught up in all this bible thumping crap. This is a fact, not a folly.
alchemistvstiger 2 years ago
@RightCitizen If you actually study the words of Bush himself he clearly shows either ignorance or his own personal philosophy about what the Bible actually states. He is far from being a Christian as you say as defined by Biblical statement. Bush is not trying to build a Christian crusade-a religious crusade sure, but not Christian. He's promoting world "democracy", straight from the mouth himself. Ultimately leading for what Lenin called Socialism, leading to Utopian Communism.
TheValidity101 1 year ago
Right On Target! All Christians need to consider this and examine just what they believe and why. Big difference between Jesus, Paul, Martin Luther, and others. Who do you really follow? Is it Jesus of Nazareth ...or somebody else? Mant Thanks Pierre!
StFrancisChurch 2 years ago
This is so clearly lacking sound academic, rational, and empiracle verification. Pierre has no open mind but clear prejudice. Bultmann, his authority, likewise uses pseudo psychology and sociology to produce a theory that anyone with any understanding of historical evidence for Jesus and the early authorship of the NT will see through. Arrogance and empty claims are not convincing for the serious student. Sorry but I would like to hear someone that was not so complacent about such issues.
haderekh 3 years ago
Boo hoo.
alchemistvstiger 2 years ago
Bultmann, wenham, eddy, boyd, bauckham, and nash have really demolished bultmann over the last decade and a half.
migkillertwo 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Paul was actually the greatest of all apostles, he did more work and got his ass kicked for preaching the word. But he considered himself the least because he persecuted Israelites before the Lord put the spirit on him. The Most High is not the author of confusion.
doubleaamazin 3 years ago
I really enjoyed this video. Things like this help to convince me that I'm not alone in the world.
tallhorseman40 3 years ago 4
Has Pierre ever talked with Jordan Maxwell or Anthony Hilder? I think those guys are there in Northern California - I'd be very interested to know what Pierre thinks of their scholarship, especially Jordan? Pierre & Jordan both understand the power of words.
Regarding religion, someone once said "Good men will do good & bad men will do evil, but you need to make good men do evil, that requires religion".
Once you think about it, things like The Crusades, Inquisition & 9/11 make sense!
TruthJockey 3 years ago 2
you could say that, or you could say modern religon is the total misunderstanding of teachings.
Some people bring teaching to their current level, some rise to the level of the teaching to understand it. People should remember that Christians were killed by the inquisition too. meaning thier were many views, and the ones with the right view might have been the ones killed.
IMBUED 2 years ago
That's right Pierre, those creeds have taken the God out of man & now they've set up a system that makes the priest the portal to god. Cha-Ching! It's the COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUSNESS that must be changed --this is where the manipulation lies. It's rampant in government, religion, everywhere! Those are the DUALITIES that must be seen...knowing the truth & seeing the deception EVERYWHERE!
Politically speaking, Obama/Hill/McCain all sing from the same book & page - the CFR & Wall Street reign
TruthJockey 3 years ago
The NeoCons have the military industrial complex entrenched...the same brainwashing that allows $400mil/day in war spending also keeps the citizens in perpetual fear. The "convincing" is what allows otherwise decent people to be tricked -- this collective unconsciousness gets projected across the globe in the form of tyranny, sparked by fear. How else can you explain hunting down men in caves in 3rd world countries...so what if it's making corporations rich & breaking the US economy, so what?!
TruthJockey 3 years ago
You got that right. Although, I think it's the collective unconscious that the great manipulators have been tampering with, and attempting to re-program. It seems that we need to liberate our collective unconscious from the intentions of a small group of extremely evil and greedy people.
seeroftruth 3 years ago
Pierre continues:
Until Scholars decided to compare the philosophical tradition that was prior to Jesus, they simply will not understand that the Cynic Philosophers followed the Stoics and they in turn were inspired by Platonic Tradition. Take a look at Socrates, Cynic Philosophers, and Jesus and you can see something interesting. If you don't you will still think that the Jesus of the Gospels brought a new teaching.
-Pierre
openingmind 4 years ago
Pierre writes:
If Christians were to follow the instructions that Jesus gave to his disciples they would easily be likened to the manner and style of Cynic Philosophers. They confronted their fellow man whenever they encountered an injustice. You can see this in "Q", the sayings of Jesus that are recorded in Mathew and Luke but not Mark or John. However it is more obvious to see this linkage in the Gospel of Thomas
openingmind 4 years ago
@openingmind Who is "Q"? Why is he important? What is his significance? I am interested about "Q."
JinxOz 10 months ago
Very fashionable stuff. Today the true revolutionary must embrace orthodoxy.
As for Bultmann, he's been refuted by Joseph Ratzinger, among others. As for what Christians really believe, Pierre has set up a straw man, and he knows it. As for evangelism, Pierre is himself an evangelist and belligerent crusader.
Jitpring 4 years ago
Absolutely! It is very dubious to present Bultmann as if his "scholarship" is some how the ultimate in exegesis and his claim that Christianity is not rooted in the Gospels is totally absurd! He surrounds himself with very ignorant people, tells them what they want to hear whilst using "philosophy" to dazzle them into submission. He is a liar! "They don't have to use their mind."
jksoren 4 years ago
Jksoren must have quite the imagination to think this video presents Bultmann's ideas as "the ultimate in exegesis." As for ignorance, clearly you do not understand the relationship between the gospels and the Christian church. Go do some reading and reflecting instead of relying on blind belief and ignorant name calling.
HermeticLight 4 years ago
I am pretty familiar with the relationship of the Gospels with the early Christian Church and the history of their origins and eventual canonical status...I suppose you have a specific thing in mind when you suggest that I do reading and reflecting, what "blind" presuppositions do YOU have in mind for ME? The video relies on Bultman and Bultman's work hasn't exactly stood the test of time, but here it is for all of us as if canonized Gospel...you know, for blind belief.
jksoren 4 years ago
What a strange idea of a canonized gospel! Perhaps you need to watch the video to see that Bultmann is only briefly mentioned. What does it take for something to be canonized gospel in your world?
Bultmann was one of the first to show that the kerygma cannot be found in the 4 gospels - something that cannot be refuted even if Bultmann made many other errors in his scholarship. "Pauline" christianity relies heavily on other canonized texts and interpretation.
HermeticLight 4 years ago
The entire corpus of early writings are the product of the community's thriving oral tradition...Paul and his scribe did not invent the Kerygma but proclaimed it in union with other apostles such as Peter whom he verified his teaching with...and of course disagreed on specific points. The canonization of the gospels is not a strange idea but was done in accord with the oral apostolic teaching tradition and the the early liturgies.
jksoren 4 years ago
i couldn't understand the author of "the sayings of Jesus"
was it Keue?
thanks in advance
arquilian 4 years ago
The sayings of Jesus as found in Mathew and Luke has been called Q by scholars.-Lisa
openingmind 4 years ago
I'd just like to add that many younger scholars have moved away from "internal textual criticisms" in light of various objections. Many of us our unconvinced by the conventional arguments that are based almost exclusively on "internal criticism" left ungrounded in any empirical historical evidence. Internal criticism, it can be argued, is actually prone to a great deal of arbitrariness and bias that often goes farther in reflecting one's preconceived notions than much else.
jksoren 4 years ago
religion is not yet ripe in its outer bands in many inner pockets the mosaic changes have in some way retarded its spread and i do not mean its existence but its one singular unification as the whole or as much of it that is allowed by the force of god
jargenlink 4 years ago
Interesting discussion; thank you once again. I wonder what you think of the role of the Interfaith movement and how that might go some way to addressing many of the issues touched on.
Shachihata8 4 years ago
Interesting discussion. I would like to know what Pierre thinks about the idea of Christianity being assembled from ancient pagan sun-worshipping traditions. Maybe he or you have seen Zeitgeist the movie. I didn't care for the second and third parts but the first was truly illuminating.
atypicalguy 4 years ago
Thanks for the upload :)
I don't know if Jesus existed or not, but i do know one thing. Atheist and Christians have one thing in common, they both take the bible literally. When the bible is taken literally we find it contradicts itself all the time. Perhaps the bible is not a history book? Should we not take it for a literal meaning?
I'm amazed that atheist actually read their bible more than christians do... Sorry to go off topic :D
Openwindow86 4 years ago
Wonder what would happen if i were to ask the pope these kinds of questions, i'm sure he's too important to see a low life like me...
Openwindow86 4 years ago
Pierre writes:
Christians follow their preacher, but they don't seek to understand the bible. Christianity is a "follow the leader" and the Pope is a leader of leaders, and if he couldn't answer your questions then he must lead people that don't ask questions, such as you posed.
-Pierre
openingmind 4 years ago
Interesting to try and understand why some people choose to ask questions and some people don't.
One could really upset some apple carts.
TodMcInerney 4 years ago 2
Good stuff, Pierre. Thanks for sending the video link.
JSResponds 4 years ago
you are welcome
-Lisa
openingmind 4 years ago
I enjoyed this better as entertainment.
omunhvilag 4 years ago
with all due respect to Pierre and i do agree on some of his points but he misses a fundamental part in Christianity: Jesus is the way the truth and life. The church is a person, not a building. The preacher is the Bible. The truth is God
homer30 4 years ago
Pierre writes:
It would be interesting if defenders of Christianity such as yourself had taken the time to take a course on Q and an introduction to metaphysics. Your idea that the preacher is the bible is a classic example of the misuse of metaphors. Equally your idea that truth is God lacks a fundamental insight into the nature of God and of truth. But believe what you want it probably makes you feel good.
-Pierre
openingmind 4 years ago
My reference to metaphysics should have included, that in terms or Platonic metaphysics-- which proceeds from rational principles--that a knowledge that is able to grasp reality apprehends truth ( which it does by means of the Intellect) but God is beyond that which exists as reality, and so is also beyond Truth. In Platonic terms in the experience of divine luminosity the nature of Reality is revealed as truly existing and so truth is reached.
-Pierre
openingmind 4 years ago
God actually is the preacher but since the Bible is the word of God, reading a bible is the same as God communicating to the reader. searching for ultimate reality through human effort alone is a useless pursuit. Ultimate reality has to be shown to us. God has shown his nature to us and that is Jesus Christ. God said if you really wanna know my nature observe my Son
homer30 4 years ago
Pardon me Pierre, if you don't mind me asking: Do you believe in God? If not, why?
homer30 4 years ago
i just think before we even begin discussing about Christianity we have to settle the issue as to whether there is God or not.
homer30 4 years ago
I think for arguments sake ... you could assume that many/most people including philosophers do not discount and perhaps believe in a creator God.
It's just that people rely on interpretations of there religious institutions to perceive the reality/purpose and to provide an understanding of God.
TodMcInerney 4 years ago
People in most if not nearly all societies have the right to determine whether they want to discover divinity/God by themselves or choose a religious institution to do this with/for them.
TodMcInerney 4 years ago 2
The effect of this collectivism is for all to see in recent history.
Shaping of collective understanding/thinking is as much of a study ... as the effects of it are.
TodMcInerney 4 years ago
We do a similar thing with our monetary systems we go from trading something like walnuts to ineatables like silver and gold then to fiat currencies (CONfidence systems).
Then back to trading things of substance and value.
I think our understanding and changes in our understanding of divinity over the ages is worthy of discussion and may enlighten us all.
TodMcInerney 4 years ago
it would be nice if we could get a some type of references... for how do you spell that guys name: rudolf bulman(?), and the first one mcdonald (?)....
thanks in advance....
postsimpli 4 years ago 2
Dennis R. MacDonald
Rudolf Bultmann
Look in the descriptions for the links
-Lisa
openingmind 4 years ago
Intersting as always ,Great to see Pierre again .thank you for posting .
detagirl 4 years ago
Great dicussion to have.
I tried to open this up with a few abstract notes on Part 8 of Platonism and Alchemy.
Anyways it's brilliant of you to present this.
TodMcInerney 4 years ago
I still love jesus...I ditched the priests when i was seven years old...and i was intellectually left with jesus.....and i just love him ...i couldn t think my way to all that love.
macrina9 4 years ago