OccultForum.org

Blessed are

the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (5:3)
they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. (5:4)
the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. (5:5)
they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. (5:6)
the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. (5:7)
the pure in heart: for they shall see God. (5:8)
the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. (5:9)
they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (5:10)

Having trouble understanding exactly what this entails. All I get when I search for ideas is God Gody God God. Looking at them they look like great way to treat one another.

Poor in spirit- give everything you can in this life as to not be able to do anything more (spirit as potential, people dont have much potential when they use it all up)
Mourn- If someone is mourning comfort them
Meek- If you are meek conflict can no longer cloud your heart leading to inner peace
Hunger for righteousness- Try to fix any atrocity you come across as to keep things peaceful
Merciful- If everyone was merciful then everyone would receive mercy to lifes more difficult moments making this life much easier
Pure in heart- Live your life with only good intentions until you automatically do them.
Peacemakers- Sometimes ones own survival instinct takes a hold and if you can do let it get that far
Persecuted for righteous sake- Because we cannot follow the crowd if the crowd wants to do evil

I like this explanation, but most theologists would disagree with me because it isn't directed towards God, but how to treat other people, but I cant see anything wrong with leading by example for what would probably be a better world if more people followed this, sadly in a real world Satan will get in the way, but idealism is an unachievable goal, but should be strived for none the less. Just my thoughts. What are yours?

the pure in heart: for they shall see God. (5:8)

IMHO "pure" means to be free of envy,pride greed, wrath, gluttony and sloth Being free of the these, a person is the best position to see the objective truth around him/her as it exists. Seeing truth is what I would equate with god.

I like this explanation, but most theologists would disagree with me because it isn't directed towards God, but how to treat other people, but I cant see anything wrong with leading by example for what would probably be a better world if more people followed this, sadly in a real world Satan will get in the way, but idealism is an unachievable goal, but should be strived for none the less. Just my thoughts. What are yours?

Jesus was a people kinda person. [thumbup]

It's the dogma that's been built up over and above his direct teaching that obscures it's beauty sometimes.

You have to remember when dealing with the Christian paradigm that there is a difference between the teachings of Jesus Christ and the teachings of the Church. The Church dogma is about control of the people and the subjugation of the masses while Christs teaching is about love and being good and nice to one another. If you can seperate Jesus from the Church then His teachings are actually much easier to work with, which is sad really - the Church as a body has done more to destroy the work of Jesus than opponents to Jesus could ever have done.

Case wrote:You have to remember when dealing with the Christian paradigm that there is a difference between the teachings of Jesus Christ and the teachings of the Church. The Church dogma is about control of the people and the subjugation of the masses while Christs teaching is about love and being good and nice to one another. If you can seperate Jesus from the Church then His teachings are actually much easier to work with, which is sad really - the Church as a body has done more to destroy the work of Jesus than opponents to Jesus could ever have done.

This is why I find Christianity so problematic. The God preached by Jesus is so different to God as described by the old testament, and the modern church is such a corruption of Jesus' original teaching (partly because they didn't ditch the old testament, and partly because the church has been used as a tool to control the masses ever since Constantine) that we end up with as much the OT god as we do of the NT god, then it becomes impossible to find the positive amongst all the negativity. Which would be fine (for me anyway...), except that a lot of the magical and occult works were written in an age when good old YHVH was the only god in town for western society, so you either have to settle for systems riddled with references to this spiteful, spiritually-strangling deity, or somehow seperate the asshole god of the old testament from the God that jesus preached (who seems like a pretty cool dude).

To me, it feels like the God of the old testament is a completely different entity, claiming to be something much more than he is, Jesus tried to sort things out and restore worship to the real divine source of creation etc etc., but due to the events that followed and general human nature, his teaching were instead corrupted and twisted until they pretty much resembled what he set out to get rid of. Not that I'm an expect by any means, but I just can't find any way to reconcile two such contradictory entities except to conclude that they aren't the same at all.

I'm no expert, but it's an issue I've been grabbling with recently and this is the only conclusion I can reach.