Matthew

That's a really good post, Amy. But you can bet your bottom dollar that those freaky fundamentalists would have an answer for you. They are so bigoted, nothing penetrates their certainty (aka arrogance.)

xxx

Hi Amelia Jane, (long post coming up!)

It was a good question. Jesus was Jewish (thus the synagogue) and I have never felt that he came to start a new religion, but to show mankind a higher way of living and thinking which would free them from all the material limitations and the suffering that comes out of our belief in sin, disease, death. As Mary Baker Eddy explained:

Jesus' history made a new calendar, which we call the Christian era; but he established no ritualistic worship. He knew that men can be baptized, partake of the Eucharist, support the clergy, observe the Sabbath, make long prayers, and yet be sensual and sinful. (Science and Health p 20)

I haven’t watched the attack on Oprah yet as my wireless router is yet again not working and though my lovely next door neighbour says it’s fine to use her wireless which comes through the walls, I feel so guilty! I need to find the time, energy and patience to phone the call centre in India – aaargh! 😡

Anyway, that passage you quoted always makes me smile as I was once warned that we had a passenger who had to be met by the police the last three times he’d flown with us. My initial thought was "why on earth are they allowing him on board?" but then I realised that this was on opportunity for healing. The steward I was working with sat beside me during takeoff, going through all the scenarios and of how he would beat the man up. Groan. As soon as the wheels were up, I said I needed to go to the loo and there found the peace where I could turn to God and find harmony. We had a wonderful flight with only politeness from the passenger and afterwards I laughed when I realised I’d literally gone into the closet and shut the door! :rolleyes:

The first chapter of Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures is on Prayer and how to pray effectively. If you’d like to read it, here is the beginning of the chapter:

Here are Mary Baker Eddy’s comments on your quote (and as she was a woman who founded a church over a hundred years ago against bitter opposition from the male-orientated orthodox Christians) I'd say yes, here's one group of Christians who certainly do read it, but hopefully, more than that!

"When thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and, when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly."
So spake Jesus. The closet typifies the sanctuary of Spirit, the door of which shuts out sinful sense but lets in Truth, Life, and Love. Closed to error, it is open to Truth, and vice versa. The Father in secret is unseen to the physical senses, but He knows all things and rewards according to motives, not according to speech. To enter into the heart of prayer, the door of the erring senses must be closed. Lips must be mute and materialism silent, that man may have audience with Spirit, the divine Principle, Love, which destroys all error.
In order to pray aright, we must enter into the closet and shut the door. We must close the lips and silence the material senses. In the quiet sanctuary of earnest longings, we must deny sin and plead God's allness. We must resolve to take up the cross, and go forth with honest hearts to work and watch for wisdom, Truth, and Love. We must "pray without ceasing." Such prayer is answered, in so far as we put our desires into practice. The Master's injunction is, that we pray in secret and let our lives attest our sincerity. (Science and Health p 15)

This on prayer is wonderful too – it was in response to someone who had accused her (I've shortened the Matthew quote)

As to being "prayerless," I call your attention and deep consideration to the following Scripture, that voices my impressions of prayer:--
"When thou prayest,…...and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."
I hope I am not wrong in literally following the dictum of Jesus; and, were it not because of my desire to set you right on this question, I should feel a delicacy in making the following statement:--
Three times a day, I retire to seek the divine blessing on the sick and sorrowing, with my face toward the Jerusalem of Love and Truth, in silent prayer to the Father which "seeth in secret," and with childlike confidence that He will reward "openly." In the midst of depressing care and labor I turn constantly to divine Love for guidance, and find rest. It affords me great joy to be able to attest to the truth of Jesus' words. Love makes all burdens light, it giveth a peace that passeth understanding, and with "signs following." (Miscellaneous Writings p 133)

Love and peace,

Judy

Hi Amelia,
Someone once told me that we can each have our own interpretation to the words shared in the bible and that is why the stories/parables that Jesus told were left to our own interpretation.

I am just struck by this thought when I read this...

But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet

It is a bit like saying.... enter into your heart. Discover the depths of Love.

.....that they may be seen of men.

It isn't about what you are seen to be doing but what is in your heart. And that you can share what is in your heart...

when thou has shut thy door

you can share yourself for it is your own relationship and really it has nothing to do with anyone else....

thy father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

Is this the feeling of Love which can then go with you into the living?

Just my interpretation!
Thank you for sharing your thoughts Amelia.

Hi, Amelia,

My 'take' on these words, which TBH is pretty obvious to me, is that it's nothing at all to do with whether there should be a religion or not. It's about genuine spirituality conducted for the right motive and those who go about it for the strange motivation that it somehow boosts their ego to be 'seen' in the right clothing at events, or how many hours they pray per day, or (it applies to any path) how wonderful they are at getting into yogic asanas or postures. I've certainly known people like this, and they are into the spiritual path of their choosing for entirely the wrong motive, and are ego-based. I'd like to think they are much in the minority.

But in Jesus' day, there were the showy priests, who for the most part hadn't an ounce of real adoration or morality amongst the lot of them, by the New testament accounts. So Jesus was making it clear that the spiritual path had to be conducted from genuine motive, not an egocentric or 'showing off' motive. It doesn't matter what people do or do not know about you. You may meditate, pray, chant or whatever for several hours a day, but that's not some kind of a badge to be worn, just to let others know you do it! That's not right motive: it's between you and God, by whatever name.

To me that's clearly what the lines are about, and it doesn't at all preclude the idea that a dozen, a hundred, or thousands of people might be together in the same path (as I posted elsewhere today), organised - as you have to be if you ever try to do things with numbers of others - but all keeping their own attunement and spiritual experiences with the Highest quiet and to themselves. It's important not to go blabbing off (or posting) about deep spiritual experiences, else the whole motive can go awry. They are private between yourself and God ... but you can do this with many other people.

"Organised" and "religion" are IMHO not dirty words. Jesus was clearly organised himself: he gathered disciples, he instructed them, he told them to go out and find others, he had rules, he even had a base as archeology is turning up, at Peter's house by the sea, and he had formal rites for deep initiates, as is clear from the Secret Gospel of Mark. Jesus did begin rites and regulations, and a community or 'religion' had already gathered around him, based at Bethany it seems to me, while he still lived. So once Jesus was not incarnated (though accounts have it that he kept returning anyway), the religion already existed, and the question was then all about how to continue from then on.

V

" 'God' is Spirit; and (s)he who worships should worship in Spirit and in Truth."

Imho this emphasises inner sincerity, not outward ritual or show done 'just for the sake of it', or to be self-righteous.

That's a great quote for this thread Starshower and I think it deserves to be seen in context. Here is the interpretation from JB Phillips John 4. Jesus is at the well, talking to the Samaritan woman (has anyone noticed how often Jesus perceived the spiritual understanding that most women have - and all this nonsense about them not being priests and bishops, but that's off-topic!)

4:19-20 - "Sir," said the woman again, "I can see that you are a prophet! Now our ancestors worshipped on this hill-side, but you Jews say that Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship -"

4:21-24 - "Believe me," returned Jesus, "the time is coming when worshipping the Father will not be a matter of 'on this hill-side' or 'in Jerusalem'. Nowadays you are worshipping with your eyes shut. We Jews are worshipping with our eyes open, for the salvation of mankind is to come from our race. Yet the time is coming, yes, and has already come, when true worshippers will worship in spirit and in reality. Indeed, the Father looks for men who will worship him like that. God is spirit, and those who worship him can only worship in spirit and in reality."

Love and peace,

Judy

I find it interesting that the word "reward".... is used for those who stand on the streets as well as for those who don't....

Those who stand on the streets......[quote]Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

and those who don't......[quote]thy father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

The way I see it........we are all loved, anyway.
So why is the word reward used when it can't be about whether any of us get it right or not?
It can't be about the getting of a reward....
Isn't the being of us our reward anyway?
And our reward is just in being?

Just wondering....

Thanks for all the replies:)

Hi Flit, the talk of reward in the quote above to me says that if someone is to pray/preach openly in public with the intent to be seen and appricated by others then that is what they will get (their reward) ie just seen and appricated/respected by their fellow man

But if someone is to pray in private with sincerity from the heart then their prayers will be heard by who it is intended to be heard by and 'rewarded'

xxx

Nowadays you are worshipping with your eyes shut. We Jews are worshipping with our eyes open, for the salvation of mankind is to come from our race.

Those lines do make me wonder. I don't have a big problem with them, as there are many possible reasons Jesus may have said that; e.g. that Christianity came out from the Jews (kind of), or just speaking at her level of understanding, or that by "Jews" he meant all "called" or "called out" (to God) people. But I did also just wonder if a mischievous scribe stuck the words in at some distant point in time. :rolleyes:

There is also a train of thought BTW, by traditional and also virtually New Age sources, that the Jews, then, were indeed the spiritual elite in a sense. I'm not wording that well. I mean that some of earth's highest souls had tended then to incarnate into that race at that time, or earlier in the time of the prophets. The idea goes that twelve types of people (just as there were twelve key disciples) incarnated as the twelve tribes, plus the thirteenth who were more spiritually advanced than the twelve. And a case can be made that the twelve tribes dispersed geographically before Jesus' time - becoming many European nations, some further East, and one tribe, Manassah, became Britain. Another 'take' on this is simply that the tribes reincarnated in twelve different places. Very hard to prove, but a number of books have been written on this.

So it would mean that today's Jews are not necessarily the people incarnated as Jews then - those people of 2,000 years ago are maybe ... us, and other nations. The books can be convincing. I'd have to look 'em up, but they detail similarities in language and so forth. I recall reading that the Druids could be the dispersed tribe, Manassah. Hear the sounds: "Jews" and "Druids". It would explain why legend has it that a young Jesus, and later St. Paul, visited Britian and were so much at home with the "Druids".

It's a thought. I don't necessarily go with it, but I found it interesting reading.

The belief sometimes goes awry when it gets political e.g. some have used this to make the case that we, Britain, are now a Chosen People, etc., etc. Can't recall their name, but there's a small organisation in London based around this.

Well, going right off-topic! Sorry. :p

V

Hi Flit,

I've enjoyed reading your posts above, but have to say that that pretty pale blue isn't easy to see!!! :dft003:

AJ, you replied exactly what I would have too.

Hi V,

Now, how did I guess you wouldn’t agree with that sentence? :p

I just looked up what the Dummelow commentary says about it – sadly not online, so I have to type, but it’s interesting. I find it helps a lot to understand the historical background of what is being discussed in the Bible. As to whether bits were added by scribes or for political reasons, who knows – they certainly have been in some of the Pauline letters and also, there was a fascinating documentary on the Qur’an the other night and that has happened there in the past, but most notably in modern days in Saudi where parts of the translations are politicized. But I’m going :offtopic:

Back to John 4: The Samaritans had Israelite descendantcy (sp?), but were not accepted as Jewish by the “purer” ones. The Samaritans’ centre of worship was Mount Gerizim. Dummelow also says that the Samaritans’ religion was an external one of forms and ceremonies.

Some excerpts:

All that is transitory, national, local and ceremonial is to pass away, and God will accept for the future only the worship of the spirit and the heart.

In the meantime, however, Jerusalem, not Gerizim, is the true centre of worship ….there His religion is first to be established.

We Jews understand the nature of the God we worship: you Samaritans do not. We have the Psalmists and Prophets to teach us the meaning of spiritual religion: you reject all but the ceremonial Law of Moses.

Salvation is of the Jews – alluding to the promises to Abraham (Genesis 12) and to David (II Sam 7:11-13, 16; Ps 89:3,4; Ps 132:11) and to the historic fact that the gospel was to be preached to all nations “beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:47)

The Luke verse is in that Gospel’s commentary about the words Jesus spoke to the disciples before his ascension:

And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. (Luke 24:44-47)

Love and peace,

Judy

I've enjoyed reading your posts above, but have to say that that pretty pale blue isn't easy to see!!! :dft003:

Thanks for letting me know.....:) I'll change it in a minute!

Hi Judy,

"Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,"

I have no problem with the quote you cite. Those words above, here, contrary to the mainstream Christian viewpoint, I take to mean that Jesus taught them deeper, esoteric teachings, not contained in the gospels, for the public gospels were for the majority. But academically it is now generally accepted that Jesus taught many things which have not come down to us. They were in "secret" gospels, such as the now-partly revealed Secret Gospel of Mark ... in all, an entire body of deeper, esoteric or 'occult' teachings, going far beyond today's mainstream understanding of Christianity.

Your Mary B Eddy will have gone a ways to reestablishing these teachings, but surely not every amazing word Jesus ever spoke to the closer initiates.

So this is hinted at many times in the Biblical gospels, that he took the main disciples aside and taught them things not to be recorded in the gospels within today's Bible. 🙂 That this took place is recorded as a fact right there in the Bible, right? So the Bible is only a small fragment of Jesus' whole teaching: we can't pretend to know the other 95% of what he did or taught.

V

Thanks Flit! I use a Mac and have noticed that the colours are much paler than on PCs.

Hi again V,

There are so many places in the Bible where we get this idea of needing help to understand the deeper and more spiritual meaning of the scriptures and to me it makes a mockery of those who say we HAVE to take the word literally (ie in its material explanation)

I love the account of the two disciples on the way to Emmaus who didn’t know it was the resurrected Jesus talking to them:

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures? (Luke 24)

Did not our heart burn within us? I bet they did! 😉

The disciples too went on to help others:

And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet. Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? (Acts 8)

This to me is a most wonderful prophesy:

¶Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. (Jeremiah 31)

Love and peace,

Judy

I didn't comment, BTW Judy, thanks for looking into the Jewish point. That makes more sense - that scripture said things would begin at Jerusalem, and hence among the Jews of that day.

I might still post when I have the books to hand (at another house) about the alleged dispersion of Jewish tribes prior to Jesus' time. I seem to recall that in an alleged extra, discoved final chapter of Acts, St. Paul, in arriving in England and going to London (hence "St. Paul's" so it is said), found the Druids to be Jews, and that their rites were Jewish to a degree. Something along those lines, anyway. But off-topic here. 🙂

V

I might still post when I have the books to hand (at another house) about the alleged dispersion of Jewish tribes prior to Jesus' time. I seem to recall that in an alleged extra, discoved final chapter of Acts, St. Paul, in arriving in England and going to London (hence "St. Paul's" so it is said), found the Druids to be Jews, and that their rites were Jewish to a degree. Something along those lines, anyway. But off-topic here. 🙂

Well I hope you don't mind this diversion Amelia Jane, but Venetian doesn't have to go to another house, it's already here on HP!

We've already had this discussion V and I seem to recall that you had some doubts about the authenticity of this author. However, this is what I've found from the Search engine (didn't look up your comments though on the potted history of the Bible)

I seem to recall that you have another book by the same author. Here goes (again!)

I had often wondered about what happened during those "lost" years of Jesus and I was fascinated to receive a second hand book which had been written in the '60's - before the heightened "New Age" interest in the life of Jesus and some of the mish-mash of beliefs that often goes with it. Looking at the bibliography of the book, it was obvious that this was a serious researcher (actually an American or Canadian Anglophile) who had dug up obscure documents in monasteries, cathedrals, museums and abbeys.

The book is called The Drama of the Lost Disciples by George Jowett, which tells how Christianity came to Britain much earlier than I had realised – back in about AD 36, when Joseph of Arimathea (the uncle of the Virgin Mary) became known as the Apostle to Britain. (It seems that much of this history was concealed when the Roman Church came into being three hundred years later).

Christianity, or "The Way" as it was known then, was very quickly accepted by the Druids whose "religious beliefs and customs set them markedly apart from all other faiths. It was diametrically opposed to all other religion of that time. They believed in One Invisible God, and the coming of the Messiah. They had no graven images, abhorring the sight of idols. They always worshipped in the open, facing the east. They had a passionate belief in the immortality of life, to such an extent that both friend and foe claimed this belief made them fearless warriors, disdainful of death."

The religious ritual that appeared to make the greatest impression on the foreign historians was their custom of carrying a replica of the Ark of the Covenant before them in all religious observances, as did their forefathers in old Judea.

The motto of the Druids was "The Truth against the World". …."extraordinary as it may seem, the actual name of Jesus was familiar to them long before the advent of the Christ."

These Druids, quickly accepted "The Way" when Joseph of Arimathea arrived in AD 36. I found this fascinating – I knew nothing about all this before. Obviously, this is all different from the history we have probably read or been taught, but this book seems to have been meticulously researched, going back into many ancient documents including Druid Triads.

From The Drama of the Lost Disciples (Covenant Publishing Co. Ltd 1970)

Other books by this publisher include:
St Paul in Britain (the one Venetian mentioned in the potted hstory of the Bible thread)
The Painted Savages of Britain (a myth spread by the Romans)
George of Lydda
The coming of the saints
Our neglected heritage
Celt, Druid and Culdee

[url]From: https://www.healthypages.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=8921 [/url]

someone on Wiki seems to be pouring scorn it on it though:

Love and peace,

Judy

Thanks for the links, Judy......fasinatingly good stuff

....doubts about the authenticity of this author.

The doubts.. of the things we may read....
There cannot just be a blind trusting of "those in the know" can there?
So how does each one of us individually authenticate what we read or what we are told?
I haven't even heard of so many of the writings mentioned in this thread.
So, if I did want to read more of something, then how would I know where to begin?

Is it back to that word intuition/ gut feeling?
And isn't our intuition individual to each of us and so that what may seem just right for one just isn't that way for another?
And mighten it be about personal choice for each of us?
Is it just about what we may read that allows those whisperings within our soul?

And who knows what it is that may move us deeply?
Who knows what the next bit is of our potential?

Why do we share on here like we do?
There is so much sharing always....
Why do we share like we do?
Do we share in hope that someone may like what we write?
Do we share to discover more about ourselves and to discover more about how it can be for others?
Why do we do this sharing like we do, when we are so so individual?

Is it really each to their own?
Is it about...my choices... of what I read/like etc.
But how will I know what will really really move me if I don't allow for new experiences?

How will I grow if I don't let the opportunity for newness to just happen? If I just continue to operate in the same patterns of the past, and read the same words as before, how can there be opportunity for new new growth if I don't allow or take the steps for expansion?

I just feel I must not sit with my eyes closed, but neither do I want to go anywhere where I may feel scared.

It is just, I do know what it feels like when words feel like living words.....and for me if the words are authentic I know because of the way I feel touched/ deeply moved. And often when I return to read the words, perhaps many months later, it sometimes feels like the message within the words grows too.

But, each of us is different....
So, is it all a personal thing whether something is authentic or not?
And if you like it and I don't that is alright
and if I like something and you don't that is alright too?
And it is okay then to share how it is..
because it is a different viewpoint and that is what hp is about..
the way we share ourselves?

And is that what this thread is about?
The way that different people share their differing viewpoints of Jesus?

The text visibility looks fine to me, Flit, in reply to your edit comment.

V

The text visibility looks fine to me, Flit, in reply to your edit comment.

V

Thank you