Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Pastors Not Telling?

Expand Messages
  • etznab18
    The following is a cross post from A.R.E. One that I had to post about six times before it finally stuck. What I mean by stuck is that several of my A.R.E.
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 13, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      The following is a cross post from A.R.E.
      One that I had to post about six times before
      it finally stuck.

      What I mean by "stuck" is that several of
      my A.R.E. posts over the past few days would
      disappear about a minute or two after they
      posted. Most of my posts today on A.R.E. have
      vanished from the Google groups board, as far
      as I can tell. This was not the case for a post
      to another Google Group (today), however.

      So far this has only happened with A.R.E.
      and I don't recall it ever happening before.
      If it keeps up I will probably not post there
      any longer. Here is the post. I hope there
      aren't any line breaks. If so, just read it
      at

      http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/3d7e65dc9e866d16?hl=en#

      *********************************************

      Pastors Not Telling?


      Today - in Archaeology News, of all places - I read
      a piece on how people are almost completely "in the
      dark" about what scholars know about the Bible. App-
      arently, they are even in the dark about what pastors
      know. So it seems. Here is the quote I'm referring to.


      *************************************************************


      [....]


      Many pastors preaching on a Sunday don't believe
      the Bible is God-breathed the way members uneducated
      in theology do. But they are not telling. In the latest of his
      books showing how unreliable the Bible and orthodox
      Christianity are, Jesus Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden
      Contradictions in the Bible, Bart Ehrman, fundamentalist-
      pastor-turned-atheist, and still distinguished professor of
      religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel
      Hill, says: "Most Americans are almost completely in the
      dark about what scholars have been saying about the Bible
      for the past two centuries. This is because many pastors
      who learned this material in seminary have, for a variety of
      reasons, not shared it with their parishioners once they
      take up positions in the Church."


      [....]


      http://www.archaeologynews.org/story.asp?ID=495187&Title=Atheists'
      problem with the Bible


      *************************************************************


      This piece brought up an interesting point about those
      teaching religion "officially". About what they know - on
      the one hand - and what they are saying, on the other.


      It also - if you read the entire article - illustrates some
      valid positions by people who don't argree with all that is
      being "officially" taught.


      So, IMO, there is a kind of dialogue going on between
      the two basic sides. One that has even intensified over
      the years. Many "opponents" claims are indisputable, in
      light of recent discoveries and scientific research.


      What got my attention the most was the fact "clergy"
      are probably "in the know" about a lot of things they are
      not telling the "congregation".


      Here is my question. Is it really serving religion when
      facts are withheld, intentionally, by the very people who
      are commissioned to teach it?


      This type of bias can be found in other forms of teach-
      ing environments. Not only religion, but science, history,
      politics, etc.


      In this group, A.R.E., and other places we have seen
      dialogue and debate about facts vs. myths & legends
      for "Eckankar" history. How is this different from what is
      going on with other religions and other congregations?


      Obviously, there are beneficial and successful results
      gained by positive imagination. Where is the point that
      it goes too far though? And then turns to its opposite?
      How far can the imagination be allowed to go? And at
      the expense of vital truth?


      Paul Twitchell (the founder of Eckankar) writing about
      imagination, didn't characterize it exclusively as positive.
      I remember that he said something about how it could
      go both ways, so to speak. It could be used for good &
      for bad, basically.


      So, when members of a "congregation" learn some
      of the things their own "clergy" know (but aren't telling
      them) and confront them with it - demanding more of
      the same privilege to know the truth - how justified is
      it for "clergy" to hold back the truth? How justified is
      it for "higher-ups" to "spin" the truth for people on the
      lower rungs of the ladder?


      Apply these questions to business and politics and
      it becomes clear the truth can be manipulated for the
      benefit of special interests, etc. People can use tools
      of advertising like sales people trained to succeed at
      all costs. Often sacrificing certain particulars to make
      their "product" more attractive.


      I can see the reasons for doing all that, but at the
      same time I think it becomes the marketing of tem-
      porary experience. It's what "they say it is" so long
      as the customer doesn't come up to the same level
      and take a gander at the same unspun truth.


      What becomes of a religion and a clergy - not to
      mention their congregations - when the former have
      to admit that the latter know just as much as they
      do? If not more?


      Does it become a "battle" for God? Or is it more
      a "battle" to know the truth?


      Etznab
    • prometheus_973
      Hello Etznab and All, It s no mystery that religious leaders, like Klemp, tend to omit and twist the truth. It s called job security! Why do followers of any
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 14, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Etznab and All,
        It's no mystery that religious leaders,
        like Klemp, tend to omit and twist the
        truth. It's called job security!

        Why do followers of any religion need
        living leaders? It's because the followers
        believe (are told) that the leader/master
        is a highly evolved spiritual being who
        is "closer" to God (than they are), "speaks"
        to God, and has the "ear" of God. And,
        only the leader can truly interpret their
        "Holy scripture" (written by unknown sources).

        It would seem that these religious leaders
        always have to muddy the waters (misdirect,
        confuse, and control the believers) by adding
        more rules and laws, and in Eckankar's case,
        Guidelines! It is true that the leader does usually
        "know" more about the workings of the religion
        than the average follower, however, the key
        is in "acting" the role and getting the followers
        to accept that there are "inner" workings taking
        place.

        Here's an exercise for Eckists: walk and talk
        "as if" you are a 12th initiate... then imagine
        that Klemp (at the 2009 Worldwide) names
        you as an EK Master. See how Eckists are, now,
        looking at you differently! It was no different
        for Klemp... many said that there must be more
        to him on the "inner." And those who had had
        some dealings with him thought he was a loner
        and, thus, very pious and "spiritual." HK talked
        the talk and walked the arahata/vahana walk...
        like most... but, mostly, HK tricked Darwin
        and omitted his bridge jump, strip tease, and
        arrest and stay in a mental institution and
        then, after an early release, the stalking of
        an "unknown" Eck Master to Texas!

        Prometheus



        Etznab wrote:

        The following is a cross post from A.R.E.
        One that I had to post about six times before
        it finally stuck.

        What I mean by "stuck" is that several of
        my A.R.E. posts over the past few days would
        disappear about a minute or two after they
        posted. Most of my posts today on A.R.E. have
        vanished from the Google groups board, as far
        as I can tell. This was not the case for a post
        to another Google Group (today), however.

        So far this has only happened with A.R.E.
        and I don't recall it ever happening before.
        If it keeps up I will probably not post there
        any longer. Here is the post. I hope there
        aren't any line breaks. If so, just read it
        at

        http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/3d7e65
        dc9e866d16?hl=en#

        *********************************************

        Pastors Not Telling?


        Today - in Archaeology News, of all places - I read
        a piece on how people are almost completely "in the
        dark" about what scholars know about the Bible. App-
        arently, they are even in the dark about what pastors
        know. So it seems. Here is the quote I'm referring to.


        *************************************************************


        [....]


        Many pastors preaching on a Sunday don't believe
        the Bible is God-breathed the way members uneducated
        in theology do. But they are not telling. In the latest of his
        books showing how unreliable the Bible and orthodox
        Christianity are, Jesus Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden
        Contradictions in the Bible, Bart Ehrman, fundamentalist-
        pastor-turned-atheist, and still distinguished professor of
        religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel
        Hill, says: "Most Americans are almost completely in the
        dark about what scholars have been saying about the Bible
        for the past two centuries. This is because many pastors
        who learned this material in seminary have, for a variety of
        reasons, not shared it with their parishioners once they
        take up positions in the Church."


        [....]


        http://www.archaeologynews.org/story.asp?ID=495187&Title=Atheists'
        problem with the Bible


        *************************************************************


        This piece brought up an interesting point about those
        teaching religion "officially". About what they know - on
        the one hand - and what they are saying, on the other.


        It also - if you read the entire article - illustrates some
        valid positions by people who don't argree with all that is
        being "officially" taught.


        So, IMO, there is a kind of dialogue going on between
        the two basic sides. One that has even intensified over
        the years. Many "opponents" claims are indisputable, in
        light of recent discoveries and scientific research.


        What got my attention the most was the fact "clergy"
        are probably "in the know" about a lot of things they are
        not telling the "congregation".


        Here is my question. Is it really serving religion when
        facts are withheld, intentionally, by the very people who
        are commissioned to teach it?


        This type of bias can be found in other forms of teach-
        ing environments. Not only religion, but science, history,
        politics, etc.


        In this group, A.R.E., and other places we have seen
        dialogue and debate about facts vs. myths & legends
        for "Eckankar" history. How is this different from what is
        going on with other religions and other congregations?


        Obviously, there are beneficial and successful results
        gained by positive imagination. Where is the point that
        it goes too far though? And then turns to its opposite?
        How far can the imagination be allowed to go? And at
        the expense of vital truth?


        Paul Twitchell (the founder of Eckankar) writing about
        imagination, didn't characterize it exclusively as positive.
        I remember that he said something about how it could
        go both ways, so to speak. It could be used for good &
        for bad, basically.


        So, when members of a "congregation" learn some
        of the things their own "clergy" know (but aren't telling
        them) and confront them with it - demanding more of
        the same privilege to know the truth - how justified is
        it for "clergy" to hold back the truth? How justified is
        it for "higher-ups" to "spin" the truth for people on the
        lower rungs of the ladder?


        Apply these questions to business and politics and
        it becomes clear the truth can be manipulated for the
        benefit of special interests, etc. People can use tools
        of advertising like sales people trained to succeed at
        all costs. Often sacrificing certain particulars to make
        their "product" more attractive.


        I can see the reasons for doing all that, but at the
        same time I think it becomes the marketing of tem-
        porary experience. It's what "they say it is" so long
        as the customer doesn't come up to the same level
        and take a gander at the same unspun truth.


        What becomes of a religion and a clergy - not to
        mention their congregations - when the former have
        to admit that the latter know just as much as they
        do? If not more?


        Does it become a "battle" for God? Or is it more
        a "battle" to know the truth?


        Etznab
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.