| Credit: punjabkesari |
Overheard on the internet: "Protecting a victim from an unrepentant transgressor is the highest form of compassion you can offer to the victim."
The blog to end all blogs. Reviews and comments about all and everything. This blog is NOT affiliated with YouTube, Wikipedia, Microsoft Bing, Gemini, ChatGPT or any commercial vendor! Links don´t imply endorsement. Many posts and comments are ironic. The blogger is not responsible for comments made by others. The languages used are English and Swedish. Content warning: Essentially everything.
| Credit: punjabkesari |
Overheard on the internet: "Protecting a victim from an unrepentant transgressor is the highest form of compassion you can offer to the victim."
I never heard of Ushnishavijaya before. Or "The Crown Ornament of Victory"...of all the Buddhas of all time. No less! The two short clips above deal with her Tibetan iconography. Apparently, Ushnishavijaya is associated with Amitayus and Amitabha. There seems to be an obvious family likeness with Tara.
Well-known atheist Bible scholar Bart Ehrman argues that "Luke" didn´t believe in the atonement. That is, the New Testament writer known as Luke, who wrote both the Gospel of Luke and Acts. Paul, Mark and Matthew *did* believe that the death of Jesus was an atonement for sin, but Luke had a different perspective. (Ehrman doesn´t discuss John.)
Yes, people should repent of their sins (including the sin of killing Jesus). If they do, God will forgive them. However, "foregiveness" and "atonement" are two different concepts, usually blurred in later theology. In the Lukan scenario, God doesn´t demand a sin sacrifice as payment. Turning towards God with a repentant heart is enough to receive foregiveness.
Ehrman believes that Luke´s perspective was the original message of Jesus himself. The notion that the crucifixion was an atonement was a response to the failure of Jesus to inaugurate the apocalypse during his lifetime.
Ehrman also points out that Luke had a stronger social message than Matthew. In Luke, Jesus says that the poor are blessed, in Matthew it´s "the poor in spirit". But note that both believe in work-based salvation!
Frankly a bit boring, but still interesting.
Was Jesus actually Yahweh? In other words: was Yahweh the "Son" rather than the "Father"? According to early Christian theology, that is.
Which leads us to the follow up question: Who was the Father...?
Overheard from ChatGPT. Has the System cracked the world riddle and found...God?
>>>Its supreme reality is Bhairava, not merely the fierce deity, but the infinite, ecstatic consciousness beyond all limitation. Interestingly: Lalitā Tripurasundarī is often portrayed as the supreme beauty of Śakti. Bhairava is the supreme freedom of Śiva. Their union is the ultimate reality.
Amen to that. So how do I join in?
This annoying character, "Star Soul Man" (who sometimes implies that he is Jesus or something to that effect), is apparently leaving the internet. LOL. How likely is *that*, exactly? He claims to be in the fourth dimension already. Well, he doesn´t curse as much as before, so maybe he *has* evolved? Goodbye, you fucking village idiot!
Håller med om att fotografiet högst upp kommer att bli en klassiker. Här är ett citat:
>>>Vi står, konstaterar forskarna, inför ett moment 22: Vi behöver plantera mer skog för att begränsa klimatförändringarna – men om inte framtidens skogar planeras utifrån en kraftigt ökad brandrisk, riskerar de att brinna upp innan de hinner fungera som de kolsänkor som klimatstrategierna bygger på.>>>
Påminner om klimatkrisens mer generella "moment 22": om vi slutar att använda fossila bränslen kollapsar den moderna civilisationen, men om vi fortsätter kan den mycket väl kollapsa ändå.
Välkommen till apokalypsen.
Or maybe it´s just the midterm election campaign, yes? Some on-line drama surrounding Nick Fuentes, Hunter Biden and Hassan Piker. Does anyone *really* care anymore?