The bible is the bait and hook the "devil" uses to get you.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
What's the difference between a cult and a religion? Serious question.

Religion when practiced properly can lead someone to a very healthy lifestyle spiritually and physically. I tend to believe that religion should be practiced on an individual level, in other words without the influence of anyone else.

A Cult exploits that part of religion, they make people delusional through believing things which are not entirely true, possibly make them do stupid crap which in some cases ends in massacres because some idiot has convinced them a comet or asteroid is coming to take them to the planet cybertron or something. There is a big difference between religion and cults.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If I may be allowed to use the Bible to show why
the Bible isn't corruptable.

John 1:1

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God.…

But the Church, alas it is with men.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Speculating here but the ideas I'm inspired to put down are usually founded on something but anyway if the holy bible wasn't only the core message with no additives (even if they be true) then it wouldn't be holy, it would be an expanded bible. The fact that the holy bible (or at the very least some of the books inside the holy bible) always sticks only to the core facts of the phenomenon and even leaves out abstract and physical details which are crucial for a person to complete their understanding of the basic truth of the mystery of the bible in its' entirety is basically a hint that there is something more to the story and the root core of the story being the only presented part of the bible is what makes it a holy bible.

For instance the bible says that Jesus was born of a virgin, this implies that Jesus was a human being like us and that the virgin got pregnant and had to go through a regular child-birth to a regular organic infant child like every other mother on Earth did, the only difference between Jesus and his birth and everyone else was the fact that his mom was a virgin. But if you were initiated to the truth you might find out that Jesus in fact is not a normal human being and the fact that people were out for Jesus yet no one could do him in before he had SPOKEN that it would happen is another tip that he isn't a human being, his luck was extraordinary, he did whatever he did and it just so happened that no one could obstruct him, not even thousands fervently trying. This is another tip, no one is that lucky. He had a huge lasting cumulative impact on Rome and the world, this is another tip. Jesus said exactly what was needed and went exactly where he was needed when he was needed in order to establish his perfect legacy, this is a big world and he was in the perfect spot, both by luck and by action. Born in a different place or an hour later than he was and his legacy would have been distorted, Christianity wouldn't exist as the incontestable religious establishment in the west. This religion wouldn't exist, this is another tip. All this implies that he wasn't human like us, he wasn't self aware like us and he didn't have free will like us. He was automatic, he just did it, exactly what needed to be done, naturally. He was the effect of all the wrong and right everyone did on Earth made correct, everything everyone did made Jesus do what he did. It's as if all of humanities karma made a path that Jesus walked right through. He didn't have to learn it or be taught when he was being educated by the Essene mystery school, that's why he was teaching people at such a young age, he was inherently master of Essene wisdom without being taught, this is another tip. Jesus was God's way of correcting the world gracefully, he's not a regular human, he couldn't have children, he couldn't be affected, he could only affect. Once he had been used (served) to correct humanity in every active way that was needed he was used to complete his correction by becoming passive and consumed by the effects of his own active deeds until his ascension, completing his perfect legacy and made his cause-effect a closed loop.

And I think this is why there is discrepancy between Christian sects and Islam, much of their dispute is a matter of semantics and incomplete detail presentation because the esoteric truth of the religion in its' entirety could be very laborious to explain and with multiple presentations comes squabbles over semantics when really it's just a simple misunderstanding of the terms and the terms relative to other terms that the people used for their presentation.

If everyone was perfect and faithful to God Jesus would have never been sacrificed, as a matter of fact there would be no Jesus, he never would have been born, only ascended Christ would exist.

I think I've cracked the code and I didn't even have to be initiated! I'm such a genius.

I rule. Consider your arguments conquered in advance atheists.

a reply to: DarknStormy

So why would Rome have a change of heart, start telling the truth with the Bible, then turn around 300 years later and try to sabotage what they had built with Islam? Jesus said something about Satan driving out Satan didn't he?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I must be missing something, are you saying that the Romans created Islam?

a reply to: On7a7higher7plane

Now if you'd just use your caps right!

But DAMN!
Did you just go off?

a reply to: DarknStormy

In your first reply to me you said that exact thing was a possibility.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: DarknStormy

When it comes down to it, you can only change the course and thought process of your spirit, no-one else can.

Correct. And it takes many, many stints here (or in other worlds/dimensions) to get to the goal.
But, the really really good news is that we all make it. Eventually.

Screw up as much as it takes. You'll be fine. We all will.

Sooner or later yes.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DarknStormy

In your first reply to me you said that exact thing was a possibility.

OK, No I wasn't implying that the Romans created Islam, what I was saying is that because of the Roman version of Christianity after the persecution of Christians and the council of Nicaea in 325, the teachings were possibly changed to suit the Roman agenda and because of that Islam was created (or sent) depending on what way you look at it to counter the corrupt or altered version of Christianity which was introduced by Constantine and the other people of the council. It is believed that is where the title "Son of God" also came from.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Religion relies on external sources, cult relies internal sources.

a reply to: On7a7higher7plane

He didn't have to learn it or be taught when he was being educated by the Essene mystery school, that's why he was teaching people at such a young age, he was inherently master of Essene wisdom without being taught

Right.
So. Why are you bashing people that believe he was a mystic, again? Please?

Other than that - I think he was a regular guy, like Ghautama. But he knew what he was talking about.
The 'Christian denominations' (aside from Ecclesia Gnostica, which see at that link) all think they have the 'answers' and that 'reincarnation' is nonsense.

Further, most adherents to those denominations reject ANYTHING that challenges their dogma.

gnosticschristians.com...

The gnostic way of faith is free, open, and creative. One does not have to be told how to act; particularly, what to believe. You can and should use your brain and modern knowledge. You have the ability to think for yourself.

The gnostic style believes seeking God is more important than finding God by a certain dogma or belief. Therefore, this web site isn't about accepting Gnosticism or their beliefs or myths (yes, some are strange), but it's purpose is to share an early and widespread style of Christian faith that those called Gnostics heard Jesus teach. Silenced, condemned, and lost, this way of faith allows new knowledge, such as now that from history and science, to inform our faith and change not only our beliefs but how we are Christian in today's world.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

And of course set myself up for condemnation and judgment and belittling by those who disagree with my attitude.

I'm not criticizing you for believing in reincarnation, I'm merely answering your question as to why Christians don't believe in it. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and to interpret scripture the way that they want to, but to say that your interpretation is more valid than mine, simply because it supports your belief which does not originate in scripture, is not reasonable.

a reply to: randyvs

It's funny how much sense that makes to someone with understanding.

a reply to: randyvs

Yup I got ideas, now if only I was well Englished.

a reply to: adjensen

to say that your interpretation is more valid than mine, simply because it supports your belief which does not originate in scripture, is not reasonable.

But...
but,
it DOES originate in scripture! And not just the 'Christian' scripture, either. There are other holy texts, you know that. And many of them DO speak of actual reincarnation in a flesh/bone body after one flesh/bone body "dies."

So, that interpretation just doesn't get included in your Christian denomination's teaching of said scripture.
Which is unfortunate. IMO. Doesn't mean it's (reincarnation is) an invalid interpretation, though. I find it pretty easy to feel comfortable with it.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

But Jesus wasn't a mystic, mystics spend their lives learning the mysteries. Jesus knew everything true pertaining to all the mysteries in their completion, he had the big picture (all the knowledge) at his disposal in its' entirety and he didn't even have to learn it. He taught truth that he hadn't been taught.

Jesus wasn't a mystic, he was surrounded by mystics. You also mentioned he was like some other memorable guy, but he wasn't, the other guy did his best through will power, deliberating to make good choices and to improve himself, Jesus didn't, he only did IT, automatically.

a reply to: On7a7higher7plane

But Jesus wasn't a mystic, mystics spend their lives learning the mysteries. Jesus knew everything true pertaining to all the mysteries in their completion, he had the big picture (all the knowledge) at his disposal in its' entirety and he didn't even have to learn it. He taught truth that he hadn't been taught.

Jesus wasn't a mystic, he was surrounded by mystics.

O kaaayyy.....

So, where was he in the 'missing years' then?
I'll tell you! He was studying with mystics of the East.

If he hadn't been taught it (with which I agree), he already knew it. He went to learn the strategies for teaching it to people with no knowledge or understanding of it, from the people who were living and teaching it then.

Obviously, his methods weren't quite sufficient, since there are so many millions and millions of people who still don't get it.

Can you say he himself (Jesus) was not a 'reincarnation' of those mystic seers and prophets who came before him? Like Buddha, Krishna, etc? And just needed to know the vernacular and mindset of the times so he could go back 'home' and try to explain it?

Because, you see, he taught the same things they did.
I believe that we keep coming back until we 'get it', and then, after that, we can choose to come back to help....as many times as we like.
I believe he (the spirit of Jesus) was surrounded by 'mystics' for several lifetimes, and just decided to give it one more shot (as Jesus).

That all is, if 'he' existed at all, and was/is not just a rewrite of all those previous 'avatars' (which seems likely) suited for the times.
(And what a mess humanity made of it!) Same-o-same-o.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

So, that interpretation just doesn't get included in your Christian denomination's teaching of said scripture.

Why would it? You're losing me here -- I believe in Christianity because I believe that it's right. Why would I concern myself with the teachings of religions that I don't think are right? You're not a Catholic, do you care what that church teaches about Mary? Would you order your day around daily Mass and Adoration? Of course not.

Don't get me wrong, I've been exposed to other religions and even done a fair amount of studying of some of them, but all that really did was reinforce that my conclusions about them were right (for me -- Hindus or Jews are every bit as convinced that they're right and I'm wrong, and I have no problem with that.)

a reply to: adjensen

Why would it? You're losing me here -- I believe in Christianity because I believe that it's right.

Not trying to be obtuse. There are branches of Christianity that DO teach it. (see my other post that references Ecclesia Gnostica).

I respect and admire your confidence and position. I simply believe that the message is there (reincarnation) and was taught by Jesus (called Christ; but others were called Christ also). Most denominations have suppressed it (for reasons that are obvious). And, I don't appreciate the adjective 'vapid' in regards to the gnostic writings.

Your church flavor doesn't include them as an ingredient. Fine, that's okay. My non-church flavor does. One of us or neither of us is right.
Right?
Right.

a reply to: adjensen

I'm not criticizing you for believing in reincarnation,

You have a history of criticizing and mocking reincarnation and those who have shared their memories.

I'm merely answering your question as to why Christians don't believe in it.

You are not THE AUTHORITY on what Christians believe and what they don't. There are many denominations of Christians that do teach reincarnation today and early Catholic Church fathers and other early Christian groups, including, according to the Bible, the apostles, believed in reincarnation. The Essene and the Pharisees all believed in reincarnation.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and to interpret scripture the way that they want to, but to say that your interpretation is more valid than mine, simply because it supports your belief which does not originate in scripture, is not reasonable.

This is a cliche passive aggressive attempt to argue your authority in the interpretation of scripture over some one else's, at the same alienating them from Christianity by re-affirming that they can't be a Christian and believe what you do not.