The concept of hell and eternal damnation is a form of control.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by petrus4

 

But then years went by. And Paul proved himself.

Yes, he most certainly did. No arguments there, at all.

But what am I supposed to do when he suddenly does miracles and acts that only Christ himself could do?

To use a Star Wars analogy, it wasn't only the Jedi who could learn to use the Force. The loyal opposition *does* offer its' employees certain fringe benefits; although their long term stock options aren't quite as good.

I also disagree that most people are not intelligent enough to get it. That was the argument the Catholic Church used to ban the bible in the people's language. And that was one of the reasons Luther was excommunicated. It's a very suspicious argument with hardly any basis for truth.

edit on 3-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

There is a difference between inherent intelligence, and intelligence which is voluntarily applied. The latter is capable of enhancing, or at least maximising, the former. I will not criticise anyone for their inherent level of ability; what I may criticise them for, is their own choice not to use it.

reply to post by Gorman91

Did you actually read the whole part? Or just the small snippet?

Uh, I actually have read entire volumes of "whole parts", not just "snippets" on a public forum.

I have read so many volumes by so many authors over so many years that I can't count them. Heck, I've GIVEN AWAY more than half of those same volumes, to others who wanted to learn....and I STILL have three dozen different works on my bookshelf.

And what I read has accumulated in my brain, where I store my knowledge gleaned from this lifetime. (Commonly known as study and learning.)

How many have you read?

reply to post by MrUncreated


You have a child, and you lets say……own cleaning chemicals.

First you correct your child of the dangers of them when they are curious and try to play with them, then when they are a bit older you explain why they cannot play with them , and soon as they grow they will understand why.
You wouldn’t foolishly let your child play with something that will cause harm or death.

So the post you quoted: is actually not a fail, but really a warning to stay away from things that will cause great harm to you , but you wont understand it till your much more mature and able to understand why!

reply to post by wildtimes

sigh. Yes, gorman, that is the point. No one said we die and come back as ourselves in this lifetime again. No. Reincarnation is the spirit, the soul, that comes back here, to earth, in a DIFFERENT body, to a DIFFERENT life, in which we experience DIFFERENT things to the ones we have previously experienced.

This is not backed up by what you quoted.

What is backed up is that your spirit is not your own. It is your purpose, given from God. It has been with many. But that you were not those many. You simply have the same purpose.

The spirit is not the soul. The soul is someone's self. The spirit is their purpose. The spirit is reused, as purposes are often needed again. The soul is not. No where in the Bible does the soul get reused.

The soul is me. My spirit like a machine, driving me to where the wind blows, I don't know why I follow it. It just tells me to.

Elijah's spirit, the purpose of his life, is RELIVED in John the Baptist. His SPIRIT WAS BORN AGAIN.

His spirit is not him. it is from God. Christians receive the Holy Spirit. That does not mean that you were God in a past life. it means your purpose is now part of the divine mandate.

Honestly, I just don't see what is so difficult to comprehend about this.

The whole "not backed by scripture" is pretty important.

We dont' "come back" looking the same, or talking the same, or wearing the same clothes, or having the same car. We are born again, into a new incarnation, a new body, so that we can continue our soul's journey through the "school" of Divinity. We come back as someone else, someone new, with our spirits intact, but our experiences to be refreshed with others to enrich what our spirit, our soul, has learned previously.

And yet, revelation seems to imply Elijah must return as Elijah. His flesh, his soul, his spirit.

The soul is not the spirit. The soul's journey ends on this world when the body dies.
No. We are not. Our souls die, and we go to wherever that is. Some say sleep until the final day. Others say you will simply rise on the final day.

And by the way, I have been baptized. When I was about a week old, they tell me.

.

This is irrelevant, and I am very suspicious at new born baptism.

reply to post by petrus4

To use a Star Wars analogy, it wasn't only the Jedi who could learn to use the Force. The loyal opposition *does* offer its' employees certain fringe benefits; although their long term stock options aren't quite as good.

Fine comedy and somewhat true. However, the loyal opposition does not seek to bring people to Christ.

There is a difference between inherent intelligence, and intelligence which is voluntarily applied. The latter is capable of enhancing, or at least maximising, the former. I will not criticise anyone for their inherent level of ability; what I may criticise them for, is their own choice not to use it.

I just doubt that the common people can't understand it. Maybe you can't understand the common people.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by Gorman91

 

Did you actually read the whole part? Or just the small snippet?

Uh, I actually have read entire volumes of "whole parts", not just "snippets" on a public forum.

I have read so many volumes by so many authors over so many years that I can't count them. Heck, I've GIVEN AWAY more than half of those same volumes, to others who wanted to learn....and I STILL have three dozen different works on my bookshelf.

And what I read has accumulated in my brain, where I store my knowledge gleaned from this lifetime. (Commonly known as study and learning.)

How many have you read?

Your attitude is not helping anyone. Speak honestly. Not grieved as if doing a service. Nobody asks you to be cocky. Just prove a point.

reply to post by Gorman91

This is not backed up by what you quoted.

No?

Well, it IS backed up by what YOU quoted. The bits about "I say to you that John is Elijah". Those bits.
another sigh
Fine, I'll open another window, c/p them, and repeat them for you here....

Jesus said that John the Baptist was The Elijah. And indeed, the spirit of Elijah. A spirit, based off what I know, is not the man, but the purpose of a man. The man is his soul. His purpose is the spirit God gives him. This is actually an ancient tradition going back to ancient Egypt. Egyptians separated the soul from the spirit.

Again, the translation itself is pretty perplexing. Here's a few.

and if ye are willing to receive [it], he is Elijah who was about to come;

Young's literal translation

11-14"Let me tell you what's going on here: No one in history surpasses John the Baptizer; but in the kingdom he prepared you for, the lowliest person is ahead of him. For a long time now people have tried to force themselves into God's kingdom. But if you read the books of the Prophets and God's Law closely, you will see them culminate in John, teaming up with him in preparing the way for the Messiah of the kingdom. Looked at in this way, John is the 'Elijah' you've all been expecting to arrive and introduce the Messiah.

Messages

14If you are willing to accept their message, John is the Elijah who was to come.

God's word

14 And if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who [a]was to come.

Elijah's spirit was in John the Baptist.

Gorman, you are agreeing with me, whether you want to admit it or not.

It appears, however, that where you are getting hung up is this differentiation between the "spirit" and the "soul".
Not sure where you get that, but it seems to be clouding your ability to grasp the actually fairly simple points....
we must be born again. Our spirit (our portion of the Divine Oneness) does not die. It returns, again and again.

And eventually, after many lifetimes on earth, our spirit is ready to be reunited with the Divine and not have to come back for more lessons.

I think perhaps where you are bashing from is this insistence on separating spirit from soul. I speak of them as the same thing. My spirit. My soul. They are not my current body. They are the same thing: my eternal, Divine being which is filled by the (what you all want to call) Holy Spirit. That part of the Holy Spirit which is ME constitutes my soul.

reply to post by Gorman91


I AM speaking honestly. I already told you I was tired. It is past midnight here. I am TIRED.
You wanted to "discuss", so I'm doing my best with the energy I have remaining for today.

Give me a break, will you? I'm trying. I could've just blown it off, like others have done.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Akragon

 

I was relaying the thing I thought you claimed to believe. Because yes, the word shows up.


I am simply asking you to prove what you believe from scripture, as you asked me.

Anything else makes you a hypocrite. And you have been displaying a superiority complex quite honestly. You still didn't admit you couldn't prove it in scripture. You just evaded and said it's irrelevant. Well yea sure, if you ignore parts of the scripture, you can justify anything from reincarnation, to mass murder.

I apologized, so admit you can't prove it.

edit on 3-1-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

Lets just say i got tired of your silly rants that made little to no sense...

Anyways lets start here shall we?

Jeremiah 1:4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish in his sight and love." (Ephesians 1:4)

20Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped,

21And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD (Job 1:20-21)

Job 19:25 I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth. 26 And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God; 27 I myself will see him with my own eyes-I, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!

4One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
5The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
6The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
7All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
8All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.
9The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.(Ecclesiastes 1:4-9)

And as he was passing by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who has sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?" Jesus answered, 'Neither has this man sinned, nor his parents, but the works of God were to be made manifest in him.'" (John 9:1)

13But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.
14Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
Ephesians 5:13-14


In the Apocryphal book Wisdom of Solomon, recognized by the Catholic Church, is the following verse:

"... I was given a sound body to live in because I was already good." (Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20)

Would you like more bibical evidence of reincarnationand pre-existance of the soul/spirit?

Im sure you won't agree with these passages as being evidence... Though as you've shown within this thread, scripture isn't your strong suit anyways...

Realize that reincarnation was removed from scripture for a reason... simply put, IF people believed they only lived once they would have control... but if they believed they lived more then once, they have no power, no control... thus it was deleted from "biblical history"

Thank God, since the introduction of the internet the church no longer has any authority on scriptual matters...

Everything eventually comes out....

There is scripture that predates the bible that also affirms reincarnation IS the path of the soul... Christians would argue otherwise of course... They would prefer to call it satanic... without even looking... which in all honestly is just pathetic...

and you would never touch such scripture since its not a part of your religion.

That is what happens when you're brainwashed by a church... The open mind you were born with slams shut...

And i would also bet money you could find Jesus teaching reincarnation within the vaults of the Vatican library as well...

reply to post by wildtimes

No? Well, it IS backed up by what YOU quoted. The bits about "I say to you that John is Elijah". Those bits. another sigh

The Elijah. Not Elijah.

Gorman, you are agreeing with me, whether you want to admit it or not. It appears, however, that where you are getting hung up is this differentiation between the "spirit" and the "soul". Not sure where you get that, but it seems to be clouding your ability to grasp the actually fairly simple points.... we must be born again. Our spirit (our portion of the Divine Oneness) does not die. It returns, again and again.

Because the Bible differentiates between the soul and the spirit

Jesus never says you must be born psychically again. he essentially says your soul needs to replace its spirit. The spirit is from God. Yes, the divine oneness. But it is not you. You are not your own. Jesus states this. Once you receive the spirit, your purpose is God's purpose. Your soul is always you. It lives in the flesh. When the flesh dies, the soul is put to rest. God can use that spirit again, or he can throw it out, or he can save it for later. The spirit is nothing more than a machine. A voice in the wind. A piece of paper with words on it telling you what to do.

In my life, I have done as Jesus said. I will requote it again.

Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”

Do you understand this? I do. I have heard my spirit speak. It has ordered me to do things I do not understand why. I have done these things, and changed people's lives, as well my own.

The spirit orders. It is a machine. It says what God wants you to do. And you can accept it or deny it.

And eventually, after many lifetimes on earth, our spirit is ready to be reunited with the Divine and not have to come back for more lessons.

Perhaps. But that spirit is not you. It has none of your self. I am not outside the idea that it has your memories and your experiences. But it is no different than a picture in a photo book, or a voice recording, or an essay you wrote. These things have a piece of you, because you created it. But you are not there. When I create something, I put my spirit into it. But I am not there. Just my spirit. My soul remains with me.

I think perhaps where you are bashing from is this insistence on separating spirit from soul. I speak of them as the same thing. My spirit. My soul. They are not my current body. They are the same thing: my eternal, Divine being which is filled by the (what you all want to call) Holy Spirit. That part of the Holy Spirit which is ME constitutes my soul.

Then I'm afraid for all your reading you have missed a very important differentiation

The Hebrew word for Spirit is ruach. The Hebrew word for soul is Nephesh.


Knowing the difference between them is very important.

Nephesh can also mean life. The self.

Ruach on the other hand, denotes from God. An edict; a purpose.


For it is said.

"for the reckoning of God is living, and working, and sharp above every two-edged sword, and piercing unto the dividing asunder both of soul and spirit, of joints also and marrow, and a discerner of thoughts and intents of the heart;"

Hebrews 4:12


If you wish to say they are the same. By all means. Prove it in scripture. You will find they are not the same thing. In fact, you will find they are totally different in their role.

reply to post by Akragon


These were already posted.

They show predestination. Not reincarnation.

Thanks, but not good enough.


Where in the bible does it say that you- your soul- is reused.

Originally posted by Gorman91
The whole "not backed by scripture" is pretty important.

Reincarnation isn't going to be backed by scripture (or at least, any of the scripture that you're supposed to read) for a couple of different reasons, all of which are related to control.

a] Catholicism (and these days, most Prot denominations as well) doesn't want anybody to think that there is any way out of their program. Go to any contemporary church you like; forward spiritual development does not exist. Non-monastic Christianity, for the individual, is completely developmentally static for the most part. You turn up, you hear a sermon, you sing some songs, you take communion, you hang out with your friends, you go home, the end.

This is by design. Forward evolution implies by necessity, that said evolution could eventually bypass their control, which is the last thing they want.

You mention Paul's ability at winning converts. Sure; his religion became the biggest on the planet, at least at one point. You might want to think a little more deeply, however, about what people have been committed *to.* The bottom line is that Essenic/Gnostic/pre-Pauline Christianity is liberating; Pauline/Catholic/Protestant theology, by comparison, is largely a trap.

1] Jesus was the only person in existence according to them, who had his abilities; even though one of the major points of his message was that anybody who wanted to do the work could do what he did. So we don't get to realise the full benefit of our divine heritage; only a comparitive few cloistered mystics figured it out, for the most part.

2] There is no reincarnation according to them. You get one shot. According to this, the amount of forward personal development that can happen is minimal. Catholicism is a bit better, in terms of allowing for the existence of Purgatory; but not much.

3] Your only hope of a way out of said social jail cell, is to reach what they call Heaven; but no matter how much you might say and believe internally that Jesus is Lord, and no matter how much work you do, they will put as much effort as they can into making sure that you're never quite certain as to whether or not you're in the club. Paul's negation of works, means that you can be excommunicated and thrown out for literally any reason. You might be a great person morally, but if you don't speak in tongues, you obviously aren't saved.

4] Christian eschatology is a moral and rational nightmare, for several different reasons.

4a] It first of all presumes that human free will essentially does not exist. When was the last time you heard a Christian daring to pronounce that Biblical prophecy might be successfully resisted, and humanity might be able to choose a better path than World War 3? We're not allowed to do that; prophecy is prophecy, and that is what is going to happen, no matter how bad it is.

4b] Because of this, it paints God as an unspeakable monster. We're going to be put through the Tribulation, and goodness knows what else, and prophecy implies that in practical terms, we have no choice. The people who bring it about, are simply going to act out their roles...we all are.

"These things must come, but woe to that man through whom they come."

You can call me rebellious and tell me I am going to Hell as much as you want for this; but that is not justice.

4c] Eschatology causes Christians to walk around in a perpetual state, of literally being berserk with fear. I don't know if you've ever seen this firsthand before, but I have, and believe me when I say it really isn't pretty. It can have all kinds of adverse consequences; many of which lead to people being killed.

You said that eventually Paul was shown by his fruits. On that we agree; but I think we possibly differ a little, in terms of what we think said fruits actually are. I'm not saying that a lot of good hasn't come out of Christianity; it has. Virtually all of the negative, fear-inducing, debilitating aspects of Christian theology, however, which people have to live with on a daily basis, are either directly or indirectly attributable to Paul.

I consider Thomas Jefferson a kindred spirit; and he and I are in agreement, concerning his verdict of Paul.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Akragon

 

These were already posted.

They show predestination. Not reincarnation.

Thanks, but not good enough.


Where in the bible does it say that you- your soul- is reused.

They show pre-existance of the soul...
"
And i couldn't care less if you think they are not "good enough"....

And by the way they were not already posted.... I read what was posted and made sure not to repost.

I've also had enough of your questions when you don't even have the respect to read or consider others responses...

Buh bye...

reply to post by petrus4


All of this can be denoted very simply.


Reincarnation is clearly a better tool to control people. More on that later.


You use all these examples to denote control. And yet I must ask if you have read them.

Paul said you should be free. He even says don't get married if you want to be free. Hell there's some essence in Paul's works that denotes anarchy in many ways.

The fact that the Catholics use it for control hardly means that it was useful.

I went to an all boys school... a catholic all boys school. Virtually every poor soul, including me, came out of there an atheist or agnostic. Years later, when I actually read Paul. When I actually read most of the Bible. I more or less saw no purpose nor reason for the catholic church.

And furthermore, in this modern age, the more people read the bible, the less they believe in the Catholic church.

Sooo many are leaving it because they actually read the bible, and realize that the Catholics are wrong.


I mean, Luther practically started a revolution against the Catholics by printing the Bible in German and actually using Paul's writing to free them.



So there is really no reason for me to believe that control is true in your claim. Because every time people have had the opportunity to actually read the bible in a language they know and study it, they throw out their religious leaders.


How can you tell me that Paul allows control when the Catholics banned the Bible in native languages to keep that control, out of fear of losing it? This is double think!





And to return to reincarnation, it basically is far easier to control. any government can get you to do anything, and you just can say "it's ok, if I follow orders and am good, I will be my master in the next life."

India was practically enslaved by their own religion because reincarnation gave birth to the caste system. And reincarnation allowed master to tell slave that if they follow orders, they will be the master in the next life.

This is borderline unregulated capitalism. And people like Romney honestly don't say much different when it comes to the economy.

reply to post by Akragon


No. They do not show the preexistence of the soul. The show the eye of the designer thinking of what he is going to create.

And if you wish to leave, good bye to you. You actually did repost most of that. The link a wile back by wildtimes shows it.


Good day to you too if you don't wish to argue.

But don't say I did not consider it. I did. Perhaps you missed my whole part about thinking it was true for a period of time. perhaps you missed where I actually sought to find points to help your case in terms of people dreaming their past lives.

But no, go on believing what you want. Ok then.

Bye.

reply to post by Gorman91

I went to an all boys school a catholic all boys school. Virtually every pour soul, including me, came out of there an atheist or agnostic. Years later, when I actually read Paul. When I actually read most of the Bible. I more or less saw no purpose nor reason for the catholic church.

And furthermore, in this modern age, the more people read the bible, the less they believe in the Catholic church.

!!!

So why are you asking for scripture to back up anything??

Sorry, gorman, I think you really are trying. But you send mixed messages.
Scripture is the Bible. And you say "them ore people read the bible, the less they believe in the Catholic church."

Why do you want to have "scripture" back up anything if it drove you away to begin with?

Okay. Ya know? I'm done for tonight. No puedo mas. I'll keep reading (lurking) for a bit, but won't be back with more ammo for you to sling back at me until later. Perhaps then we'll continue this, our lively and respectful debate.
G'night.
--wt

reply to post by wildtimes

Why do you want to have "scripture" back up anything if it drove you away to begin with?

It did not. What the church was saying did. Ignorance of the word made me unable to counter it. So, I chose no belief.

With the word, I saw what was wrong with the Catholics. Hell, I practically relived Martin Luther's experience.

Not sure if I am not catholic anymore, insomuch as determined to destroy their lies and reinvent their church into truth.

Okay. Ya know? I'm done for tonight. No puedo mas. I'll keep reading (lurking) for a bit, but won't be back with more ammo for you to sling back at me until later. Perhaps then we'll continue this, our lively and respectful debate.

Sorry I made you feel angry on a late night.

reply to post by Gorman91


No, not angry at all. Just tired, and out of mental energy.
Have a good one.
--wt

reply to post by Myollinir


This is why you are good? Because you are afraid that if when die you will be forced to endure an infinity of flaming torture porn if your "bad" instead?

I'm not even sure what to say to that. I am sure that being a good person has almost nothing to do with which superstitions you follow and which ones you make fun of. Or at least I hope it does.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by petrus4

 

He even says don't get married if you want to be free.

As someone who has been celibate for close to 30 out of 35 years of life, I can promise you that although bachelorhood is freedom in some respects, it is a great minimisation and reduction of a person in others.

I went to an all boys school... a catholic all boys school. Virtually every poor soul, including me, came out of there an atheist or agnostic.

That is a genuine tragedy. I don't necessarily consider becoming a former Christian tragic; but my own (non-Christian, somewhat) faith has been one of the most beneficial aspects of my existence.

Years later, when I actually read Paul. When I actually read most of the Bible. I more or less saw no purpose nor reason for the catholic church.

You won't get any argument from me there. Its' charitable work is more or less the sole claim Catholicism has to being useful.

And furthermore, in this modern age, the more people read the bible, the less they believe in the Catholic church.

Yes, except in Christian terms, a good many of them end up becoming militant, Dominionist nut cases who fill their heads with the likes of Texe Marrs or Tim LeHay instead. Forgive me if I have trouble seeing the improvement.

How can you tell me that Paul allows control when the Catholics banned the Bible in native languages to keep that control, out of fear of losing it? This is double think!

No, it isn't. It's actually just another layer of said control. First they edited it, and had control over which books ended up in it. Then even after they'd exercised editorial control, they cemented it (for a while at least) by making sure only their own approved people could read it.

India was practically enslaved by their own religion because reincarnation gave birth to the caste system. And reincarnation allowed master to tell slave that if they follow orders, they will be the master in the next life.

No, reincarnation itself didn't give birth to the caste system at all. Go and read the Law of Manu. Varnashrama Dharma (the caste) was in there from the word go. Also, there are two reasons why the caste started to damage India.

a] Indians made the caste hereditary. Manu makes no mention of caste being hereditary at all, and in fact to do so, destroyed the entire purpose of the system. If you read the Gita, Krishna says that a person's varna, (section within the caste) was determined purely by the nature of that specific individual, rather than heredity or anything else. As such, performing their dharma (duty, although the word also actually means support or sanctuary) came almost instinctively.

The system was designed to ensure that every individual would do work that was in accordance with what Crowley called their True Will, and that in their so doing, the entire society would benefit. It was made hereditary because Kshatriyas (kings and military) and the Brahmanas primarily (priests and scientists) wanted their children to enjoy the same level of seniority that they did in the society, irrespective of whether those roles were the true nature of their heir.

b] Indians started becoming insular, and trying to shut people out; when the caste (and Hiinduism as a whole) was actually designed to maximise inclusion. The caste was based on a recognition that the four varnas (kings/military, priests/scientists, farmers/businessmen, and unskilled labourers) were present in every society on Earth, irrespective of that society's culture or religion. The intent was to create a universal point of commonality, so that India could integrate literally any foreign culture on the planet, without conflict.

The first case of insularity here, was with the Dalits, or untouchables; and the second was with the Muslims, which led to the partition of Pakistan.