Paul The First Heretic

Originally posted by Akragon
Perhaps if that Sevenfold thing is true, whos to say.... your whole family might be killed in some way... Thus also explaining why Bad things happen to good people. So again, you experience what you cause...

I don't know, maybe we're just going round in circles, and it's time to drop it, so I'll just say that it seems like an awful lot of overhead for what is gained. If God can "put it in your head that it's wrong to kill" since you did that before, then why not put that in your head the first time so you never do it? And why punish the whole family by killing them because I did something in a past life?

But even setting that aside, I will reiterate that there are sufficient logical flaws in the premise of reincarnation to make me doubt the whole thing, and there is no direct support in the Bible, while there is direct support for the things that I DO believe, so I'm gonna just side with the "no reincarnation, we're saved through Christ" view.

The ironic thing, of course, is that if you're right, it doesn't matter what I believe. But if there's a pub in Summerland, I'll look you up and buy you a tall frosty one as recompense.

If you're a Jew, or you don't believe that Christ's death and resurrection are what saves you, pork chops and tasty, tasty lobster... off the menu.

Do you live by the diet prescribed in the book?

As I am not Jewish, and I DO believe that it is Christ's death and resurrection which saves me, not my works or adherence to the Law, I do enjoy my bacon. Not a big fan of lobster, though.

reply to post by adjensen

I don't know, maybe we're just going round in circles, and it's time to drop it, so I'll just say that it seems like an awful lot of overhead for what is gained. If God can "put it in your head that it's wrong to kill" since you did that before, then why not put that in your head the first time so you never do it? And why punish the whole family by killing them because I did something in a past life?

That would be something you might ask a murderer. I've never met one... Again we all have free will. You can go on a rampage and kill 3k people, the only thing thats stopping you is mans laws not Gods. So perhaps you might ask God that same question once you have your chance. As for the whole family thing...try to look at it from the perspective that their all going through this process as well. Perhaps they also have killed or caused death through ignorance (drinking and driving etc etc) ... The thing is God does put it in your head, or from a biblical perspective..."written in the hearts of man" We all know whats right and whats not, we don't all follow our heart(conscience) And as i've said in other posts, God doesn't interfear in human affairs because its not needed. This creation along with everything else in creation is perfect without a doubt. Karma also being a perfect system(creation) Its how we're taught to act as God would have us act. This is why we're all here, to learn our lessons.

But even setting that aside, I will reiterate that there are sufficient logical flaws in the premise of reincarnation to make me doubt the whole thing, and there is no direct support in the Bible, while there is direct support for the things that I DO believe, so I'm gonna just side with the "no reincarnation, we're saved through Christ" view.

As i've said my friend im not trying to make you believe anything. Im not trying to convert you and i realy don't care if you believe what i say or not. Im only showing what i know, but again its only theory, as are all of these discussions. God might be an alien(not )...he could be cookie monster for all we know

The ironic thing, of course, is that if you're right, it doesn't matter what I believe. But if there's a pub in Summerland, I'll look you up and buy you a tall frosty one as recompense.

HAHAHA i say this exact same thing!! We're all headed that way anyways, so when we get there we'll have beers! If all will be revealed.... im sure we'll have a good laugh at how foolish we are all.

Getting back to our topic here...

In twisted logic involving blessing and cursing, Paul defends himself in his letters to the Galatians (3:11-13). Paul argues that he is redeemed in his transgressions against the teachings of Jesus, because Christ himself became cursed by the law . Paul is confusing the law of Moses with the law of the Romans and his own law.

Im starting to think hes using a different version from the KJV...I've read over these passages and what comes before and after....im not seeing what the writer is saying at all...

11But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

12And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

13Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

I see here, we are not justified by the law(of moses) But those that still cling to the law(of moses) are cursed so to speak. Probably meaning they're still stuck believing in materialism... and thus there is no progression.

In this same part in the artical the writer speaks about the excomunication of Paul...apparently a text from the "dead sea scrolls" was found which many believe was the trial of Paul...

I would like to see that text

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Perhaps you'd like to give me a "sum up" of this video series...the first part was just quoting genesis, with animations... doesn't thrill me honestly.

That's just the first video. The "sum up" can best be given in the words of the link. If you're way to busy to watch I can understand.

Originally posted by Akragon
Getting back to our topic here...

In twisted logic involving blessing and cursing, Paul defends himself in his letters to the Galatians (3:11-13). Paul argues that he is redeemed in his transgressions against the teachings of Jesus, because Christ himself became cursed by the law . Paul is confusing the law of Moses with the law of the Romans and his own law.

Im starting to think hes using a different version from the KJV...I've read over these passages and what comes before and after....im not seeing what the writer is saying at all...

As far as I can recall, Paul never talks about secular law at all, apart from the occasional "obey those in authority, except where they are contrary to God" admonition. I suspect that, from that quote you provide, the author doesn't really have any idea what Paul is discussing.

I see here, we are not justified by the law(of moses) But those that still cling to the law(of moses) are cursed so to speak. Probably meaning they're still stuck believing in materialism... and thus there is no progression.

Cursed because we can't live by it. Paul's letter to the Galatians is a refutation of salvation by Judaic Law, written because the church in Galatia (which he had previously been a part of) had been influenced by Jewish Christians (Judas Barsabbas, who was a missionary like Paul, is usually the one blamed,) to undergo circumcision and conversion to Judaism. As I wrote earlier, Paul's response is a bit extreme -- to the point of saying that if you did that, you're done -- Jesus isn't going to save you, because your faith is in yourself, not in God.

It's not really an argument against materialism, because Christians are not dualists, but an argument against where you place your faith.

In this same part in the artical the writer speaks about the excomunication of Paul...apparently a text from the "dead sea scrolls" was found which many believe was the trial of Paul...

I have never heard of such a thing, much less seen a legitimate reference to it. The Dead Sea Scrolls are texts attributed to the Essenes, a Jewish sect that was ascetic and predated Christianity, though they were contemporaries around the time the Essenes died out in the First Century (preaching poverty and celibacy makes a long lived sect pretty difficult. )

As such, there is little, if anything, in the Dead Sea Scrolls that relates to Christianity, never mind something as earth shattering as a factual account of the trial of Paul in Rome.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Perhaps you'd like to give me a "sum up" of this video series...the first part was just quoting genesis, with animations... doesn't thrill me honestly.

That's just the first video. The "sum up" can best be given in the words of the link. If you're way to busy to watch I can understand.

taken from a christian perspective i'd assume?

I quite enjoy many "new age teachings"

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Perhaps you'd like to give me a "sum up" of this video series...the first part was just quoting genesis, with animations... doesn't thrill me honestly.

That's just the first video. The "sum up" can best be given in the words of the link. If you're way to busy to watch I can understand.

I quite enjoy many "new age teachings"

I realize that, kinda why I wanted to share the video series with you.


"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him." Proverbs 18:13


"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is a proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle is condemnation before investigation." ~ Herbert Spencer

reply to post by adjensen

Paul's response is a bit extreme -- to the point of saying that if you did that, you're done -- Jesus isn't going to save you, because your faith is in yourself, not in God.

technically that is true, faith is inside you. It can't come from anywhere else.

It's not really an argument against materialism, because Christians are not dualists, but an argument against where you place your faith.

Explain please?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Perhaps you'd like to give me a "sum up" of this video series...the first part was just quoting genesis, with animations... doesn't thrill me honestly.

That's just the first video. The "sum up" can best be given in the words of the link. If you're way to busy to watch I can understand.

I quite enjoy many "new age teachings"

I realize that, kinda why I wanted to share the video series with you.


"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him." Proverbs 18:13


"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is a proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle is condemnation before investigation." ~ Herbert Spencer

Wait didn't you say you haven't read the gnostics but put all your faith in the bible?

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Perhaps you'd like to give me a "sum up" of this video series...the first part was just quoting genesis, with animations... doesn't thrill me honestly.

That's just the first video. The "sum up" can best be given in the words of the link. If you're way to busy to watch I can understand.

I quite enjoy many "new age teachings"

I realize that, kinda why I wanted to share the video series with you.


"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him." Proverbs 18:13


"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is a proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle is condemnation before investigation." ~ Herbert Spencer

Wait didn't you say you haven't read the gnostics but put all your faith in the bible?

Me? No, I've spent the better part of a decade studying heretical doctrine, cults, false religions, and church history. Perhaps you were thinking of someone else?

Secondly, why should it matter if the information is from a "Christian perspective"? Do you never read information on Christianity from perspectives other than historically Christian ones?

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is a proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle is condemnation before investigation." ~

Herbert Spencer

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Me? No, I've spent the better part of a decade studying heretical doctrine, cults, false religions, and church history. Perhaps you were thinking of someone else?

Secondly, why should it matter if the information is from a "Christian perspective"? Do you never read information on Christianity from perspectives other than historically Christian ones?

hmm...yeh i guess it was someone else...

I read things from many different perspectives, i just don't like watching videos really... Unless its a conspiracy video... and not religious conspiracy either... they tend to be bias...

Originally posted by Akragon
It's not really an argument against materialism, because Christians are not dualists, but an argument against where you place your faith.

Explain please?

Dualism is the belief that there are equal and opposing components -- good versus evil, for example. Christianity, like the Judaism that it is derived from, is non-dualistic. Evil is not the opposite of good, it is the absence of it. Theologically, it gets a bit complicated, but it boils down to the fact that God has no equal.

Some early alternative Christian views that were influenced by Greek philosophy (usually best represented by the Gnostics, but there were others,) adopted the belief that, just as their dualistic view had good versus evil, that which was spiritual was inherently good, and that which was material was inherently evil. If you spend much time reading Gnostic texts, this quickly emerges as an overlying theme.

Well, that poses all sorts of problems for reconciling with the teaching of orthodox Christianity -- what's the deal with the resurrection of the body, which Christ evidenced, if the material form is evil? See The Treatise on the Resurrection for their view on the subject. Christ was usually resolved by the Docetic view, which preceded the Gnostics and held that Christ's material existence was an illusion, that he was just a spirit, and that nothing was actually crucified.

You can see where that runs afoul of pretty much everything, and it didn't work out so well for Docetism, either.

But the bottom line is that Christianity, like Judaism, does not hold that material existence is evil, and so doesn't argue points based on materialism. Instances that border on it (like Jesus suggesting that you should tuck away treasures in heaven, where thieves do not steal and moths do not eat) are more practical than philosophical -- they emphasize the value of pleasing God over pleasing yourself.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Akragon
It's not really an argument against materialism, because Christians are not dualists, but an argument against where you place your faith.

Explain please?

Dualism is the belief that there are equal and opposing components -- good versus evil, for example. Christianity, like the Judaism that it is derived from, is non-dualistic. Evil is not the opposite of good, it is the absence of it. Theologically, it gets a bit complicated, but it boils down to the fact that God has no equal.

Some early alternative Christian views that were influenced by Greek philosophy (usually best represented by the Gnostics, but there were others,) adopted the belief that, just as their dualistic view had good versus evil, that which was spiritual was inherently good, and that which was material was inherently evil. If you spend much time reading Gnostic texts, this quickly emerges as an overlying theme.

Well, that poses all sorts of problems for reconciling with the teaching of orthodox Christianity -- what's the deal with the resurrection of the body, which Christ evidenced, if the material form is evil? See The Treatise on the Resurrection for their view on the subject. Christ was usually resolved by the Docetic view, which preceded the Gnostics and held that Christ's material existence was an illusion, that he was just a spirit, and that nothing was actually crucified.

You can see where that runs afoul of pretty much everything, and it didn't work out so well for Docetism, either.

But the bottom line is that Christianity, like Judaism, does not hold that material existence is evil, and so doesn't argue points based on materialism. Instances that border on it (like Jesus suggesting that you should tuck away treasures in heaven, where thieves do not steal and moths do not eat) are more practical than philosophical -- they emphasize the value of pleasing God over pleasing yourself.

edit on 6-4-2011 by adjensen because: tag repair

edit on 6-4-2011 by adjensen because: (no reason given)

i know what duelism is, i wanted to hear your take on it.

I don't really believe much in Good or evil actually, but materialism in general isn't great for progression. For instance if you lose your TV or it breaks, if that affects you deeply that isn't good. If it happens it happens, that tends to be how i look at things, neutral from almost everywhere. I also agree that existance is an illusion though, technically everything is a vibration, physical, spiritual, mental, verbal, all are such. So again technically, if the spirit doesn't die when the physical body does, they're right, nothing was destroyed. And thus he still lives. As they say, energy can't be created or destroyed.

"Tucking away gives in heaven" can also be taken as a Karmic reference actually. Positive action/words, creates positive Karma. Which also pleases God, due to the fact that you're showing love to his creation.

Originally posted by Akragon
I don't really believe much in Good or evil actually, but materialism in general isn't great for progression. For instance if you lose your TV or it breaks, if that affects you deeply that isn't good. If it happens it happens, that tends to be how i look at things, neutral from almost everywhere. I also agree that existance is an illusion though, technically everything is a vibration, physical, spiritual, mental, verbal, all are such.

Well, they didn't see all of existence as an illusion, just the few things (like Jesus) that seemed to be material, but couldn't be, because it conflicted with that dualistic philosophy.

From your perspective (it seems) you probably can't subscribe to those notions anyway, since the Gnostics believed that once you were free of the material world, you not only weren't evil, you couldn't be, and, for some, you wouldn't remember the torture of being human.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Akragon
I don't really believe much in Good or evil actually, but materialism in general isn't great for progression. For instance if you lose your TV or it breaks, if that affects you deeply that isn't good. If it happens it happens, that tends to be how i look at things, neutral from almost everywhere. I also agree that existance is an illusion though, technically everything is a vibration, physical, spiritual, mental, verbal, all are such.

Well, they didn't see all of existence as an illusion, just the few things (like Jesus) that seemed to be material, but couldn't be, because it conflicted with that dualistic philosophy.

From your perspective (it seems) you probably can't subscribe to those notions anyway, since the Gnostics believed that once you were free of the material world, you not only weren't evil, you couldn't be, and, for some, you wouldn't remember the torture of being human.

well, i don't really subscribe to anyones specific ideas aside from my own. I don't really beleive in good or evil, its just peoples hate and greed which makes them act the way they do. Internal emotions. Technically they're right though, i can't see it being possible to be evil while with God, again refering to the "all will be revealed" thing. At that time you'd see your mistakes and why it was wrong, though i don't think it would need explaining because at that time you're a part of God, even with him. No different then now but without physical issues, without those negitive emotions, at least as far as you've progressed. The idea of reincarnation / resurrection is about learning your lessons. Learning to act how God wants us to.

reply to post by adjensen


Heres a view of the devil, from my perspective....just a theory really, but its logical. This is of course considering i don't believe evil exists.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Me? No, I've spent the better part of a decade studying heretical doctrine, cults, false religions, and church history. Perhaps you were thinking of someone else?

Secondly, why should it matter if the information is from a "Christian perspective"? Do you never read information on Christianity from perspectives other than historically Christian ones?

hmm...yeh i guess it was someone else...

I read things from many different perspectives, i just don't like watching videos really... Unless its a conspiracy video... and not religious conspiracy either... they tend to be bias...

That's fine, I'm just happy that the video is linked in a thread where people are discussing New Age ideas. I just hoped you'd learn where most of these ideas originated.

reply to post by Akragon

Haha, i don't mind i just wish people would read before spouting off like that...

Amazing how religious people attack at the first sign of someone disagreeing with them..

- Good show Akragon.

I hope you can understand my amusement at the irony of your statement. I'm sure you do

Again, you think you are non-religious. but the Theism begins as soon as you begin to define God. And you have your special ideas of what God really is.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Actually it would be great if you explained the "irony" of that statement... I've never attacked anyone if thats what you're implying

reply to post by awake_and_aware

Again, you think you are non-religious. but the Theism begins as soon as you begin to define God. And you have your special ideas of what God really is.

alright so...

Theism, in the broadest sense, is the belief that at least one deity exists

and Deity...

A deity[1] is a recognised preternatural or supernatural immortal being, who may be thought of as holy, divine, or sacred, held in high regard, and respected by believers, often religiously referred to as a god.

I told you God is The all, the whole... Not a specific being but every being... Not some guy in the clouds.

I don't really see how that coinsides with either of those definitions.