Doctrines of Devils?

[amariselle]

Monk Brendan, amariselle was posting to a different poster not you. You have quoted the wrong person. Check the post I mentioned above.

Thank you @Goatee.

 

[Goatee]

Thank you @Goatee.

It's ok, I thought he quoted you wrongly.

 

[amariselle]

Oh? Salvation has divided you from the One True Church? That is a load of manure.

Yet more proof you are not reading what I've said carefully. (Especially when you interject in responses I've made to others.)

I have never been anything but polite and civil to you.

Blessings.

 

[Goatee]

Brendan, you do need to apologise my friend. You quoted wrongly.

 

[amariselle]

So I'm not a Christian? Why? I use the teaching of Christ Jesus and quote them and explain my view on them. You ask me not to judge you, then you judge me. Shame on you.

If you (or anyone) believes the Bible is the word of God, so be it. Jesus said that his words were life. He said that the Hebrews ate their bread and died. He said if we eat his bread (from heaven) we would gain life.

Chose your bread wisely.

Actually if anyone is lost here, it appears to be you. My words are controversial. If yours aren't, why are you here?

This is in no way about who achieves heaven or doesn't. If a mod see's me as a rule breaker or just hates me, and I am banned, so be it. I am not bothered one iota by what people call me or think of me. Jesus was called the devil (by the ignorant). Even on the cross Jesus said they didn't know what they were doing. Hey, lets go read and follow the OT. Sorry no. There is only one who spoke perfect truth.

That, my friend, is what I believe a true Christian is. One who forsakes all to follow Christ, mother, father, siblings, creeds, religions, all physical entities.

You said the serpent was the one being truthful in the garden. That is indeed Luciferianism.

They were your words, not mine.

 

[Robert76]

Why is it the default position of most Protestants that Catholics are trying to "WORK" their way to heaven? I'm not. None of the people I know are. They all love Jesus, and out of their love, abundant works flow.

You know, that's a good question. I've heard this stigma as well and not sure where it stems from. I sometimes wonder if the "works-based" ideology was partially generational in nature. Like what you've said, I've met many Catholics who do not believe this, but my Dad who is also Catholic has what I'll call "tendencies" towards this thinking. In fact, in our own church we have folks from different backgrounds who's parents/grandparents had similar misconceptions... like having to work for one's salvation, or the other one is trying to do good deeds to "outweigh" the bad ones.

Isaiah 64:6 (ESV) states, "We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away."

Then Romans 4:24-25 (ESV) states "...It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification."

So from these, we understand that even our best efforts to do good are "like filthy rags"; however, we are justified (saved) by the blood of Jesus. I'm glad you brought this up... hopefully this awareness will help remove some of the stigmas and assumptions that we tend to make, which may no longer be true.

 

[Phantasman]

You said the serpent was the one being truthful in the garden. That is indeed Luciferianism.

They were your words, not mine.

Whoa. I had to go read on it. The wiki said it was from the gnostics.

The whole article had nothing to do with the Christian gnostic books. The term gnostic was created by the catholics to identify groups who thought different than them (heretics). Gnosis only teaches of God the Father and Jesus Christ his only begotten son. There are a lot of mystics (past and present) who are considered gnostic. Remember, gnosis just means knowledge. A Christian who sought knowledge in all the books written of those who heard Jesus speak were called "gnostic" by the emerging catholic ideology that believed that the OT was all truth as well. The Christian division was over the OT.

Let me try to explain Christian "gnostics" and please, please open you mind just to the image to get clarity.

Orthodoxy seeds come from the OT. There is one god, the creator (of man and the world, heavens). But wee had the adversary to god in the garden.

So lets draw an imaginary line in our mind. At one end of the line is god and at the other end is the adversary (Satan, Lucifer, Devil). Now Orthodox believes that man is on this line between both. And man is pulled to follow one. The Christian belief is taught that we move away from one towards the other, in this case God. The closer we get to God the further we are from the adversary. We want to see only God, all eyes on him. The devil is at the evil end. He tries to draw us back by influencing us to try to do evil things, against God who we strive to follow.

Do you see that close to what the Bible teaches. It's not a trick question, I just want to know if this vision is close to what you believe.

I'll continue when you post.

 

[amariselle]

Whoa. I had to go read on it. The wiki said it was from the gnostics.

The whole article had nothing to do with the Christian gnostic books. The term gnostic was created by the catholics to identify groups who thought different than them (heretics). Gnosis only teaches of God the Father and Jesus Christ his only begotten son. There are a lot of mystics (past and present) who are considered gnostic. Remember, gnosis just means knowledge. A Christian who sought knowledge in all the books written of those who heard Jesus speak were called "gnostic" by the emerging catholic ideology that believed that the OT was all truth as well. The Christian division was over the OT.

Let me try to explain Christian "gnostics" and please, please open you mind just to the image to get clarity.

Orthodoxy seeds come from the OT. There is one god, the creator (of man and the world, heavens). But wee had the adversary to god in the garden.

So lets draw an imaginary line in our mind. At one end of the line is god and at the other end is the adversary (Satan, Lucifer, Devil). Now Orthodox believes that man is on this line between both. And man is pulled to follow one. The Christian belief is taught that we move away from one towards the other, in this case God. The closer we get to God the further we are from the adversary. We want to see only God, all eyes on him. The devil is at the evil end. He tries to draw us back by influencing us to try to do evil things, against God who we strive to follow.

Do you see that close to what the Bible teaches. It's not a trick question, I just want to know if this vision is close to what you believe.

I'll continue when you post.

I'm not someone who believes in any division between the OT and the NT.

I also believe the "Gospel of Thomas" is non-canonical for good reason.

 

[Phantasman]

I'm not someone who believes in any division between the OT and the NT.

I also believe the "Gospel of Thomas" is non-canonical for good reason.

Then it's futile to debate with you any further.

 

[amariselle]

Then it's futile to debate you any further.

I agree. I do not believe we agree on some of the core tenants of the Christian faith. (Judging by your words about the serpent, referring to the Holy Spirit as "She" etc.)

 

[Phantasman]

I agree. I do not believe we agree on some of the core tenants of the Christian faith. (Judging by your words about the serpent, referring to the Holy Spirit as "She" etc.)

It all comes together in a powerful way when you understand that the entire OT is based on two gods. An ignorant one that lies and murders and led the Jews to destruction, and the Father of Jesus who never murdered, never jealous, and saved the Jews as well as the world that accepts him (over the adversary). It answers so many questions and the words of Jesus stands out among the confusion.

For an example, why does God let babies die? He doesn't, but is blamed for it. The Father saves the important part, the soul. The murdering god had Abraham to show his faith by killing his son. The Father knows the faith of everyone. The ignorant god killed the first born of Egypt to prove his power. The Father sent his son to show his love. I could go on and on.

There is God the Father, and one who wants to be God. He is good in many ways. He tries to emulate the Father, but since he never saw him, doesn't believe through his ignorance. It is why Philip says that ignorance is the mother of all evil. Every sin performed by man is a result of ignorance of love (Which God is). The two commandments of love from Jesus bring great power to the weak physical law. It's all about the sword of Jesus dividing the physical from the spiritual, the god of the physical world and the God of spirit.

Jesus made one appearance to save those who died before the Truth (Word) came into the world. I doubt he is going to do it again. Following the Hebrew Scriptures will lead to the same place the Jews wound up if one isn't careful. And it's why only the catholic ideology followed it. The disciples and apostles taught the Gospel. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me,

 

[amariselle]

It all comes together in a powerful way when you understand that the entire OT is based on two gods. An ignorant one that lies and murders and led the Jews to destruction, and the Father of Jesus who never murdered, never jealous, and saved the Jews as well as the world that accepts him (over the adversary). It answers so many questions and the words of Jesus stands out among the confusion.

For an example, why does God let babies die? He doesn't, but is blamed for it. The Father saves the important part, the soul. The murdering god had Abraham to show his faith by killing his son. The Father knows the faith of everyone. The ignorant god killed the first born of Egypt to prove his power. The Father sent his son to show his love. I could go on and on.

There is God the Father, and one who wants to be God. He is good in many ways. He tries to emulate the Father, but since he never saw him, doesn't believe through his ignorance. It is why Philip says that ignorance is the mother of all evil. Every sin performed by man is a result of ignorance of love (Which God is). The two commandments of love from Jesus bring great power to the weak physical law. It's all about the sword of Jesus dividing the physical from the spiritual, the god of the physical world and the God of spirit.

Jesus made one appearance to save those who died before the Truth (Word) came into the world. I doubt he is going to do it again. Following the Hebrew Scriptures will lead to the same place the Jews wound up if one isn't careful. And it's why only the catholic ideology followed it. The disciples and apostles taught the Gospel. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me,

Yeah.... you may want to read the forum rules again.

Pretty sure from the contents of your posts that you've made some pretty serious deviations from Christianity.

 

[HighCherub]

'Doctines of demons' obviously speaks toward anything from the paganism of many eastern heresies such as worshipers of Baal, all the way to more developed beliefs of the Roman and Greek pantheons.

Christianity has, however, developed such proud and dictating sects that it's gone to call each other the same- people laboring under doctrines of demons, as if one can never be a saint if they are Calvinist or Catholic- or Anglican or Methodist- simply because of their theology.

 

[amariselle]

'Doctines of demons' obviously speaks toward anything from the paganism of many eastern heresies such as worshipers of Baal, all the way to more developed beliefs of the Roman and Greek pantheons.

Christianity has, however, developed such proud and dictating sects that it's gone to call each other the same- people laboring under doctrines of demons, as if one can never be a saint if they are Calvinist or Catholic- or Anglican or Methodist- simply because of their theology.

I think it can speak of paganism. However, that isn't what Paul is referring to in the verses shared in the OP.

 

[HighCherub]

I think it can speak of paganism. However, that isn't what Paul is referring to in the verses shared in the OP.

The verses in your post are about the world's fallback to the same beliefs it once held- the only difference is that, instead of the gods themselves, it's the principles and allowances those gods allowed.

A sort of rerun of history, if you will.

 

[amariselle]

The verses in your post are about the world's fallback to the same beliefs it once held- the only difference is that, instead of the gods themselves, it's the principles and allowances those gods allowed.

A sort of rerun of history, if you will.

Are you referring to the forbidding of marriage and the eating of certain foods?

 

[HighCherub]

Are you referring to the forbidding of marriage and the eating of certain foods?

How do you see 'forbidding of marriage' in the texts? Is it strictly the defiance of the biblical standard, or is it an outright defiance of the notion of a civil union altogether (homosexual, bestial, polygamy)?

 

[amariselle]

How do you see 'forbidding of marriage' in the texts? Is it strictly the defiance of the biblical standard, or is it an outright defiance of the notion of a civil union altogether (homosexual, bestial, polygamy)?

I believe it's referring to marriage (between one man and one woman).

Sexual immorality is another matter, I don't see any reference to that in these texts.

 

[HighCherub]

I believe it's referring to marriage (between one man and one woman).

Sexual immorality is another matter, I don't see any reference to that in these texts.

There's many truths that are uncomfortable, and one of them is that marriage is ultimately about sexual exclusivity before it is about anything else.
That is to say, the moral reason God ever instituted marriage in the first place was to keep men and women from having sons and daughters from different men and women.

'Love' is something extra- you can simply look to Solomon in that regard, who had many wives and yet had a heart only to one woman.




Anyway,
I asked you that question to better understand how you see those verses- which I'm inclined to agree with.
I think we have minor differences which nonetheless funnel into a similar belief

 

[amariselle]

There's many truths that are uncomfortable, and one of them is that marriage is ultimately about sexual exclusivity before it is about anything else.
That is to say, the moral reason God ever instituted marriage in the first place was to keep men and women from having sons and daughters from different men and women.

'Love' is something extra- you can simply look to Solomon in that regard, who had many wives and yet had a heart only to one woman.

Anyway,
I asked you that question to better understand how you see those verses- which I'm inclined to agree with.
I think we have minor differences which nonetheless funnel into a similar belief

Okay. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.