Just the Basics - Holy Tradition/Sola Scriptura

[Root of Jesse]

“ Regarding what I said "Before you were in the womb, I knew you.", this is not the depth of my knowledge, it is a summary. I don't have the time, nor the care to demonstrate how this refutes what you claim above.”Root of Jesse pg 10, #96
...

The roman Catholics do not HAVE the same set of traditions and data as the earliest Judao-Christians had. Much knowledge has been abandoned by and LOST to the roman congregation and the roman Catholics cannot teach them as a belief in any depth or clarity even comparable to the early Judao-Christians.

The point has already BEEN made.

We are trying to examine your claim that the Catholic Church is “untouched in its teaching for 2000 years” and your second claim that it is the retention of ancient tradition which makes Catholic interpretation of scripture superior to “sola scriptura”. While erroneous “sola scriptura” has demonstrated itself unworkable for interpretation, the reliance on an erroneous tradition has no advantage for correct interpretation of texts. Thus, catholic interpretations cannot BE held to be somehow superior than opposing interpretations if they are based on erroneous data, or lack of data.


3) ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF DOCTRINES THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CONGREGATION ABANDONED OR LOST

We’re still discussing the fact that the Roman Congregation has abandoned and lost early traditions regarding evil and lucifer as an example of a very basic tradition which the roman congregation is unable to teach in clarity and context as the early Judao-Christians were able to do.

If Root of Jesse is unable to offer the Roman Catholic teaching on this subject in any depth, then ANY OTHER CATHOLIC WHO BELIEVES THEY HAVE THE SAME DOCTRINE AND DEPTH AS EARLY JUDAO-CHRISITANS HAD ARE WELCOME TO OFFER THE ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITIONS regarding these points so as to allow us to compare the roman catholic doctrine with the early Judao-Christian doctrine. (The doctrine of good - evil is one of the most basic of all religious doctrines.)


Below is the third of three comparisons I offered to make with Root of Jesse back on page #3, post #30 :I had already repeated the request to compare the roman congregations doctrine multiple times. I certainly respect roman catholic scholarship (the catholic Migne is a GIANT in my estimation), but it is clear historically, that the later roman catholicism is a different Christianity in doctrine and practice than the earliest Christianity. It is not the same.



Clearly
eifusifufutwoi



p.s. No Root of Jesse, I am not particularly "gnostic" though I do have a historians interest in the gnostics.

Just to let you know, I am aware of the traditions of evil and how Lucifer was given a choice to follow God or not, and he chose not, so he and 1/3 of the angels were cast out of heaven.

So apparently, it's not as lost as you think it is.

What I think is that there's so much noise in the world that many Christians don't give their entire faith the time it deserves. Many may not know the above tradition, or many of the traditions of the Church. The traditions are not lost. It's the people who are lost. I take great pride in spending very little time with popular music, television, video games and the internet. I spend my time reading about my faith, listening to experts talk about my faith, and worshipping God.

I hope you can see.

 

[Clearly]

POST ONE OF FOUR

Root of Jesseclaims that the Roman Catholic Church teaches it’s members the same traditions as the earliest Christianity

Clearly Claims that the Roman Catholic Church abandoned and lost many of the earliest Judao-christian traditions and no longer is able to even teach them in the clarity and rich detail and context as the early Judao-christians did. As an example to compare early tradition, depth, clarity and detail of early Judao-christian teachings with Roman Catholic depth, clarity and detail of tradition.

Clearly requested that Root of Jesse : “ describe the current catholic tradition regarding details about the fall of Lucifer and his motives and reason for engineering the fall of Adam and eve and his continuing to war against God ” (Clearly : page 3, post #30)
Root of Jesse said : “ Lucifer fell because God gave the angels a choice at their creation, to be with Him forever, or to be against him forever. The angels had free will once. I'm not sure why Lucifer engineered the fall of Adam and Eve, other than that he was trying to subvert everything God did. “ (pg 4 post #32) In post #101, pg 11 he adds more detail regarding what catholics are able to teach: “ Lucifer was given a choice to follow God or not, and he chose not, so he and 1/3 of the angels were cast out of heaven. ” pg 11, # 101


Root of Jesse, This description is what most Christians grew up with regardless of our denominations. However, saying that Lucifer “chose” not to be with God does not explain WHY an archangel in power would “chose” not to live in joy and unity in a heaven with a powerful God who is full of love and truth. The limited nature of your tradition tells us nothing significant about the motives and plans and reasons to rebel against a loving God; nor does your tradition explain Lucifers motives regarding Adam (other than having very simplistic revenge against the Father). Your tradition tells us nothing about WHY God allows lucifer dominion and what purpose that serves him as God.


My point has been that the early Judao-Christians possessed MUCH greater detail and clarity and depth of tradition which the Catholic Church (and many others) no longer teaches.

Perhaps we can compare the quality of depth, clarity and detail you have provided from your description of Catholic tradition with an introduction to the most popular orthodox Early Judao-christian tradition found in Early Jewish, Christian, Judao-Christian and even Islamic texts.


[FONT=&quot]AN OVERVIEW-SUMMARY OF SOME POINTS FROM EARLY JUDA-CHRISTIAN TEXTS[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Though there are many modern theories regarding how Lucifer, an archangel with some authority became Satan, an enemy to all righteousness, there is a great deal of early literature regarding what the early christians themselves believed regarding the Origin and motives of Lucifer.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
I believe an accurate summary of early Judao-Christian belief should start in the time period before the creation of the earth (another set of traditions abandoned by and lost to Catholic belief). Jewish Haggadah indicates that all spirits of men and angels existed before the creation of the world and God the Father created a plan to both sort the spirits of men based on moral intelligence and their moral desires and also to educate the spirits of men in moral principles by which they might live in eternal joy and harmony forever. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In the early creation council texts, God the Father lays out his plan for men and there are some reservations. The Jewish haggadah and the Christian Abbaton histories relate a controversy regarding the plan. Both texts describe concerns that once the spirit of man is placed into a body and sent to earth, mankind will then sin such that they will be unable to return to a sinless state.

In both Jewish Enoch and Christian Abbaton histories God the Father puts to rest this specific controversy by the mechanism of a “savior” who will atone for the sins of those among mankind who believe in and want to learn to follow those moral laws. A Savior is chosen, a Son of the Father, who will ultimately redeem mankind who want redemption and thus that controversy is settled. In this early theology, God was not “surprised” by Adam’s fall, but rather it was part of his original plan.

Judao-Christian texts concerning this time period indicate other controversies come up but there is one controversy that seems to be “the last straw” for the arch angel Lucifer. This specific controversy revolves about the creation of Adams body and the spirit that will be placed into Adam. The texts indicate that this time period, when God’s plan for these spirits is about to be inaugurated by an Adam being placed on earth is a glorious and exciting time for all spirits who will be involved in God’s plan for men.

Multiple Judao-Christian (and Islamic) texts refer to this controversy where God creates Adam after his very own image which is, beautiful and glorious. All angels are to honor Adam both for his creation in God’s image and for what he is about to do, that is, he is to be placed on earth and inaugurate God’s plan for the education and sieving of men based upon their own desires as to what moral laws they are willing and wanting to learn.

The texts indicate that the angel lucifer was proud and would not honor Adam because he felt Adam was inferior to himself. He thus refused to honor Adam and support the plan of the Father of spirits and ultimately rebelled against the plan and intended to set up his own throne and administration and kingdom in defiance to God the Father. The discourse on Abbaton describes the result of this rebellion. Lucifers’ authority and powers are removed from him and he is cast out into the earth, with the angels and spirits that supported his rebellion. He is allowed dominion to the extent that it serves Gods’ purpose and plan.

THE FOLLOWING THREE POSTS ARE DATA AND COMMENTS SUPPORTING THIS SUMMARY

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] POST TWO OF FOUR FOLLOWS[/FONT]

 

[Clearly]

POST TWO OF FOUR

[FONT=&quot]THE NEXT THREE POSTS OFFER MORE DETAIL OF DATA AND TEXTS FROM EARLY JUDAO-CHRISTIANITY[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Lucifer’s “fall” did not happen in a vacuum but it occurred in the context of several controversies, the most famous one being the honoring of Adam which itself takes place in the greater context of God the Fathers Plan. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
In this ancient Judao-christian theology :

1) The spirits of angels and mankind existed prior to earth’s creation
2) God the Father’s plan
3) The Honoring of Adam
4) The nature of Lucifer’s “rebellion”
5) Lucifer’s “punishment” relates to his rebellion against the plan AND God himself
6) Lucifer’s current “dominion” plays a “role” in God’s ultimate plan


[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]A) GOD THE FATHER’S PLAN FOR MAN, (WHICH LUCIFER ULTIMATELY REBELS AGAINST)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

On page 5 of this thread, In posts # 47 and 47 We’ve already reviewed the early Judeao-Christian tradition that before the creation of this world, God was in the midst of spirits. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Regarding his vision of pre-creation heaven, the Prophet Enoch taught : "No one could come near unto him [God the Father] from among those that surrounded the tens of millions (that stood) before him". (1 En 14:23). Enoch continues : Quote:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"I saw a hundred thousand times a hundred thousand, ten million times ten million, an innumerable and uncountable (multitude) who stand before the glory of the Lord of the Spirits". (1 Enoch 40:1-2)" [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“At the time that the Holy One, be blessed, was about to create the world, he decided to fashion all the souls which would in due course be dealt out to the children of men, ” (The Zohar - The Destiny of the Soul) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
God was in the midst of spirits of all the spirits who ever lived or will live on this earth according to such early texts.



[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]B) BECAUSE OF HIS INTELLIGENCE; POWER; AND LOVE, GOD DEVISED A PLAN TO ALLOW OTHER SPIRITS TO IMPROVE THEIR EXISTENCE[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The ancient Jewish doctrine that God had instituted a divine plan is interwoven into multiple texts : "Before all things came to be, he [God] has ordered all their designs" (Dead Sea Scrolls 4Q255-264)

Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“....I (the Father), in the midst of the light (glory), moved around in the invisible things, like one of them, as the sun moves around from east to west and from west to east....I did not find rest, because everything was not yet created. And I thought up the idea of establishing a foundation, to create a visible creation." (2nd Enoch 24:4) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Prophet Enoch describes the earliest stages of this plan before it was known among the heavenly host : "for not even to my angels have I explained my secrets, nor related to them their origin, nor my endless and inconceivable creation which I conceived." (2nd Enoch 24:3)

In these descriptions of his Plan, God the Father seems to take great care in both the planning of and in ensuring the deep involvement of the Heavenly Hosts (for whose benefit the plan existed).

Though these texts tell us that all the spirits of men existed before the creation of the earth, the spirits were in no way equals (just as we are not equal now). Among them were the more intelligent and gifted; i.e. those who were more full of grace and truth than others. In addition to Lucifer, God the Father and Adam, all other key players are all present in this pre-mortal realm. In Enoch’s vision, he also see’s the pre-mortal Jesus with the Father. Upon seeing the two together, Enoch asks who this individual (Jesus) is and what role he has in the Father's Plan :

Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]"At that place, I saw the Beginning of days [i.e. the Father] And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual, whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of grace like that of one among the holy angels. And I asked the one – from among the angels –who was going with me,..."Who is this and from where could he be, and for what reason does he go with him who precedes time?" And he answered me and said to me, "This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells...the Lord of the spirits has chosen him, and he is destined to be victorious before the Lord of the spirits in eternal uprightness...." (1 Enoch 46:1-4) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It is in this context that the Apostolic Father Ignatius taught that among those spirits was "Jesus...who before the ages was with the father..” (Ignatius :6:1). The ancient records show the Father and Jesus, from early on, possessed a great similarity and unity. Jesus was given greater authority and administrated much of the Father’s plan from early on (God’s "right hand" was one of the Pre-Creation Jesus’ appellations). Diogenes relates this ancient doctrine :

Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]"And when he revealed it (his plan) through his beloved Child and made known the things prepared from the beginning, he gave us to share in his benefits and to see and understand things which none of [us] ever would have expected.. So then, having already planned everything in his mind together with his child... (Diog 301:8-11) [/FONT]



[FONT=&quot]C) DESPITE CONCERNS, THE PLAN WAS GENERALLY, RECEIVED JOYOUSLY[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

Ancient pre-creation histories describe that the Father’s plan, revealed to these spirits before the foundations of the earth were laid was generally joyously received. God’s question to Job was not merely rhetorical, but was a contextual reminder to Job of an actual occurrence.

Quote: "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:4-7) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The reason for joy was that advancement entailed by God's plan was something the spirits wanted : Enoch says that he saw : Quote: "...the fountain of righteousness,...surrounded completely by numerous fountains of wisdom. All the thirsty ones drink and become filled with wisdom. (Then) their dwelling places become with the holy, righteous, and elect ones.‘ [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]There were spirits who wanted to drink from that same wisdom and take their place with others who were holy, righteous and elect, AND, they rejoiced at being given the chance to do so.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Jewish Zohar relates mortality to a moral education received by coming to mortality : [/FONT]Q[FONT=&quot]uote: “...why do they [the spirits of mankind] descend to this world only to be taken thence [back to heaven] at some future time? “This may be explained by way of a simile: A king has a son whom he sends to a village to be educated until he shall have been initiated into the ways of the palace. When the king is informed that his son is now come to maturity, the king, out of his love, sends the matron his mother to bring him back into the palace, and there the king rejoices with him every day..... “ (The zohar - A seal upon your heart) [/FONT]




[FONT=&quot]D) GOD’S PLAN CONTINUED TO PROGRESS[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

God’s plan moved forward and preparations were made over a great deal of time including a physical creation in preparation for mortality.

Though multiple creation accounts exist, the earlier Christian accounts make it clear both that God created the Planets and Stars (often translated “orbs” or “circles&#8221 out of “lessor”, or more chaotic material, and, importantly, he commissioned the Pre-creation Jesus (Often called “the word” or his “right hand&#8221 to administrate over this material creation of an earth which will then be populated with embodied spirits for their education and testing.

Thus the early Synagogal prayer reflects this doctrine : “We give thanks to you, O God and Father of Jesus our Savior...O Master Almighty, the God of the universe, you created the world and what is in it through him,... (Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers - thanksgiving following Communion (aposCon 7.26. 1-3)

Or prayer #3 “ Blessed are you, O Lord, King of the ages, who through Christ made everything, and through him in the beginning ordered that which was unprepared” (i.e. chaotic matter) (#3 prayer That meditates upon God’s Manifold Creative Power) (aposCon 7.34.1-8)

or prayer #4 that addresses God the Father : “For you are the Father of wisdom, the Creator, as cause, of the creative workmanship through a Mediator....” #4 (aposCon 7.35.1-10);

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Jewish Geninza 4Q texts are clear that, despite delegation of important roles, the plan IS the Father’s plan and that he “determined all your works before you created them, together with the host of your spirits and the assembly of your holy ones… - all your designs for the end of time..” God counsels with those whose involvement he wants, but it remains God the Father's plan : “Moreover the Holy One, blessed be he, does nothing in his world without first taking counsel with them; then he acts, as it is written” (3Enoch :4 283). This early Jewish teaching that the physical creation was accomplished for the purpose of advancing mankind is the same tradition as the early Christians held. New Testament Hermas taught : [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Quote: “...don’t you understand how great and mighty and marvelous God’s glory is, because he created the world for the sake of man, and subjected all his creation to man..” (Her 47:2-4). [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]And thus, in company with the Pre-Mortal spirit of Jesus (called "the word” or “the right hand” in some accounts), the Father accomplished creation. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“I said, “O Lord, you spoke at the beginning of creation, and said on the first day, ‘Let heaven and earth be made, ‘ and your word accomplished the work...Again, on the second day, you created the spirit of the firmament and commanded him to divide and separate the waters...On the third day you commanded the waters to be gather together...For your word went forth, and at once the work was done. “ (4th Enoch 3:38-42). [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Just as the early texts demonstrate that the Son of God was named and chosen to be the redeemer in this Plan, the pre-mortal Adam is chosen to be the pro-genitor of all mankind who will inaugurate the Fathers Plan.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]

F) THE HONORING OF ADAM AS A PROGENITOR TO INAUGURATE THE FATHERS’ PLAN

Sedrach relates : quote “You commanded your angels to worship [honor] Adam, but he who was first among the angels disobeyed your order and did not worship him: and so you banished him because he transgressed your commandment and did not come forth (to worship) the creation of your hands." (The Apocalypse of Sedrach 5:1-7)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
It ought to be perfectly clear that as milestones were reached in the moving forward of God’s Plan for the spirits of mankind, the inauguration of mortality was an incredibly important phase that all spirits had long been anticipating. Thus, the “honoring of Adam” was not simply an arbitrary and spontaneous “office party” thrown at a whim, but it was a recognition of the culmination of organization and creation over a great deal of time and the inauguration of the opening phase of mortality of all mankind..[/FONT]


POST THREE OF FOUR FOLLOWS

 

[Clearly]

POST THREE OF FOUR

[FONT=&quot]
G) THE NATURE OF LUCIFER’S REFELLION IN THE CONTEXT OF GOD THE FATHER’S PLAN.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The nature of Lucifer’s punishment indicates the seriousness of what he did : When Enoch tells the fallen angel Azaz’el that “There will not be peace unto you; a grave judgment has come upon you. They will put you in bonds because you have taught injustice (1st Enoch 13:1-3), Enoch is not speaking of mere “naughtiness” or mere “disagreement” with God’s plan. Such fallen angels were told “judgment is passed upon you. 5 From now on you will not be able to ascend into heaven unto all eternity, (1st Enoch 14:3-5) because their rebellion had much greater ramifications than simple disagreement with God.

The jewish Haggadah describes the “wary reluctance” some souls experienced to leave a pre-mortal “heaven” to be born into mortality. Speaking of this sort of “reluctance” the Zohar describes how God, tells a spirit to “Go now, descend into this and that place, into this and this body.” Yet often enough the soul would reply: “Lord of the world, I am content to remain in this realm, , and have no wish to depart to some other, where I shall be in thralldom, and become stained.” Whereupon the Holy One, be blessed, would reply: “Your destiny is, and has been from the day of thy forming, to go into that world.” (The Zohar - The Destiny of the Soul)

Such “unconfidence” is not “rebellion” and such souls are given encouragement and still sent into mortality through birth according to God’s plan. However, just as “reluctance” is not “rebellion”, Lucifer’s “rebellion” was not merely “reluctance”.

Lucifer’s rebellion was described as a willful and confident full fledged disagreement which evolved into a plan for an assaultive counter “coup” having a DIFFERENT administration under a DIFFERENT King and DIFFERENT goals to the ultimate effect of nullifying God’s initial plan. In the context of controversies such as Lucifer’s “last straw” over Adam, one can better understand the sparks that made up the fires of the Rebellion or “war in heaven” itself.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
In reference to a different, earlier controversy regarding the knowledge, that IF man, having free will, was sent to earth, then mankind would certainly commit moral atrocities. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]“At the time that the Holy One, be blessed, was about to create the world, he decided to fashion all the souls which would in due course be dealt out to the children of men, .... Scrutinizing each, he saw that among them some would fall into evil ways in the world...” (The Zohar - The Destiny of the Soul)

The “fall of mankind” into moral transgression was not a surprise to a omnipotent God, rather, it was known long before the fall of Adam, and in fact, long before Adam was placed into the Garden. 3rd Enoch relates one of the fallen angels complaints against God the Father and his plan : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote: "Then three of the ministering angels, Uzzah, Azzah, and Aza’el, came and laid charges against me in the heavenly height. They said before the Holy One, blessed be he, ‘Lord of the Universe, did not the primeval ones give you good advice when they said, Do not create man!’ The Holy One, blessed be he, replied, ‘I have made and will sustain him; I will carry and deliver him.’ (3rd Enoch 4:6) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Such references hint of the other controversies and together, they offer a coherent history regarding such related controversies and their relationship to Lucifers Fall.

Regarding the current Controversy with Adam :

Jewish Haggadah relates that “[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“The extraordinary qualities with which Adam was blessed, physical and spiritual as well, aroused the envy of the angels......You created us angels from the splendor of the Shekinah, and now you command us to cast ourselves down before the creature which you fashioned out of the dust of the ground!” God answered, “Yet this dust of the ground has more wisdom and understanding than you.”... (The Haggadah -The Fall of Satan) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This Haggadic summary illuminates the growing anger in an envious Lucifer. This haggadic text goes on to relate a subsequent battle of wits between the spirits of Lucifer and Adam which leaves Lucifer publicly upstaged and discontented and frustrated. Much like the one-sided debates we sometimes see on this public forum when a poster loses face. How would an envious, upstaged and angry Lucifer be expected to react? Especially given that “the devil understood how I wished to create another world, so that everything could be subjected to Adam on the earth, to rule and reign over it.” 2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1;

As the earth was created and it’s preparations finished and the time arrived for God’s plan to be inaugurated, the mood among the hosts of heaven becomes one of anticipation and excitement. It is under these circumstance that the body for Adam is created and joined to his spirit and God commanded that Adam was to be honored for his role in inaugurating God’s plan upon the earth. Michael calls all the angels to honor Adam for what he is about to do. A seemingly “fed up” Lucifer arrives to the occasion with a bad attitude.

It is in such a context that later, the fallen Lucifer later explained to the fallen Adam : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]..Michael brought you and made (us) worship you in the sight of God, and the Lord God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ And I answered, ‘I do not worship Adam.’ ...’Why do you compel me? I will not worship one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to worship me.’ .... When they heard this, other angels who were under me refused to worship him. And Michael asserted, ‘Worship the image of God. But if now you will not worship, the Lord God will be wrathful with you.’ And I said, ‘[/FONT][FONT=&quot]If he be wrathful with me, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven and will be like the Most High[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT][FONT=&quot]” (Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) 12: 1-2, 13:13, 14:2-3; 15:1-3) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
As I will point out; there are many, many confirming versions of this same story. In these early christian texts, the anger and frustration of Lucifer does not remain a private gripe, but becomes an open rebellion. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]”... one from the order of the archangels deviated, together with the division that was under his authority. He thought up the impossible idea, that he might place his throne higher than the clouds which are above the earth, and that he might become equal to my power. 5 And I hurled him out from the height, together with his angels.” (2nd Enoch 29:3-5) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Book of John the evangelist confirms Satan’s presumption in similar language “He set his seat above the clouds of heaven”. Bartholemew records this occurrence in almost the same words as the other versions : “I will set my throne over against his throne” (bar 4:55) ;

It is for carrying out the actual plan and organized attempt to “set up [his] throne above the stars of heaven and ..be like the Most High” that Lucifer was punished. (“Stars” was a euphamism for the greatest angels). Speaking of Lucifer and the angels who allied with him the ancient psalm read [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“Now as they were warring with each other, they made bold to attack the land of Light, considering themselves capable of conquering it. Yet they know not that what they thought will recoil upon their own heads. But there was a host of angels in the Land of Light which possessed the power to issue forth and overcome the enemy of the Father, whom it pleased that through the Word that he would send, he should subdue the rebels who desired to raise themselves above what was more exalted than they.... (The Coptic Psalm-book - Let us worship the spirit of the paraclete) Psalm 223 (allberry 9-11) p 328; ) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
This attempted “coup” would have divided heaven and created a rival Kingship over a rival group in heaven. It was an attempt to set up a rival administration with it’s own rival plan for man.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] This was no mere show of minor “disloyalty”. Also, one should note the doctrine that the father delegated the successful battle which overcame Lucifer “through the Word” (who was his son). The earthly Devil had undergone multiple prior perceived offenses as the pre-mortal Lucifer. AND, his memories of pre-mortal happenings were not “veiled” from him, as Adams were. Certain battle lines were drawn long, long ago.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
It is in this larger set of contexts that it was said : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And the Rebel meditating these things Fol. 5b, col. 2 would not render obedience to God, and of his own free will he asserted his independence and separated himself from God. But he was - swept away out of heaven and fell, and the fall of himself and of all his company from heaven took place ...because he turned aside from the right way, ... he lost the apparel of his glory. And behold, from that time until the present day, he and all his hosts have been stripped of their apparel, (Cave of Treasures, chapt on “The Revolt of Satan&#8221 [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]POST FOUR OF FOUR FOLLOWS

 

[Clearly]

POST FOUR

[FONT=&quot]It’s unnecessary to the purpose of this post to discussed the symbolism of Lucifer’s apparel, his armor, and the “names” which were written in his hand (as the christian Abbaton also describes in greater detail), but it’s apparent that Lucifer unwillingly undergoes a ritual removal of his powers and authorities and authority for leadership and, with those angels who took part in his planned rebellion, he is cast down into the earth.

However, such histories lend sense and context and confirmation to other histories such as Apocalypse of abraham when Azaz’el is told regarding Abraham “...shame on you Azazel! For Abraham’s portion is in heaven, and yours is on earth, for you have selected here, (and) become enamored of the dwelling place of your blemish. .... For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours has been set aside for him, and the corruption which was on him has gone over to you.” (The Apocalypse of Abraham 13: 4,5,7-14)

Once Lucifer finds himself and his fallen angels on the earth, his own recognition and understanding and sense of what he had done increased, but this recognition was not associated with remorse nor repentance, but rather with an obstinate resolve and desire and plan for revenge (and other motives) and for continuing his rebellion. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“..he fled from heaven; Sotona, because his name was satanail. 5 In this way he became different from the angels. His nature did not change, (but) his thought did, since his consciousness of righteous and sinful things changed. And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. 6 And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam." (2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In early Christian Texts, these early Christian doctrines regarding the relationship between God the Father; his son who was Chosen to be the redeemer of mankind; between Adam and Lucifer and the rest of us is made more clear. In the early christian document “Life of Adam and Eve”, Fallen but the still naive and somewhat confused Adam asks Satan why Satan wanted to do Adam moral harm (since Adam’s prior memories of heaven were veiled from him). [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And the devil sighed and said, “O Adam, all my enmity and envy and sorrow concern you, since because of you I am expelled and deprived of my glory which I had in the heavens in the midst of angels, and because of you I was cast out onto the earth......Michael brought you and made (us) worship you in the sight of God, and the Lord God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ Ch 14 3 And I answered, ‘I do not worship Adam.’ ...’Why do you compel me? I will not worship one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to worship me.’ 15 1 When they heard this, other angels who were under me refused to worship him. 2 And Michael asserted, ‘Worship the image of God. But if now you will not worship, the Lord God will be wrathful with you.’ And I said, ‘If he be wrathful with me, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven and will be like the Most High.’ (Isa 14:13, Dan 8:10, obad 4, job 22:12, jude 9) Ch 16 1 and the Lord God was angry with me and sent me with my angels out from our glory; and because of you, we were expelled into this world from our dwellings and have been cast onto the earth. 2 And immediately we were made to grieve, since we had been deprived of so great glory. And we were pained to see you in such bliss of delights. 3So with deceit I assailed your wife and made you to be expelled through her from the joys of your bliss, as I have been expelled from my glory.” (Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) Vol 2 P 262 12: 1-2, 13:13, 14:2-3; 15:1-3; 16:1-3) [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]I hope that it is clear that the early Judao-Christians; their traditions, doctrines and texts DID have a sensible concept of the origin of the Devil and for some of the underlying motives as to why Lucifer battles against God and God's plan for the moral education of those among mankind who are willing and wanting to live by the moral laws which will ultimately allow them to live in happiness and harmony.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Compared to modern theories (or lack of theories), the ancient Christian doctrines were, I think, more coherent and more logical and represented a more accurate view of the Devils origin.[/FONT]



clearly
eisesivihr


The following is a POST SCRIPT that I thought might be important.
[FONT=&quot]
LUCIFER’S REFUSAL TO HONOR ADAM WAS AN ORTHODOX TEACHING IN EARLY CHRISTIAN RELIGION

Regarding the reference to Lucifer’s refusal to honor Adam, it is important that readers understand that though I only gave only a few reference from jewish; Christian; and Islamic sources in my over view above, I did not simply pick out a single “obscure” reference describing this tradition. Rather, this early doctrine was taught is described in MANY texts over a great deal of time and space. For examples :

The Christian text “Life of Adam and Eve” relates the same incident : Speaking to Adam, the Devil said :

“ ...because of you I am expelled and deprived of my glory which I had in the heavens in the midst of angels, and because of you I was cast out onto the earth.” 2 Adam answered, “What have I done to you, and what is my blame with you? Ch 13 “The devil replied,...It is because of you that I have been thrown out of there. 2 When .......Michael brought you and made (us) worship you in the sight of God, and the Lord God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ Ch 14 3 And I answered, ‘I do not worship Adam.’ ...’Why do you compel me? I will not worship one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to worship me.’ 15 1 When they heard this, other angels who were under me refused to worship him. (Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) 12: 1-2, 13:13, 14:2-3; 15:1-3; 16:1-3)

The early Christian Text “Cave of Treasures” relates [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And when the prince of the lower order of angels saw what great majesty had been given unto Adam, he was jealous of him from that day, and he did not wish to worship him. And he said unto his hosts, "Ye shall not worship him, and ye shall not praise him with the angels. It is meet that ye should worship me, because I am fire and spirit; and not that I should worship a thing of dust, which hath been fashioned of fine dust." [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Jewish Enoch relates, in the context of this Lucifer’s rebellion : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“ the devil understood how I wished to create another world, so that everything could be subjected to Adam on the earth, to rule and reign over it. ....And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. 6 And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam. (2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Jewish Haggadah (having Talmudic origins) also relates : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“The extraordinary qualities with which Adam was blessed, physical and spiritual as well, aroused the envy of the angels...After Adam had been endowed with a soul, God invited all the angels to come and pay him reverence and homage. Satan, the greatest of the angels in heaven,....refused to pay heed to the behest of God, saying, “You created us angels from the splendor of the Shekinah, and now you command us to cast ourselves down before the creature which you fashioned out of the dust of the ground!” God answered, “Yet this dust of the ground has more wisdom and understanding than you.”... (The Haggadah -The Fall of Satan) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The text then relates the "battle of wits" between Lucifers spirit and Adam's spirit where Lucifer is bested and loses "face".

Christian Bartholomew also confirms the story as Lucifer says : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And when I came from the ends of the world, Michael said to me: ‘Worship the image of God which he has made in his own likeness.’ But I said: ‘I am fire of fire. I was the first angel to be formed, and shall I worship clay and matter?” And Michael said to me: ‘Worship, lest god be angry with you.’ I answered: ‘God will not be angry with me, but I will set up my throne over against his throne, and shall be as he is [Isa. 14:14f]. ‘ then god was angry with me and cast me down,...” (The Gospel of Bartholomew Ch IV) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
This doctrinal controversy is not simply Jewish and Christian in it’s nature, but it’s also confirmed by the Sixth Century Quran text : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]"..And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "I am going to create a man (Adam) from sounding clay of altered black smooth mud. So, when I have fashioned him completely and breathed into him (Adam) the soul which I created for him, then fall (you) down prostrating yourselves unto him." So, the angels prostrated themselves, all of them together. Except Iblis (Satan), - he refused to be among the prostrators. (Sura 15:28-31) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
In Sura 20 : “ And (remember) when We said to the angels: "Prostrate yourselves to Adam." They prostrated (all) except Iblis (Satan), who refused. (Sura 20:116)

In Sura 38 : “ (Remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Truly, I am going to create man from clay". So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him (his) soul created by Me, then you fall down prostrate to him." So the angels prostrated themselves, all of them: Except Iblis (Satan) he was proud and was one of the disbelievers. (Sura 38:71-74)

In Sura 7 : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And surely, We created you (your father Adam) and then gave you shape (the noble shape of a human being), then We told the angels, "Prostrate to Adam", and they prostrated, except Iblis (Satan), he refused to be of those who prostrate. (Allah) said: "What prevented you (O Iblis) that you did not prostrate, when I commanded you?" Iblis said: "I am better than him (Adam), You created me from fire, and him You created from clay." (Sura 7:11-12) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
In Sura 18 :[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And (remember) when We said to the angels; "Prostrate to Adam." So they prostrated except Iblis (Satan). He was one of the jinns; he disobeyed the Command of his Lord.... (Sura 18:50) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The point in repeating this doctrine from so many different ancient Jewish, Christian and Islamic sources and versions is to show that this specific controversy and it’s relation to the doctrine of the “Origin” of Satan, is VERY ancient, the doctrine is VERY widespread among a large group of ancient literature,[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and the doctrine is VERY “orthodox” to the ancient Christians and other religious groups as well.


CLEARLY

[/FONT]

 

[Root of Jesse]

POST ONE OF FOUR

Root of Jesseclaims that the Roman Catholic Church teaches it’s members the same traditions as the earliest Christianity

Clearly Claims that the Roman Catholic Church abandoned and lost many of the earliest Judao-christian traditions and no longer is able to even teach them in the clarity and rich detail and context as the early Judao-christians did. As an example to compare early tradition, depth, clarity and detail of early Judao-christian teachings with Roman Catholic depth, clarity and detail of tradition.

Clearly requested that Root of Jesse : “ describe the current catholic tradition regarding details about the fall of Lucifer and his motives and reason for engineering the fall of Adam and eve and his continuing to war against God ” (Clearly : page 3, post #30)
Root of Jesse said : “ Lucifer fell because God gave the angels a choice at their creation, to be with Him forever, or to be against him forever. The angels had free will once. I'm not sure why Lucifer engineered the fall of Adam and Eve, other than that he was trying to subvert everything God did. “ (pg 4 post #32) In post #101, pg 11 he adds more detail regarding what catholics are able to teach: “ Lucifer was given a choice to follow God or not, and he chose not, so he and 1/3 of the angels were cast out of heaven. ” pg 11, # 101


Root of Jesse, This description is what most Christians grew up with regardless of our denominations. However, saying that Lucifer “chose” not to be with God does not explain WHY an archangel in power would “chose” not to live in joy and unity in a heaven with a powerful God who is full of love and truth. The limited nature of your tradition tells us nothing significant about the motives and plans and reasons to rebel against a loving God; nor does your tradition explain Lucifers motives regarding Adam (other than having very simplistic revenge against the Father). Your tradition tells us nothing about WHY God allows lucifer dominion and what purpose that serves him as God.


My point has been that the early Judao-Christians possessed MUCH greater detail and clarity and depth of tradition which the Catholic Church (and many others) no longer teaches.

Perhaps we can compare the quality of depth, clarity and detail you have provided from your description of Catholic tradition with an introduction to the most popular orthodox Early Judao-christian tradition found in Early Jewish, Christian, Judao-Christian and even Islamic texts.


[FONT=&quot]AN OVERVIEW-SUMMARY OF SOME POINTS FROM EARLY JUDA-CHRISTIAN TEXTS[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Though there are many modern theories regarding how Lucifer, an archangel with some authority became Satan, an enemy to all righteousness, there is a great deal of early literature regarding what the early christians themselves believed regarding the Origin and motives of Lucifer.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I believe an accurate summary of early Judao-Christian belief should start in the time period before the creation of the earth (another set of traditions abandoned by and lost to Catholic belief). Jewish Haggadah indicates that all spirits of men and angels existed before the creation of the world and God the Father created a plan to both sort the spirits of men based on moral intelligence and their moral desires and also to educate the spirits of men in moral principles by which they might live in eternal joy and harmony forever. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In the early creation council texts, God the Father lays out his plan for men and there are some reservations. The Jewish haggadah and the Christian Abbaton histories relate a controversy regarding the plan. Both texts describe concerns that once the spirit of man is placed into a body and sent to earth, mankind will then sin such that they will be unable to return to a sinless state. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In both Jewish Enoch and Christian Abbaton histories God the Father puts to rest this specific controversy by the mechanism of a “savior” who will atone for the sins of those among mankind who believe in and want to learn to follow those moral laws. A Savior is chosen, a Son of the Father, who will ultimately redeem mankind who want redemption and thus that controversy is settled. In this early theology, God was not “surprised” by Adam’s fall, but rather it was part of his original plan.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Judao-Christian texts concerning this time period indicate other controversies come up but there is one controversy that seems to be “the last straw” for the arch angel Lucifer. This specific controversy revolves about the creation of Adams body and the spirit that will be placed into Adam. The texts indicate that this time period, when God’s plan for these spirits is about to be inaugurated by an Adam being placed on earth is a glorious and exciting time for all spirits who will be involved in God’s plan for men. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Multiple Judao-Christian (and Islamic) texts refer to this controversy where God creates Adam after his very own image which is, beautiful and glorious. All angels are to honor Adam both for his creation in God’s image and for what he is about to do, that is, he is to be placed on earth and inaugurate God’s plan for the education and sieving of men based upon their own desires as to what moral laws they are willing and wanting to learn. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The texts indicate that the angel lucifer was proud and would not honor Adam because he felt Adam was inferior to himself. He thus refused to honor Adam and support the plan of the Father of spirits and ultimately rebelled against the plan and intended to set up his own throne and administration and kingdom in defiance to God the Father. The discourse on Abbaton describes the result of this rebellion. Lucifers’ authority and powers are removed from him and he is cast out into the earth, with the angels and spirits that supported his rebellion. He is allowed dominion to the extent that it serves Gods’ purpose and plan.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]THE FOLLOWING THREE POSTS ARE DATA AND COMMENTS SUPPORTING THIS SUMMARY[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]POST TWO OF FOUR FOLLOWS[/FONT]

Simply put, why? Because he didn't want to serve God the way God demanded. He was self-centered. Which is why all of us sin.

The rest is blah...blah...blah. Again, I don't have time to write dissertations, so I'll leave that to you.

 

[Root of Jesse]

POST FOUR

[FONT=&quot]It’s unnecessary to the purpose of this post to discussed the symbolism of Lucifer’s apparel, his armor, and the “names” which were written in his hand (as the christian Abbaton also describes in greater detail), but it’s apparent that Lucifer unwillingly undergoes a ritual removal of his powers and authorities and authority for leadership and, with those angels who took part in his planned rebellion, he is cast down into the earth. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]However, such histories lend sense and context and confirmation to other histories such as Apocalypse of abraham when Azaz’el is told regarding Abraham “...shame on you Azazel! For Abraham’s portion is in heaven, and yours is on earth, for you have selected here, (and) become enamored of the dwelling place of your blemish. .... For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours has been set aside for him, and the corruption which was on him has gone over to you.” (The Apocalypse of Abraham 13: 4,5,7-14)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Once Lucifer finds himself and his fallen angels on the earth, his own recognition and understanding and sense of what he had done increased, but this recognition was not associated with remorse nor repentance, but rather with an obstinate resolve and desire and plan for revenge (and other motives) and for continuing his rebellion. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“..he fled from heaven; Sotona, because his name was satanail. 5 In this way he became different from the angels. His nature did not change, (but) his thought did, since his consciousness of righteous and sinful things changed. And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. 6 And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam." (2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In early Christian Texts, these early Christian doctrines regarding the relationship between God the Father; his son who was Chosen to be the redeemer of mankind; between Adam and Lucifer and the rest of us is made more clear. In the early christian document “Life of Adam and Eve”, Fallen but the still naive and somewhat confused Adam asks Satan why Satan wanted to do Adam moral harm (since Adam’s prior memories of heaven were veiled from him). [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And the devil sighed and said, “O Adam, all my enmity and envy and sorrow concern you, since because of you I am expelled and deprived of my glory which I had in the heavens in the midst of angels, and because of you I was cast out onto the earth......Michael brought you and made (us) worship you in the sight of God, and the Lord God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ Ch 14 3 And I answered, ‘I do not worship Adam.’ ...’Why do you compel me? I will not worship one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to worship me.’ 15 1 When they heard this, other angels who were under me refused to worship him. 2 And Michael asserted, ‘Worship the image of God. But if now you will not worship, the Lord God will be wrathful with you.’ And I said, ‘If he be wrathful with me, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven and will be like the Most High.’ (Isa 14:13, Dan 8:10, obad 4, job 22:12, jude 9) Ch 16 1 and the Lord God was angry with me and sent me with my angels out from our glory; and because of you, we were expelled into this world from our dwellings and have been cast onto the earth. 2 And immediately we were made to grieve, since we had been deprived of so great glory. And we were pained to see you in such bliss of delights. 3So with deceit I assailed your wife and made you to be expelled through her from the joys of your bliss, as I have been expelled from my glory.” (Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) Vol 2 P 262 12: 1-2, 13:13, 14:2-3; 15:1-3; 16:1-3) [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]I hope that it is clear that the early Judao-Christians; their traditions, doctrines and texts DID have a sensible concept of the origin of the Devil and for some of the underlying motives as to why Lucifer battles against God and God's plan for the moral education of those among mankind who are willing and wanting to live by the moral laws which will ultimately allow them to live in happiness and harmony.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Compared to modern theories (or lack of theories), the ancient Christian doctrines were, I think, more coherent and more logical and represented a more accurate view of the Devils origin.[/FONT]



clearly
eisesivihr


The following is a POST SCRIPT that I thought might be important.

[FONT=&quot]LUCIFER’S REFUSAL TO HONOR ADAM WAS AN ORTHODOX TEACHING IN EARLY CHRISTIAN RELIGION[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Regarding the reference to Lucifer’s refusal to honor Adam, it is important that readers understand that though I only gave only a few reference from jewish; Christian; and Islamic sources in my over view above, I did not simply pick out a single “obscure” reference describing this tradition. Rather, this early doctrine was taught is described in MANY texts over a great deal of time and space. For examples : [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Christian text “Life of Adam and Eve” relates the same incident : Speaking to Adam, the Devil said :

“ ...because of you I am expelled and deprived of my glory which I had in the heavens in the midst of angels, and because of you I was cast out onto the earth.” 2 Adam answered, “What have I done to you, and what is my blame with you? Ch 13 “The devil replied,...It is because of you that I have been thrown out of there. 2 When .......Michael brought you and made (us) worship you in the sight of God, and the Lord God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ Ch 14 3 And I answered, ‘I do not worship Adam.’ ...’Why do you compel me? I will not worship one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to worship me.’ 15 1 When they heard this, other angels who were under me refused to worship him. (Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) 12: 1-2, 13:13, 14:2-3; 15:1-3; 16:1-3) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The early Christian Text “Cave of Treasures” relates [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And when the prince of the lower order of angels saw what great majesty had been given unto Adam, he was jealous of him from that day, and he did not wish to worship him. And he said unto his hosts, "Ye shall not worship him, and ye shall not praise him with the angels. It is meet that ye should worship me, because I am fire and spirit; and not that I should worship a thing of dust, which hath been fashioned of fine dust." [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jewish Enoch relates, in the context of this Lucifer’s rebellion : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“ the devil understood how I wished to create another world, so that everything could be subjected to Adam on the earth, to rule and reign over it. ....And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. 6 And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam. (2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jewish Haggadah (having Talmudic origins) also relates : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“The extraordinary qualities with which Adam was blessed, physical and spiritual as well, aroused the envy of the angels...After Adam had been endowed with a soul, God invited all the angels to come and pay him reverence and homage. Satan, the greatest of the angels in heaven,....refused to pay heed to the behest of God, saying, “You created us angels from the splendor of the Shekinah, and now you command us to cast ourselves down before the creature which you fashioned out of the dust of the ground!” God answered, “Yet this dust of the ground has more wisdom and understanding than you.”... (The Haggadah -The Fall of Satan) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The text then relates the "battle of wits" between Lucifers spirit and Adam's spirit where Lucifer is bested and loses "face".[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Christian Bartholomew also confirms the story as Lucifer says : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And when I came from the ends of the world, Michael said to me: ‘Worship the image of God which he has made in his own likeness.’ But I said: ‘I am fire of fire. I was the first angel to be formed, and shall I worship clay and matter?” And Michael said to me: ‘Worship, lest god be angry with you.’ I answered: ‘God will not be angry with me, but I will set up my throne over against his throne, and shall be as he is [Isa. 14:14f]. ‘ then god was angry with me and cast me down,...” (The Gospel of Bartholomew Ch IV) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This doctrinal controversy is not simply Jewish and Christian in it’s nature, but it’s also confirmed by the Sixth Century Quran text : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]"..And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "I am going to create a man (Adam) from sounding clay of altered black smooth mud. So, when I have fashioned him completely and breathed into him (Adam) the soul which I created for him, then fall (you) down prostrating yourselves unto him." So, the angels prostrated themselves, all of them together. Except Iblis (Satan), - he refused to be among the prostrators. (Sura 15:28-31) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In Sura 20 : “ And (remember) when We said to the angels: "Prostrate yourselves to Adam." They prostrated (all) except Iblis (Satan), who refused. (Sura 20:116)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In Sura 38 : “ (Remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Truly, I am going to create man from clay". So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him (his) soul created by Me, then you fall down prostrate to him." So the angels prostrated themselves, all of them: Except Iblis (Satan) he was proud and was one of the disbelievers. (Sura 38:71-74)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In Sura 7 : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And surely, We created you (your father Adam) and then gave you shape (the noble shape of a human being), then We told the angels, "Prostrate to Adam", and they prostrated, except Iblis (Satan), he refused to be of those who prostrate. (Allah) said: "What prevented you (O Iblis) that you did not prostrate, when I commanded you?" Iblis said: "I am better than him (Adam), You created me from fire, and him You created from clay." (Sura 7:11-12) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In Sura 18 :[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Quote:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“And (remember) when We said to the angels; "Prostrate to Adam." So they prostrated except Iblis (Satan). He was one of the jinns; he disobeyed the Command of his Lord.... (Sura 18:50) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The point in repeating this doctrine from so many different ancient Jewish, Christian and Islamic sources and versions is to show that this specific controversy and it’s relation to the doctrine of the “Origin” of Satan, is VERY ancient, the doctrine is VERY widespread among a large group of ancient literature,[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and the doctrine is VERY “orthodox” to the ancient Christians and other religious groups as well. [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]CLEARLY [/FONT]

Summary of about 4000 words: See my post above. Lucifer did not want to worship God totally, meaning obedience to God, and chose not to. So he fell, along with 1/3 of the angels. All this happened before the creation of the world, Adam and Eve.

 

[ranpleasant]

CLEARLY

You, as a man, cannot write enough to undo what God has built. You can write 10,000 posts each containing 10,000 words and it still will not change the fact that Holy Tradition is the Word of God handed down through the Holy Catholic Church unchanged for 2,000 years. What you believe about the Catholic Church has no affect upon the Church because it is guilded and guarded by the Holy Spirit.

If you want to know more about Holy Tradition then ask. But in regard to the existence of Holy Tradition there is nothing to debate.

Ran

 

[Clearly]

1) Ranpleasant said “ You, as a man, cannot write enough to undo what God has built. “ (pg 11, #108)

Ranpleasant : My desire is NOT to “undo” nor “thwart” Gods’ purposes, but rather I desire to SUPPORT authentic Christian theology and to SUPPORT the Authentic Christian Claim that Jesus is the redeemer to whom mankind must look for salvation.

Though this process of discussing history may reveal errors in later roman catholic traditions created by their theologians, still, Historically, God did NOT “build” the specific roman catholic traditions we are discussing. You must remember that you are in a HISTORICAL thread. HISTORICALLY, the modern roman Catholic church is a DIFFERENT type of Christianity with DIFFERENT traditions than the early Judao-Christianity.

In context of “sola scriptura” vs “catholic tradition”, my reason to point out traditional innovations; changes; and loss among the roman catholic church was to show the problem with root of Jesses’ claims that roman catholic doctrine was unchanged and that roman catholic traditions allowed for superior interpretation of texts compared to sola scriptura (which itself, in practice has never worked).




2) Ranpleasant says regarding Roman Catholic tradition : “ If you want to know more about Holy Tradition then ask. “ pg 11, # 108

Readers who’ve followed this thread will see the deep irony in your offer. I have almost begged for more information and data from Catholics and have been unsuccessful in getting it.

I do not mind going through this process again with you, so that these principles of “innovated tradition, change in tradition, and loss of tradition” can be better understood and more deeply confirmed in the minds of forum historians and readers. However, if your “offer” for information is insincere, then we’ll simply find ourselves in the same situation as root of jesse and I find ourselves in. I asked for good data and receive the barest amount that can be seen as a reply, yet serves to deflect any deep examination.

For example, to demonstrate loss and differences between roman catholic tradition and early Judao-Christian traditions, I ASKED Root of Jesse :

[FONT=&quot]“ Will you describe the Roman Catholic tradition regarding the origin of man’s spirit from it’s consciousness to birth and what determines the moral and mental characteristics a spirit is born with “ pg 3, #30[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The sum total he was able or willing to offer was a single reference : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]"Before you were in the womb, I knew you" (post #32). That was it; the sum total of the roman catholic description of this early christian tradition. No explanation as to the origin of man’s spirits from its’ consciousness to birth, nothing regarding the determination of moral and mental characteristics; nothing regarding how long before birth a spirit lived; nothing but the single sentence.

I repeated my request for more information and offered to give him more time on pg 5, #41 asking [/FONT][FONT=&quot]“ … are you sure you don’t want to add some data to these descriptions since these descriptions of catholic doctrine on these subjects seems to be very superficial and lack detail? Let me know if you need more time on these descriptions,”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]He still was unable to come up with any more of a description of catholic tradition[/FONT][FONT=&quot] on this point. I ASKED AGAIN [/FONT][FONT=&quot] to see if he was able to add ANYTHING from catholic sources on the subject. In post # 44 saying :[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“ … Meanwhile, are you sure you don’t want to add more data regarding Catholic doctrine regarding the origin of mans spirit and it’s characteristics; the purpose of creation and concerning the origin of Lucifer and his motives? (since I plan to post on those later today…”[/FONT]

ROOT OF JESSE said "Before you were in the womb, I knew you.", this is not the depth of my knowledge, it is a summary. I don't have the time, nor the care to demonstrate how this refutes what you claim above. Pg 10, #96

Instead of the simple admission of lack of clear and significant amounts of data, he claimed he had little time nor cared to offer data. I felt this was simply another disingenuous deflection since readers saw how much time he had been spending on the forum in other posts. The roman Catholic pfaffenhofen was the only one who simply admitted that he did not know much about (or disbelieved) these early Judao-Christian traditions (I still think pfaffenhofen is to be commended and honored for this single act of honesty… I think it was brave and a good act)


When you and the roman catholic Pfaffenhofen disagreed regarding the value of tradition vs scripture in roman theology, I pointed out the inconsistency and again asked for information, saying : " IS there any consensus among the Forum roman Catholics as to what is the official correct roman Catholic doctrine on this point? Perhaps quotes from an official roman catholic source or text? "pg 10, #95

Still, to this day, no further significant illuminating information has been given. Even when Root of Jesse refused to publicly describe catholic doctrine regarding Lucifer and his fall in any depth that would allow a significant comparison, I AGAIN asked :


If Root of Jesse is unable to offer the Roman Catholic teaching on this subject in any depth, then ANY OTHER CATHOLIC WHO BELIEVES THEY HAVE THE SAME DOCTRINE AND DEPTH AS EARLY JUDAO-CHRISITANS HAD ARE WELCOME TO OFFER THE ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITIONS regarding these points so as to allow us to compare the roman catholic doctrine with the early Judao-Christian doctrine. (The doctrine of good - evil is one of the most basic of all religious doctrines.)#99

AGAIN, I received no new data from any catholic.

I DON'T WISH TO BE OFFENSIVE, BUT I DO WISH TO KNOW THAT YOUR OFFER FOR INFORMATION IS SINCERE.

IF YOUR OFFER IS SINCERE, THEN IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO A HISTORICAL COMPARISON TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS WILLING TO PROVIDE ENOUGH INFORMATION REGARDING ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITIONS TO CONTINUE EXPLORING THESE HISTORICAL ISSUES.

You could start by describing the Catholic tradition regarding the existence of the spirits of all mankind (all men and women) BEFORE the creation of the earth. I claimed there is little depth and clarity and detail in any official catholic version of this tradition compared to the earliest Judao-Christianity. Root of Jesse indicated the depth and detail of this tradition are still retained in the catholic church.





PLEASE, TAKE YOUR TIME. MAKE SURE WHAT YOU POST IS ACCURATE ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION. RESEARCH IT, CONFIRM IT, AND THEN, POST IT.



Ranpleasant, If your offer is sincere, then I THANK YOU for the willingness to allow your tradition to be examined.


Clearly
eiactzseis

 

[Abrahamist]

My point has been that the early Judao-Christians possessed MUCH greater detail and clarity and depth of tradition which the Catholic Church (and many others) no longer teaches.

Without actually having access to this much greater detail and clarity and depth of tradition, how do you actually know this?

 

[Abrahamist]

1) Ranpleasant said “ You, as a man, cannot write enough to undo what God has built. “ (pg 11, #108)

Ranpleasant : My desire is NOT to “undo” nor “thwart” Gods’ purposes, but rather I desire to SUPPORT authentic Christian theology and to SUPPORT the Authentic Christian Claim that Jesus is the redeemer to whom mankind must look for salvation.

Though this process of discussing history may reveal errors in later roman catholic traditions created by their theologians, still, Historically, God did NOT “build” the specific roman catholic traditions we are discussing. You must remember that you are in a HISTORICAL thread. HISTORICALLY, the modern roman Catholic church is a DIFFERENT type of Christianity with DIFFERENT traditions than the early Judao-Christianity.

In context of “sola scriptura” vs “catholic tradition”, my reason to point out traditional innovations; changes; and loss among the roman catholic church was to show the problem with root of Jesses’ claims that roman catholic doctrine was unchanged and that roman catholic traditions allowed for superior interpretation of texts compared to sola scriptura (which itself, in practice has never worked).




2) Ranpleasant says regarding Roman Catholic tradition : “ If you want to know more about Holy Tradition then ask. “ pg 11, # 108

Readers who’ve followed this thread will see the deep irony in your offer. I have almost begged for more information and data from Catholics and have been unsuccessful in getting it.

I do not mind going through this process again with you, so that these principles of “innovated tradition, change in tradition, and loss of tradition” can be better understood and more deeply confirmed in the minds of forum historians and readers. However, if your “offer” for information is insincere, then we’ll simply find ourselves in the same situation as root of jesse and I find ourselves in. I asked for good data and receive the barest amount that can be seen as a reply, yet serves to deflect any deep examination.

For example, to demonstrate loss and differences between roman catholic tradition and early Judao-Christian traditions, I ASKED Root of Jesse :

[FONT=&quot]“ Will you describe the Roman Catholic tradition regarding the origin of man’s spirit from it’s consciousness to birth and what determines the moral and mental characteristics a spirit is born with “ pg 3, #30[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The sum total he was able or willing to offer was a single reference : [/FONT][FONT=&quot]"Before you were in the womb, I knew you" (post #32). That was it; the sum total of the roman catholic description of this early christian tradition. No explanation as to the origin of man’s spirits from its’ consciousness to birth, nothing regarding the determination of moral and mental characteristics; nothing regarding how long before birth a spirit lived; nothing but the single sentence.

I repeated my request for more information and offered to give him more time on pg 5, #41 asking [/FONT][FONT=&quot]“ … are you sure you don’t want to add some data to these descriptions since these descriptions of catholic doctrine on these subjects seems to be very superficial and lack detail? Let me know if you need more time on these descriptions,”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]He still was unable to come up with any more of a description of catholic tradition[/FONT][FONT=&quot] on this point. I ASKED AGAIN [/FONT][FONT=&quot] to see if he was able to add ANYTHING from catholic sources on the subject. In post # 44 saying :[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]“ … Meanwhile, are you sure you don’t want to add more data regarding Catholic doctrine regarding the origin of mans spirit and it’s characteristics; the purpose of creation and concerning the origin of Lucifer and his motives? (since I plan to post on those later today…”[/FONT]

ROOT OF JESSE said "Before you were in the womb, I knew you.", this is not the depth of my knowledge, it is a summary. I don't have the time, nor the care to demonstrate how this refutes what you claim above. Pg 10, #96

Instead of the simple admission of lack of clear and significant amounts of data, he claimed he had little time nor cared to offer data. I felt this was simply another disingenuous deflection since readers saw how much time he had been spending on the forum in other posts. The roman Catholic pfaffenhofen was the only one who simply admitted that he did not know much about (or disbelieved) these early Judao-Christian traditions (I still think pfaffenhofen is to be commended and honored for this single act of honesty… I think it was brave and a good act)


When you and the roman catholic Pfaffenhofen disagreed regarding the value of tradition vs scripture in roman theology, I pointed out the inconsistency and again asked for information, saying : " IS there any consensus among the Forum roman Catholics as to what is the official correct roman Catholic doctrine on this point? Perhaps quotes from an official roman catholic source or text? "pg 10, #95

Still, to this day, no further significant illuminating information has been given. Even when Root of Jesse refused to publicly describe catholic doctrine regarding Lucifer and his fall in any depth that would allow a significant comparison, I AGAIN asked :


If Root of Jesse is unable to offer the Roman Catholic teaching on this subject in any depth, then ANY OTHER CATHOLIC WHO BELIEVES THEY HAVE THE SAME DOCTRINE AND DEPTH AS EARLY JUDAO-CHRISITANS HAD ARE WELCOME TO OFFER THE ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITIONS regarding these points so as to allow us to compare the roman catholic doctrine with the early Judao-Christian doctrine. (The doctrine of good - evil is one of the most basic of all religious doctrines.)#99

AGAIN, I received no new data from any catholic.

I DON'T WISH TO BE OFFENSIVE, BUT I DO WISH TO KNOW THAT YOUR OFFER FOR INFORMATION IS SINCERE.

IF YOUR OFFER IS SINCERE, THEN IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO A HISTORICAL COMPARISON TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS WILLING TO PROVIDE ENOUGH INFORMATION REGARDING ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITIONS TO CONTINUE EXPLORING THESE HISTORICAL ISSUES.

You could start by describing the Catholic tradition regarding the existence of the spirits of all mankind (all men and women) BEFORE the creation of the earth. I claimed there is little depth and clarity and detail in any official catholic version of this tradition compared to the earliest Judao-Christianity. Root of Jesse indicated the depth and detail of this tradition are still retained in the catholic church.





PLEASE, TAKE YOUR TIME. MAKE SURE WHAT YOU POST IS ACCURATE ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION. RESEARCH IT, CONFIRM IT, AND THEN, POST IT.



Ranpleasant, If your offer is sincere, then I THANK YOU for the willingness to allow your tradition to be examined.


Clearly
eiactzseis

Maybe I'm not understanding you right but you appear to be claiming that the early church had information that is now lost. This claim seems completely absurd to me because it appears to be unfalsifiable. And as such, we could assign this lost knowledge to any group:

The gnostics actually had the greater knowledge but the church destroyed in and so now it's lost.

The Jews were right. They had some knowledge about Jesus that has now been lost.

The Mormons are right. The earliest mormons possessed some great knowledge that has now been lost.

Without actually having this knowledge, how do you know it ever actually existed?

 

[Clearly]

1) ”Maybe I'm not understanding you right but you appear to be claiming that the early church had information that is now lost.” Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

Hi Abrahamist,
I’m not sure you do understand the historical claim and it’s context. Roman Catholics in this thread have claimed that their church tradition is original tradition that remains “unchanged over 2000 years”. We are in the midst of demonstrating that this is historically untrue.

I claimed that the roman congregation invented new traditions not held historically by the earliest Judao-christians; that they have modified some of the early authentic traditions which WERE held historically by the earliest judao-christians, and that they have “abandoned”; “lost”, no longer hold to; “no longer teach to their membership as a tenet of tradition” etc, etc. some of the earliest judao-christian traditions.

Not only does this mean the modern roman Catholic church is NOT the same in tradition, doctrine, and practice as the earliest Judao-Christian religion, but, in relation to “sola scriptura vs Tradition”, the specific erroneous traditions do NOT result in a superior interpretation of scripture (though I think specific correct traditions they hold, WILL enhance interpretation).




2) Regarding Clearlys’ Claim that the roman Catholic church does not hold to many of the early Judao-Christian traditions, Abrahamist said : “This claim seems completely absurd to me because it appears to be unfalsifiable. And as such, we could assign this lost knowledge to any group… Without actually having this knowledge, how do you know it ever actually existed? ” Pg 12, #111

Abrahamist
There is a great deal of very early Judao-Christian literature that describes early Judao-Christian traditions. Using the current example of pre-existence and conditions during this time, Sacred texts, commentaries, psalms, prayers, early novelas, diaries, etc. are all helpful in describing early Judao-Christian tradition and their beliefs.

For example, the “Apostolic Fathers” refers to a group of writings that were written either by someone who knew an apostle, or were written during the time an apostle may still have been alive. Papias for example, was a “hearer of John”. Clement was a convert who describes what Peter taught him about early Christian doctrines. What Papias and Clement tell us about early Christian Doctrine and tradition represents a very, very early version of Christian tradition. The specific things the apostle Peter tells Clement are indicative of early Christian traditions.

More sacred and secular texts have been discovered just in the 19th and 20th centuries than in all other centuries combined. Just as the Dead sea scrolls are restoring and correcting some of the lost portions of our biblical texts, the early Judao-Christian texts are restoring and correcting some of our assumptions about early Judao-Christian traditions.





3) The gnostics actually had the greater knowledge but the church destroyed in and so now it's lost. Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist
I’m not sure what you mean by any of these statements without further clarification. However, gnostics often had accurate data but inaccurate relationships. For example, even when using the same texts as non-gnostics, they interpret the meanings differently. I think modern gnostics nowadays also seem to interpret current scriptures differently in this same way though I know very little about modern gnostics.





4) ” The Jews were right. They had some knowledge about Jesus that has now been lost. “ Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

I very much agree with you on this. Jews (and christians) often assume that Judaism today is the same as Judaism anciently, whereas ancient descriptions demonstrate otherwise. For example : Justin martyr in his dialogue with trypho the jew maintained that the Jews had changed biblical references (OT) which would have made it more clear that Jesus was the awaited messiah. If some of the early Christian literature is correct (A&E, vitae, etc), then the Christian tradition where Adam was promised a redeemer would come to redeem him would indeed make Adam’s religion a “Christianity” in that he also awaited the christ as a redeemer. If this early christian tradition is true, then Judaism HAS lost data and clarity that might have allowed them to accept jesus as the messiah and redeemer of mankind.

It may have been in this context that Ignatius tells the Magnesions : “…Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity,...” (10:3). Perhaps he is referring to a concept that the Jews also evolved away from pure messianic “Christianity” that evolved into the “Judaism” we read about in later centuries.

If the Jewish history shows us anything, it is the constant and unrelenting tendency for even the most religious of us to stray and apostatize over time, only to have another prophet come and try to restore them to a more correct path, over and over and over. I do not think we should condemn the Jews for this since it is from them that we learn the important lesson that ALL of us have a tendency to stray from original religious instruction. As we filter religion through our biases as we try to make sense of and then interpret what religion and texts mean to us personally, we cannot help but change it over time.





5) “ The Mormons are right. The earliest mormons possessed some great knowledge that has now been lost. ” Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

I’m not sure what you mean by “the Mormons are right”. I would agree that “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” (i.e. “Mormons&#8221 seem to have the examples of the best doctrinal and textual correlations to the earliest Judao-Christian history I’ve ever seen.

For example : They retain a version of the early doctrine of pre-existence that is the most complete I've seen. Their “pearl of great price” text is parallel in many profound ways to the apocalypse of Abraham and is quite enochian (i.e. 2nd,3rd) in it's characteristics (though neither book was discovered and available to them as source material).

I think restorationist Christianity in general, (i.e. the christianities that are attempting to restore salvational doctrines of early the Judao-Christian religion) are most able to use the earliest Judao-Christian texts in a fairly seamless manner , (though I do not think that even their members are generally aware of this tremendous strength). However, I think even they have the same tendency to error as ALL of us have as individuals, though it is offset somewhat by their constant re-adjustment as they seek to be like early christianity.




RANPLEASANT : THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR OFFER TO PROVIDE A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION REGARDING THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF THE SPIRITS OF MANKIND BEFORE THE EARTH WAS EVEN CREATED. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DATA YOU OFFERED TO PROVIDE.



CLEARLY
eiacactzok

 

[Root of Jesse]

1) ”Maybe I'm not understanding you right but you appear to be claiming that the early church had information that is now lost.” Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

Hi Abrahamist,
I’m not sure you do understand the historical claim and it’s context. Roman Catholics in this thread have claimed that their church tradition is original tradition that remains “unchanged over 2000 years”. We are in the midst of demonstrating that this is historically untrue.

I claimed that the roman congregation invented new traditions not held historically by the earliest Judao-christians; that they have modified some of the early authentic traditions which WERE held historically by the earliest judao-christians, and that they have “abandoned”; “lost”, no longer hold to; “no longer teach to their membership as a tenet of tradition” etc, etc. some of the earliest judao-christian traditions.

Not only does this mean the modern roman Catholic church is NOT the same in tradition, doctrine, and practice as the earliest Judao-Christian religion, but, in relation to “sola scriptura vs Tradition”, the specific erroneous traditions do NOT result in a superior interpretation of scripture (though I think specific correct traditions they hold, WILL enhance interpretation).




2) Regarding Clearlys’ Claim that the roman Catholic church does not hold to many of the early Judao-Christian traditions, Abrahamist said : “This claim seems completely absurd to me because it appears to be unfalsifiable. And as such, we could assign this lost knowledge to any group… Without actually having this knowledge, how do you know it ever actually existed? ” Pg 12, #111

Abrahamist
There is a great deal of very early Judao-Christian literature that describes early Judao-Christian traditions. Using the current example of pre-existence and conditions during this time, Sacred texts, commentaries, psalms, prayers, early novelas, diaries, etc. are all helpful in describing early Judao-Christian tradition and their beliefs.

For example, the “Apostolic Fathers” refers to a group of writings that were written either by someone who knew an apostle, or were written during the time an apostle may still have been alive. Papias for example, was a “hearer of John”. Clement was a convert who describes what Peter taught him about early Christian doctrines. What Papias and Clement tell us about early Christian Doctrine and tradition represents a very, very early version of Christian tradition. The specific things the apostle Peter tells Clement are indicative of early Christian traditions.

More sacred and secular texts have been discovered just in the 19th and 20th centuries than in all other centuries combined. Just as the Dead sea scrolls are restoring and correcting some of the lost portions of our biblical texts, the early Judao-Christian texts are restoring and correcting some of our assumptions about early Judao-Christian traditions.





3) The gnostics actually had the greater knowledge but the church destroyed in and so now it's lost. Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist
I’m not sure what you mean by any of these statements without further clarification. However, gnostics often had accurate data but inaccurate relationships. For example, even when using the same texts as non-gnostics, they interpret the meanings differently. I think modern gnostics nowadays also seem to interpret current scriptures differently in this same way though I know very little about modern gnostics.





4) ” The Jews were right. They had some knowledge about Jesus that has now been lost. “ Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

I very much agree with you on this. Jews (and christians) often assume that Judaism today is the same as Judaism anciently, whereas ancient descriptions demonstrate otherwise. For example : Justin martyr in his dialogue with trypho the jew maintained that the Jews had changed biblical references (OT) which would have made it more clear that Jesus was the awaited messiah. If some of the early Christian literature is correct (A&E, vitae, etc), then the Christian tradition where Adam was promised a redeemer would come to redeem him would indeed make Adam’s religion a “Christianity” in that he also awaited the christ as a redeemer. If this early christian tradition is true, then Judaism HAS lost data and clarity that might have allowed them to accept jesus as the messiah and redeemer of mankind.

It may have been in this context that Ignatius tells the Magnesions : “…Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity,...” (10:3). Perhaps he is referring to a concept that the Jews also evolved away from pure messianic “Christianity” that evolved into the “Judaism” we read about in later centuries.

If the Jewish history shows us anything, it is the constant and unrelenting tendency for even the most religious of us to stray and apostatize over time, only to have another prophet come and try to restore them to a more correct path, over and over and over. I do not think we should condemn the Jews for this since it is from them that we learn the important lesson that ALL of us have a tendency to stray from original religious instruction. As we filter religion through our biases as we try to make sense of and then interpret what religion and texts mean to us personally, we cannot help but change it over time.





5) “ The Mormons are right. The earliest mormons possessed some great knowledge that has now been lost. ” Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

I’m not sure what you mean by “the Mormons are right”. I would agree that “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” (i.e. “Mormons”) seem to have the examples of the best doctrinal and textual correlations to the earliest Judao-Christian history I’ve ever seen.

For example : They retain a version of the early doctrine of pre-existence that is the most complete I've seen. Their “pearl of great price” text is parallel in many profound ways to the apocalypse of Abraham and is quite enochian (i.e. 2nd,3rd) in it's characteristics (though neither book was discovered and available to them as source material).

I think restorationist Christianity in general, (i.e. the christianities that are attempting to restore salvational doctrines of early the Judao-Christian religion) are most able to use the earliest Judao-Christian texts in a fairly seamless manner , (though I do not think that even their members are generally aware of this tremendous strength). However, I think even they have the same tendency to error as ALL of us have as individuals, though it is offset somewhat by their constant re-adjustment as they seek to be like early christianity.




RANPLEASANT : THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR OFFER TO PROVIDE A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION REGARDING THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF THE SPIRITS OF MANKIND BEFORE THE EARTH WAS EVEN CREATED. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DATA YOU OFFERED TO PROVIDE.



CLEARLY
eiacactzok

Clearly,
In all you words, I don't think you have proven anything. For one thing, do you know the difference between tradition and Tradition? Tradition is what we believe. tradition (lower case t) is how we practice the faith. Tradition is essential to our faith, tradition is not. Tradition cannot change, for it is Truth, tradition can change, for times change. We call Tradition "Sacred Tradition" to separate the two. Sacred Tradition is what cannot and does not change. Your understanding of what we mean by 'tradition' is important. And, as I said, the Catholic Church's Sacred Tradition has not changed for 2000 years.

 

[Abrahamist]

1) ”Maybe I'm not understanding you right but you appear to be claiming that the early church had information that is now lost.” Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

Hi Abrahamist,
I’m not sure you do understand the historical claim and it’s context. Roman Catholics in this thread have claimed that their church tradition is original tradition that remains “unchanged over 2000 years”. We are in the midst of demonstrating that this is historically untrue.

I claimed that the roman congregation invented new traditions not held historically by the earliest Judao-christians; that they have modified some of the early authentic traditions which WERE held historically by the earliest judao-christians, and that they have “abandoned”; “lost”, no longer hold to; “no longer teach to their membership as a tenet of tradition” etc, etc. some of the earliest judao-christian traditions.

Not only does this mean the modern roman Catholic church is NOT the same in tradition, doctrine, and practice as the earliest Judao-Christian religion, but, in relation to “sola scriptura vs Tradition”, the specific erroneous traditions do NOT result in a superior interpretation of scripture (though I think specific correct traditions they hold, WILL enhance interpretation).




2) Regarding Clearlys’ Claim that the roman Catholic church does not hold to many of the early Judao-Christian traditions, Abrahamist said : “This claim seems completely absurd to me because it appears to be unfalsifiable. And as such, we could assign this lost knowledge to any group… Without actually having this knowledge, how do you know it ever actually existed? ” Pg 12, #111

Abrahamist
There is a great deal of very early Judao-Christian literature that describes early Judao-Christian traditions. Using the current example of pre-existence and conditions during this time, Sacred texts, commentaries, psalms, prayers, early novelas, diaries, etc. are all helpful in describing early Judao-Christian tradition and their beliefs.

For example, the “Apostolic Fathers” refers to a group of writings that were written either by someone who knew an apostle, or were written during the time an apostle may still have been alive. Papias for example, was a “hearer of John”. Clement was a convert who describes what Peter taught him about early Christian doctrines. What Papias and Clement tell us about early Christian Doctrine and tradition represents a very, very early version of Christian tradition. The specific things the apostle Peter tells Clement are indicative of early Christian traditions.

More sacred and secular texts have been discovered just in the 19th and 20th centuries than in all other centuries combined. Just as the Dead sea scrolls are restoring and correcting some of the lost portions of our biblical texts, the early Judao-Christian texts are restoring and correcting some of our assumptions about early Judao-Christian traditions.





3) The gnostics actually had the greater knowledge but the church destroyed in and so now it's lost. Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist
I’m not sure what you mean by any of these statements without further clarification. However, gnostics often had accurate data but inaccurate relationships. For example, even when using the same texts as non-gnostics, they interpret the meanings differently. I think modern gnostics nowadays also seem to interpret current scriptures differently in this same way though I know very little about modern gnostics.





4) ” The Jews were right. They had some knowledge about Jesus that has now been lost. “ Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

I very much agree with you on this. Jews (and christians) often assume that Judaism today is the same as Judaism anciently, whereas ancient descriptions demonstrate otherwise. For example : Justin martyr in his dialogue with trypho the jew maintained that the Jews had changed biblical references (OT) which would have made it more clear that Jesus was the awaited messiah. If some of the early Christian literature is correct (A&E, vitae, etc), then the Christian tradition where Adam was promised a redeemer would come to redeem him would indeed make Adam’s religion a “Christianity” in that he also awaited the christ as a redeemer. If this early christian tradition is true, then Judaism HAS lost data and clarity that might have allowed them to accept jesus as the messiah and redeemer of mankind.

It may have been in this context that Ignatius tells the Magnesions : “…Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity,...” (10:3). Perhaps he is referring to a concept that the Jews also evolved away from pure messianic “Christianity” that evolved into the “Judaism” we read about in later centuries.

If the Jewish history shows us anything, it is the constant and unrelenting tendency for even the most religious of us to stray and apostatize over time, only to have another prophet come and try to restore them to a more correct path, over and over and over. I do not think we should condemn the Jews for this since it is from them that we learn the important lesson that ALL of us have a tendency to stray from original religious instruction. As we filter religion through our biases as we try to make sense of and then interpret what religion and texts mean to us personally, we cannot help but change it over time.





5) “ The Mormons are right. The earliest mormons possessed some great knowledge that has now been lost. ” Pg 12, #111 Abrahamist

I’m not sure what you mean by “the Mormons are right”. I would agree that “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” (i.e. “Mormons”) seem to have the examples of the best doctrinal and textual correlations to the earliest Judao-Christian history I’ve ever seen.

For example : They retain a version of the early doctrine of pre-existence that is the most complete I've seen. Their “pearl of great price” text is parallel in many profound ways to the apocalypse of Abraham and is quite enochian (i.e. 2nd,3rd) in it's characteristics (though neither book was discovered and available to them as source material).

I think restorationist Christianity in general, (i.e. the christianities that are attempting to restore salvational doctrines of early the Judao-Christian religion) are most able to use the earliest Judao-Christian texts in a fairly seamless manner , (though I do not think that even their members are generally aware of this tremendous strength). However, I think even they have the same tendency to error as ALL of us have as individuals, though it is offset somewhat by their constant re-adjustment as they seek to be like early christianity.




RANPLEASANT : THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR OFFER TO PROVIDE A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION REGARDING THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF THE SPIRITS OF MANKIND BEFORE THE EARTH WAS EVEN CREATED. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DATA YOU OFFERED TO PROVIDE.



CLEARLY
eiacactzok

I wasn't claiming the gnostics, Jews or Mormons were right. I was being sarcastic. I was trying to demonstrate that any "lost knowledge" can be assigned to any group.

I read in one of your posts where you claimed that the early apostles had a teaching that is so much more clear than what we have today but has now been lost. My question is without actually having this knowledge so that we can evaluate it first had, we have no idea at all whether this "lost knowledge" really was knowledge or just a bunch of horse poop.

Also, without actually having access to this knowledge, we can't say whether it was lost or changed or not. Maybe this "lost knowledge" wasn't lost at all but is exactly what the church is doing today.

And all the historical evidence supports that. If you go back and read the letters and documents left behind by the early church fathers, it does seem that the early church was indeed the Church.

 

[Clearly]

Abrahamist :

read my posts again : My claim is NOT that such knowledge is LOST to and abandoned by ALL christianities, nor to historians who study ancient Judao-christian texts that describe these traditions which have been abandoned by the roman congregation.

My claim was that the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH abandoned the early traditions; that these traditions are no longer taught to their membership as articles of belief; that such traditions are lost TO THE ROMAN CATHOLICS. This process of abandonment is no different than the situation with protestants who have abandoned the traditions of purgatory or the decensus. THEY no longer have these doctrines which the roman catholics are correct in retaining. Such traditions are "lost" to the children of these protestants who no longer even hear of them in any clear form.




Abrahamist said : " I wasn't claiming the gnostics, Jews or Mormons were right. I was being sarcastic. I was trying to demonstrate that any "lost knowledge" can be assigned to any group. "

When I spoke of the gnostics, the Jews and the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (mormons), I was NOT being sarcastic or insincere. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints ( "mormons" or "Church of Jesus Christ of LDS") is correct in their tradition of pre-existence of spirits of mankind just as the early Judao-Christians held to. I was NOT being sarcastic when I spoke of the lesson of the Jews as a tendency for ALL individuals to slowly change religion as they interpret religion through their biases and personalities.





Abrahamist said : " I read in one of your posts where you claimed that the early apostles had a teaching that is so much more clear than what we have today but has now been lost. " - Perhaps you can look at the post you read and quote it? I don't think of a claim that I would have worded in the way you describe. If you can even give us a pg and post number we can look up my original statement? Thanks.




Abrahamist said : " Maybe this "lost knowledge" wasn't lost at all but is exactly what the church is doing today....And all the historical evidence supports that. "

Perhaps you can read over the posts of this relatively short thread. The historical evidence does NOT support the innovative changes the roman congregation made to traditions; evidence only partially supports the authentic doctrines the Roman congregation changed; and historical evidence shows that the later roman congregation came to abandon many authentic traditions held by the earliest Judao-Christianity (i.e. they no longer teach these traditions - the traditions have been "lost" to the Roman congregation, but not to historians or all Christianities and religions).

The roman catholic RANPLEASANT is apparently trying to find the information I asked regarding any authentic roman Catholic teaching regarding a tradition of pre-creation existence of spirits, conditions and characteristics of the spirits and conditions of the pre-mortal realm. Once he provides this information which he volunteered to give, we can once again, compare the depth and quality and breadth of Roman Catholic tradition to this early Judao-Christian tradition. If the two traditions don't match, then we will, once again, confirm that as well.



I also strongly agree with your point that all groups have some knowledge gaps. However it was the ROMAN CATHOLIC posters who made the claim that they were an exception to this principle, and had maintained doctrines and traditions UNCHANGED for 2000 years and that these unchanged traditions enhance their ability to interpret scriptures in the context of "sola scriptura vs Tradition".


Clearly
eiacactzok

 

[ranpleasant]

The roman catholic RANPLEASANT is apparently trying to find the information I asked...

Clearly

I am not doing any research for you. NONE! I don't owe you any effort. I don't have to prove anything to you. Do your own research. Go back to my first post and you will see a quote from a book that clearly states what Holy Tradition is. I highly suggest you read the book too.

Karl Keating noted in his book Catholicism and Fundamentalism that fundamentalists often write disproportionate long statements during discussion as a tactical way to winning arguments since most Catholics simply don't have to time to read several pages and to respond to every single thing stated. This is clearly the tactics that you have followed in this discussion. It is a cheap tactic! You are not trying to discuss what is and is not Holy Tradition. Instead you have been trying to disprove Holy Tradition.

As I said, you as a man cannot write enough to change what God has instituted.

Ran

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Without actually having access to this much greater detail and clarity and depth of tradition, how do you actually know this?

Boy, that is a fine argument...

 

[ranpleasant]

The roman catholic RANPLEASANT...

There is no such thing as a "Roman Catholic" church. However, there is the Holy Catholic Church, the bride of Jesus Christ, the only church created by Jesus Christ. As a member of the Holy Catholic Church I am just "Catholic".

Ran

 

[Clearly]

1) THE INSTRUCTION TO ASK FOR KNOWLEDGE (WHICH IS THEN REFUSED)

Ranpleasant says regarding Roman Catholic tradition : “ If you want to know more about Holy Tradition then ask. “ pg 11, # 108

Clearly takes him up on the offer for more information by asking for more information, saying : “ IF YOUR OFFER IS SINCERE, THEN IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO A HISTORICAL COMPARISON TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS WILLING TO PROVIDE ENOUGH INFORMATION REGARDING ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITIONS TO CONTINUE EXPLORING THESE HISTORICAL ISSUES. … You could start by describing the Catholic tradition regarding the existence of the spirits of all mankind (all men and women) BEFORE the creation of the earth. I claimed there is little depth and clarity and detail in any official catholic version of this tradition compared to the earliest Judao-Christianity. Root of Jesse indicated the depth and detail of this tradition are still retained in the catholic church. “. Pg 11, #109

Ranpleasant reveals in his very next posting in the thread : “ Clearly, I am not doing any research for you. NONE! I don't owe you any effort. I don't have to prove anything to you. Do your own research. Go back to my first post and you will see a quote from a book that clearly states what Holy Tradition is. I highly suggest you read the book too. “ Pg 12, #116


I admit that I am disappointed with your withdrawal for the “offer” for information since it was YOU who seemed to indicate that I had not asked for information on specific roman catholic traditions. It was in this context that I reminded you that I HAD asked for information from roman catholics that they simply refused to provide. After you offered information, Clearly said :


“ Readers who’ve followed this thread will see the deep irony in your offer. I have almost begged for more information and data from Catholics and have been unsuccessful in getting it.

I do not mind going through this process again with you, so that these principles of “innovated tradition, change in tradition, and loss of tradition” can be better understood and more deeply confirmed in the minds of forum historians and readers. However, if your “offer” for information is insincere, then we’ll simply find ourselves in the same situation as root of jesse and I find ourselves in. I asked for good data and receive the barest amount that can be seen as a reply, yet serves to deflect any deep examination.

For example, to demonstrate loss and differences between roman catholic tradition and early Judao-Christian traditions, I ASKED Root of Jesse :

[FONT=&quot]“ Will you describe the Roman Catholic tradition regarding the origin of man’s spirit from it’s consciousness to birth and what determines the moral and mental characteristics a spirit is born with “ pg 3, #30[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The sum total he was able or willing to offer was a single reference : "Before you were in the womb, I knew you" (post #32). That was it; the sum total of the roman catholic description of this early christian tradition. No explanation as to the origin of man’s spirits from its’ consciousness to birth, nothing regarding the determination of moral and mental characteristics; nothing regarding how long before birth a spirit lived; nothing but the single sentence.

I repeated my request for more information and offered to give him more time on pg 5, #41 asking “ … are you sure you don’t want to add some data to these descriptions since these descriptions of catholic doctrine on these subjects seems to be very superficial and lack detail? Let me know if you need more time on these descriptions,”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]He still was unable to come up with any more of a description of catholic tradition[/FONT][FONT=&quot] on this point. I ASKED AGAIN to see if he was able to add ANYTHING from catholic sources on the subject. In post # 44 saying :[/FONT][FONT=&quot]“ … [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Meanwhile, are you sure you don’t want to add more data regarding Catholic doctrine regarding the origin of mans spirit and it’s characteristics; the purpose of creation and concerning the origin of Lucifer and his motives? (since I plan to post on those later today…[/FONT][FONT=&quot]”[/FONT]

ROOT OF JESSE said "Before you were in the womb, I knew you.", this is not the depth of my knowledge, it is a summary. I don't have the time, nor the care to demonstrate how this refutes what you claim above. Pg 10, #96

Instead of the simple admission of lack of clear and significant amounts of data, he claimed he had little time nor cared to offer data. I felt this was simply another disingenuous deflection since readers saw how much time he had been spending on the forum in other posts. The roman Catholic pfaffenhofen was the only one who simply admitted that he did not know much about (or disbelieved) these early Judao-Christian traditions (I still think pfaffenhofen is to be commended and honored for this single act of honesty… I think it was brave and a good act)

When you and the roman catholic Pfaffenhofen disagreed regarding the value of tradition vs scripture in roman theology, I pointed out the inconsistency and again asked for information, saying : " IS there any consensus among the Forum roman Catholics as to what is the official correct roman Catholic doctrine on this point? Perhaps quotes from an official roman catholic source or text? "pg 10, #95

Still, to this day, no further significant illuminating information has been given. Even when Root of Jesse refused to publicly describe catholic doctrine regarding Lucifer and his fall in any depth that would allow a significant comparison, I AGAIN asked :


If Root of Jesse is unable to offer the Roman Catholic teaching on this subject in any depth, then ANY OTHER CATHOLIC WHO BELIEVES THEY HAVE THE SAME DOCTRINE AND DEPTH AS EARLY JUDAO-CHRISITANS HAD ARE WELCOME TO OFFER THE ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITIONS regarding these points so as to allow us to compare the roman catholic doctrine with the early Judao-Christian doctrine. (The doctrine of good - evil is one of the most basic of all religious doctrines.)#99

AGAIN, I received no new data from any catholic.

I DON'T WISH TO BE OFFENSIVE, BUT I DO WISH TO KNOW THAT YOUR OFFER FOR INFORMATION IS SINCERE. … Ranpleasant, If your offer is sincere, then I THANK YOU for the willingness to allow your tradition to be examined.


I wish you'd reconsider and simply provide the forum members with a description of the specific catholic tradition the catholics have claimed is "unchanged".



2) THE USED CAR SALESMAN APPROACH TO PROSELYTING RELIGION

Ranpleasant: Various roman catholics have offered several fantastic claims which are historically untrue; which have NO period data supporting them while there is a GREAT DEAL of data opposing these claims. And, they are trying to use these claims to support a position of superiority in their interpretation of scriptures. If you are going to make a historical CLAIM, you must expect SOMEONE is going to ask for DATA and EVIDENCE as to WHY you made the claim (especially one that is obviously erroneous)

It feels like the roman catholics are trying to sell doctrines the same way a shady used car salesman might sell cars. You are offering a “very sweet deal of a tradition” that's “only used on Sundays” with wonderful mileage. But then no one is allowed to look closely at what you are trying to selling us.

If we on the forum ask to “look under the hood” of your tradition to see if all is in order, we are told by a catholic making the claim that “ I don't have the time, nor the care to demonstrate how this refutes what you claim above. “ Root of Jesse Pg 10, #96. If the forum wants to “look at the tires “ to see how historical they are, we are told “ [FONT=&quot]I sincere[ly] do not care much what the Early Church believed. They are all dead and most of them I do not know.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] Pfaffenhoven in post #66. If we as buyers want to point out a problem we note with the catholic claim that an erroneous tradition causes errors in interpretation, we are told “ First, we do not care about the interpretation of the Scriptures.." Pfaffenhofen #70.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This feeling of undeserved historical superiority among catholics is a mirage. It may seem somehow "historical" upon first glance, but then as one looks closer and closer to the suposed time it originated, its historicity is gone.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If you are not going to allow us to either look at or examine your claims then you have no right to criticize anyone who rejects these claims as someone simply repeating something an organisation taught them to say, but which they have never deeply examined.

If you are NOT going to provide data we others request, then it is disingenuous to even make the offer of information, as though you had intention to provide it.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Clearly
einenetwru
[/FONT]

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

There is no such thing as a "Roman Catholic" church. However, there is the Holy Catholic Church, the bride of Jesus Christ, the only church created by Jesus Christ. As a member of the Holy Catholic Church I am just "Catholic".

Ran

I prefer Christian. But the Protestant took it...