My Jesus Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Which is to say: we've got proof that the "war in heaven" did not originate in Judaism.

Right -- and the war in Iraq didn't originate on Guam.

The war in heaven originated ... let me guess ... in [second] heaven?

 

[AV1611VET]

With an omnipotent, singular (or triune) deity, the very concept of a war in heaven becomes nonsensical,

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

In Daniel 10, Daniel is beside the river Hiddekel, and he was praying about the upcoming deliverance of his people; since the 70th year of captivity was approaching.

He had been praying three weeks with no answer.

Finally, by the river Hiddekel, an angel gets through to him and tells him that God had heard his prayer from the very first, but the angels couldn't get an answer down to him as Satan and his angels fought to prevent that from happening.

It took them summoning Michael the Archangel to come and get them "punched through" to deliever God's answer to Daniel.

THAT, I consider "war in heaven."

 

[the iconoclast]

Thank you for sharing your personal experience; I cannot deny personal experience, I've had my own experiences with Buddhism.

Hey there ananda

You are most welcome my gem. What personal experiences do you have? A couple should suffice for the time being.

One of the things we would say is that one of the most powerful forces in the universe is conscious intention, e.g. calling out for "Jesus" or "Krishna" in a fervent believer.

I didnt call for krishna.

Please indulge me, how is conscious motor intention linked to visions or the supernatural?

However, I do not see how such a personal experience makes you believe you heard from an infinite being vs. an extremely powerful yet limited being

That was something i wanted to devulge and not an example of 'hearing' from the ear. I wanted to give you a testimony.

Just a little something before i get to the point. I was taught how to pray and have opened my heart to christ many times. I know this feeling is from the Holy Spirit as i receive fruits of the Spirit when i focus to God. I have made a covenant and am stubborn for the our Lord Jesus.

Galatians 5
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. ..."

I think i already mentioned this. When God speaks to me it is in the form of the Holy Spirit. This experience is not audible in my heart by rather like a spiritual intuition , in my heart.

One example when i was younger, i used to play at the basket balls courts near my house. I would shoot hoops and praise God. I became quite accustomed to having a relationship with God over those years and felt the Spirit of God many a time at that court. This intuition feeling in my heart was familiar.

One day i happened to be shooting hoops on my own just before dark. A white ute rocked up and a older man stepped out woth his basketball. A the time i thought this was strange - why would a 40 something adult play basketball with a kid?

Then that familar sensation in the heart kicked in. It felt like it wanted me to leave that instant, soni [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] one more hoop and proceeded to leave. The man turned around and said to me that i didnt have to leave on his account. I replied and left.

20-30 yards across the park i turned around and noticed he left very much the same time i did. God saved me from a sexual predator, the intuition was telling me something in my heart, i interpreted the message with my heart.

I know its the Christian God and not a deva. As my experiences line up with Christianity, all roads do not lead to the same place.

How about you show me how these experiences link to an extremely powerful yet limited being and not the Christian God.

That is not how many early Buddhists like myself understand how devas interact with people.

Well my friend, how does a deva interact with you or an early buddhist?

Who created the earth?

My apologies, I thought I already answered the question here.

Ananda - "If that happened, the natural flipside conclusion is that - by limiting its revelation only to one or specific individuals, and not to everyone simultaneously - the being is preferentially hiding things from others, and again makes it also unworthy of attention."

That was more an accusation, we need an explanation. So please.

The original question was.

Icon - "You cannot perceive any other method of an infallible being communicating other that that?"

Why shouldnt the communication be personal?

I am not Hindu, and I am agnostic towards their gods. Devas, in Buddhism, are merely consciousnesses who have acquired greater power, lifespan, and pleasures because of former good kamma.

What are consciousnesses?

Why can there be nothing known about these devas? How come they have names?

When the good kamma which sustains their heavenly life expires, those devas will die and

How do you know this if you agnostic about them?

may very well be reborn as a lesser deva, human, animal, or even in the hell realms because they will be experiencing the fruits of other kamma. Likewise,

I thought the reason to seek nirvana was to escape the wheel. Does this mean there is an expiration date on enlightenment?

humans can cultivate good kamma which may propel our consciousness on to experience a deva existence.

How does one cultivate good kamma?

Cheers my friend.

 

[the iconoclast]

I did, and my answer to that can be gleaned from the very post you quoted:

Hey hey jane

Gleaned - you obtained the (information) from various sources, often with difficulty or do you mean you collected it gradually

We can reconstruct when these elements appeared where, and who borrowed from whom.

Please dont be shy my friend. Show me how you did so?

If you acknowledge the findings of philology in relation to Zoroastrianism in order to make your case ,you'd also have to acknowledge them in relation to the Jewish and Christian scriptures.

I do not acknowledge the findings of philopsy in relation to zoroastrianism and Christianity . What are these findings? Please show me the references?

Which is to say: we've got proof that the "war in heaven" did not originate in Judaism. There's a good chance that angels didn't, either.

What is this proof? Could you please indulge me?

With an omnipotent, singular (or triune) deity,

God is a trinity.

the very concept of a war in heaven becomes nonsensical, as the Rabbinical Jews realized.

You basically pointed it out yourself, iconoclast: any act of Satan can only happen with God's permission, so the very concept of "rebelling against god" becomes anathema.

Have you considered that the war on heaven was before job and before Genesis?

God could undo or prevent any damage effortlessly, and any damage that DOES happen takes place with the deity's knowledge and consent.

What do you mean here?

Cheers you.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

In Daniel 10, Daniel is beside the river Hiddekel, and he was praying about the upcoming deliverance of his people; since the 70th year of captivity was approaching.

He had been praying three weeks with no answer.

Finally, by the river Hiddekel, an angel gets through to him and tells him that God had heard his prayer from the very first, but the angels couldn't get an answer down to him as Satan and his angels fought to prevent that from happening.

It took them summoning Michael the Archangel to come and get them "punched through" to deliever God's answer to Daniel.

THAT, I consider "war in heaven."

Funny that you should mention Daniel 10, since that is a place where God's angels do battle with their Persian equivalent. Not Satan. Not demons. Not fallen angels. A "prince" of Persia, akin to the "prince" Michael who helped the messenger best their opponent.

 

[AV1611VET]

Funny that you should mention Daniel 10, since that is a place where God's angels do battle with their Persian equivalent. Not Satan. Not demons. Not fallen angels. A "prince" of Persia, akin to the "prince" Michael who helped the messenger best their opponent.

What?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Iconoclast, in my roughly 15 years on these forums, I've learned to distinguish between those who really want to dig deeper and require sources, and those who'll just dismiss whatever academic research is presented to them and only want to antagonise whatever does not fit their pre-conceived world view.

As a rule of thumb, I do not treat internet discussions the way I'd treat a scholarly publication. I'm happy to share, but do not feel compelled to do the legwork for every commenter who doesn't even bother to look at google by himself.
Besides, I'm not revealing deep mysteries or controversial findings here. All of what I wrote is readily available in the form of scholarly research, with much better printed publications that anything I could whip up as an online resource.

I'll address your final question, though:

In a hypothetical scenario where an all-powerful, all-knowing entity exists, there can be no opposition unless the opponent was equally powerful and knowledgeable. Take that away, and every act of "going against the deity's will" happens with the deity's knowledge and - ultimately - consent. Otherwise, the act would be impossible by default.

Here, let me give you an example.

I'm omnipotent.
Someone tries to set a house on fire.
No matter what happens next, that house will not burn unless I allow it to - at which point I can no longer claim that I do not want that to happen, since I could have prevented or undone it in a billion different ways. Thus, the notion of "going against my will" becomes meaningless. Nothing happens unless I allow it. No opposition could ever harm me, ever jeopardise my plans, ever cause any effect that is not sanctioned by me.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

What?

Look at that passage again. There is no mention of Satan, or fallen angels, or demons, or rebels cast out of heaven. Only a "prince of Persia", who is bested with the help of the "prince" Michael after more than twenty days' delay.

That's not a mortal aristocrat. That's a reference to Zoroastrian angels, from a time when the Hebrew religion was closer to henotheism than monotheism, and other gods were still considered real, if less powerful.

 

[AV1611VET]

Look at that passage again. There is no mention of Satan, or fallen angels, or demons, or rebels cast out of heaven. Only a "prince of Persia", who is bested with the help of the "prince" Michael after more than twenty days' delay.

Did you read the whole chapter?

That's not a mortal aristocrat. That's a reference to Zoroastrian angels, from a time when the Hebrew religion was closer to henotheism than monotheism, and other gods were still considered real, if less powerful.

Then it wasn't the "Hebrew religion" as the "Hebrew religion" started out.

It might be some concoction of the Hebrew religion -- that is, the Hebrew religion with "tares sown among its wheat," but if, as you say, there was a time when the Hebrew religion was closer to something else, then that something else needed to move aside, lest it contaminates them.

Which, of course, we know it did (again, Ezekiel 8).

Thus God's judgment and the diaspora.

Today we see the same thing happening with the New Testament churches, and the technical term for this phenomenon is "psychoheresy," defined as the intrusion of modern-day philosophies into our doctrine.

So if Zoroastrianism indeed penetrated into Judaism, then it was invited in as an act of psychoheresy.

 

[ananda]

What personal experiences do you have? A couple should suffice for the time being.

The most important experience has been this: by practicing the Buddhist Eightfold Path, I have substantially reduced my experience of suffering. I am not aware of any Christian who have followed the Christian path and have experienced an increase in lifespan.

Please indulge me, how is conscious motor intention linked to visions or the supernatural?

In Buddhism, conscious intention is said to power all stratas of reality.

This experience is not audible in my heart by rather like a spiritual intuition , in my heart ... How about you show me how these experiences link to an extremely powerful yet limited being and not the Christian God.

I don't know either way. If your intuition knows that you heard from an infinite being, then that is personal knowledge. Others cannot know if your experience originated from a powerful yet limited being, or an infinite being. I'm merely giving an alternate explanation for such experiences.

Well my friend, how does a deva interact with you or an early buddhist?

How & why does anyone interact with anyone else? Do we normally interact with lesser beings, like bacteria?

Who created the earth?

That question is irrelevant, as we cannot know the answer; speculation is irrelevant. The far more important question is "what is suffering & what is its cessation?", as the Buddha rightly taught.

Why shouldnt the communication be personal?

If belief is based on personal communication from/with your deity, then evangelism, faith, and scripture becomes irrelevant.

What are consciousnesses?

The conscious awareness experiences the results of its kamma. It may experience heavenly states, the human state, hellish states, etc.

Why can there be nothing known about these devas? How come they have names?

Apparently they can be known, through certain practices prescribed by the Buddha. The Buddha describes how individuals, after cultivating a meditative jhanic state, experienced a Brahma deity, and then believed they've contacted the Creator and Father God:

"Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘We were created by Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. He is constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But we who have been created by him—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’" (DN1)​

How do you know this if you agnostic about them?

I don't know this yet, I was simply describing what I understood Buddhism teaches.

I thought the reason to seek nirvana was to escape the wheel. Does this mean there is an expiration date on enlightenment?

There is no expiration date.

How does one cultivate good kamma?

Good kamma includes skillful intentions & choices through the body, speech, or mind and involves non-greed, non-aversion, and non-delusion.

 

[AV1611VET]

The most important experience has been this: by practicing the Buddhist Eightfold Path, I have substantially reduced my experience of suffering.

Is this part of your Eightfold Path?

 

[ananda]

Is this part of your Eightfold Path?

He was a Mahayana monk. I don't practice Mahayana, as my signature states.

Generally speaking, the Eightfold Path is not really part of Mahayana.

 

[dlamberth]

Hey hey my dear.

Check out my reply to ananda and tell me what you think?

It's a relative thing I guess. Your not even coming close to what I'm pointing towards as God being one's reality. Do you see God? Smell God? Touch God? Hear God? Cry with God? Laugh with God? Dance with God?

Well my friend are you a lover of the Christian God?

I'm a Lover of the God Jesus prayed to. Which to me is a different God than the Christian God.

When you see the soul of human beings you see an activity of God?

That's correct. Don't you?

Does the Spirit of God live, exist, merge, mix or is inherent in nature, or is He sitting in His throne in heaven with Jesus by His side?

Of the options given, I say more like inherent is the essence of Creation itSelf.

Please excuse me my friend. That didnt really answer my question.

Well, I think I did. But I guess I'm not understanding what kind of answer your looking for. Can you help me with that?

What was this event or occurrence - which leaves an impression on someone - of the Light of God with in the essence of this Creation?

Thank you for the suggestion however i will not be reading any of these recommendations.

I gave you references to your question. If you choose to not to explore them, that's OK. I get it.

It seems you have read them. Please tell me.

I have been. But are you listening?

Please give me your personal experience in relation to

What event or occurance proved that the spirit of the Christian God exists in nature? ( eg plants, trees, animals, rocks, etc,)

That's what I've been doing. But Mysticism isn't your interest or curiosity, so we talk pass each other

The essence of Christ exists in nature?

And ALL of Creation.

What God stuff?

The stuff that is God.

What is Christ essence of God?

Light.

What is higher than God?

Higher than the beliefs, dogmas and perceptions that make up our beliefs of God, no matter what religion.

What is this source you speak of?

Pure source of the Creation.

I can assure you baptists do not consider Christianity compatible with dualism. I think you have misinterpreted what is going on. Ask me?

I didn't say that Baptist do. You asked which denomination and being unsure I suggest Baptist.

This is not dualism and i think you may have misunderstood. Fending of temptation or demon possession does not equate to equal and opposing forces.

Christianity is not compatible with dualism. Satan is not equal to God - as seen in the Book of Job - in fact he needs permission from God. Satan is a liar, the accuser and the tempter.

He tried and failed to usurp heaven. He was given a verdict and will face punishment. I wouldnt call this relationship equal or a balanced opposition. Satan was an angel who wanted to be in place of God and was unsuccessful.

Another defintion for dualism

dualism means the belief in two supreme opposed powers or gods, or sets of divine or demonic beings, that caused the world to exist.

Demonic beings were not instrumental in the creation of the world.

Sin (bad) is disobedience to God and is not a dimetric or equally opposing force. Darkness is the absence of light.

We are talking past each other again. In Dualism I look at how we experience the whole of life as we walk through it. For instance, is that Tree a separate thing apart from me? Or is it the Tree and I One. We in the West see everthing in dualastic perspective. The indigenous cultures on the other hand see everything as a verb, very alive, one and whole.

Do you believe in the birth, life, death and ressurection of Christ?

I can see a person named "Jesus" being born. The Christ aspect I experience as cosmic in reach such that the whole of the Universe is the body of Christ.

Do you believe He is the Son of God and there is no other gods but God. He has revealed Himself as God the Father, God the Son and God the Spirit?

What I "see" is that God is way too big to fit into any single religion. And that God is just as alive and vibrant in others of other spiritual paths.

Do you accept Jesus into your heart?

It's more who Jesus prayed to that I accept into my Heart. At the same time, I've spent quite a bit of time in Jesus working with the Heart of Christ. I suspect you don't know what I mean by that.

Would you confidently call your self a disciple of Jesus - a Christian?

What I confidently do is to call myself a Lover of God.

Satan has been let loose and out there accusing, temting and lying. Still this does not equate to equally opposed and mutual to existance.

Satan isn't a part of my life, only God is.

Please excuse me. So far you really havent proven anything. I have the dictionary and sound Christian doctrine to back me.

That's nice. I'm more interested in the exploration of the mystery than doctrine. And, I've never tried to "prove" anything. All I've done is to share my own spiritual experience. If your looking to tangle, I'm not your guy. If you have a true curiosity as you said in the beginning, than maybe we have something to work with.

And to more directly answer a previous question, yes, I'm a Panenthest. Thus my comment that everywhere I look, there God is. You may not of understood that.

 

[the iconoclast]

Iconoclast, in my roughly 15 years on these forums, I've learned to distinguish between those who really want to dig deeper and require sources, and those who'll just dismiss whatever academic research is presented to them and only want to antagonise whatever does not fit their pre-conceived world view.

As a rule of thumb, I do not treat internet discussions the way I'd treat a scholarly publication. I'm happy to share, but do not feel compelled to do the legwork for every commenter who doesn't even bother to look at google by himself.
Besides, I'm not revealing deep mysteries or controversial findings here. All of what I wrote is readily available in the form of scholarly research, with much better printed publications that anything I could whip up as an online resource.

I'll address your final question, though:

In a hypothetical scenario where an all-powerful, all-knowing entity exists, there can be no opposition unless the opponent was equally powerful and knowledgeable. Take that away, and every act of "going against the deity's will" happens with the deity's knowledge and - ultimately - consent. Otherwise, the act would be impossible by default.

Here, let me give you an example.

I'm omnipotent.
Someone tries to set a house on fire.
No matter what happens next, that house will not burn unless I allow it to - at which point I can no longer claim that I do not want that to happen, since I could have prevented or undone it in a billion different ways. Thus, the notion of "going against my will" becomes meaningless. Nothing happens unless I allow it. No opposition could ever harm me, ever jeopardise my plans, ever cause any effect that is not sanctioned by me.

Hey hey jane.

In other words you cannot back up your claims. You like to make statements and expect me to accept it as truth.

Show me your academic research???

Cheers

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Friedrich Reiterer: Angels: the concept of celestial beings - origins, development and reception. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007.

Jürgen van Oorschot: The origins of Yahwism. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017

 

[dlamberth]

Is this part of your Eightfold Path?

Was he suffering? If not, the Eightfold Path served him well in his protest and martyrdom. It also had international effect on America's association with the Vietnamese Diem government back in 1963. Though the picture is black and white, the effect of the Eightfold Path isn't.

 

[the iconoclast]

Friedrich Reiterer: Angels: the concept of celestial beings - origins, development and reception. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007.

Jürgen van Oorschot: The origins of Yahwism. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017

Hey hey jane.

Why should i accept these men as authority and accept their theories as the truth?

Are these men your authority?

Could you provide an excerpt that is compelling?

Cheers

 

[Dirk1540]

Is the Biblical Jesus Christ a man-made invention?

I think the question as it is worded is just pretty much asking people "Are you a Christian?" But if you erase the word 'Biblical' the question would more so be a question about hyper historical skepticism.

 

[AV1611VET]

Was he suffering? If not, the Eightfold Path served him well in his protest and martyrdom.

Martyrs don't kill themselves.

Glorifying what this oddball did just reinforces the martyr complex and insures more "kamikazes" will follow suit.

Were Klebold & Harris martyrs? was Adolf Hitler a martyr?

Absolutely not.

 

[dlamberth]

Martyrs don't kill themselves.

Glorifying what this oddball did just reinforces the martyr complex and insures more "kamikazes" will follow suit.

Were Klebold & Harris martyrs? was Adolf Hitler a martyr?

Absolutely not.

I hardly think that a monk giving his life protesting a corrupt Hitler like regime fits into the same category.