Swedenborg

[-57]

Thank you.

Your own interpretations are born of the Sola Scriptura Doctrine of Luther via the Protestant Reformation. There is also the more nuanced view of scripture and of its interpretation of the Catholic Church ( I actually quoted this in full on another thread. As I am restricted to my Kindle for a few days I am unable to trace it )

I only say two things here. There are indeed many Christians who would recognise the significance of what I originally posted - the books are out there and appear to sell well.

Second, in the end my own interest in interpretative disputes between Christians is limited - for me the entire Bible, like all other Scriptures of all other Faiths, is the work of human hands and human thoughts.

(As a Pure Land Buddhist, this does not preclude me from finding enlightening aspects within them. Nor in my grandchildren)

Thank you for your engagement.

Problem being...is the books you mention contradict the bible on many issues. Getting back to Swedenborgism...who claims to be Christian...we can easily recognize his writing are not Christian in many aspects.

 

[Fizzywig]

Problem being...is the books you mention contradict the bible on many issues

They contradict YOUR interpretation of the Bible on many issues.

But I will leave it there. I have explained the limits of my own interest.

Thanks

 

[-57]

They contradict YOUR interpretation of the Bible on many issues.

But I will leave it there. I have explained the limits of my own interest.

Thanks

When it comes to salvation the bible is pretty clear. So clear that when a false salvation is presented the false salvation sticks out like a sore thumb.
The problem I have is when people like to pick and choose scripture bending it a bit to make it conform to belief system that is not presented in the bible. Swedenborg has done that on many issues.

 

[Fizzywig]

When it comes to salvation the bible is pretty clear. So clear that when a false salvation is presented the false salvation sticks out like a sore thumb.
The problem I have is when people like to pick and choose...

No it is not. There are various issues ( e.g. of the need for baptism or not ) that have been a constant source of dispute between the various Protestant denominations and between Catholic and Protestant.

You yourself pick and choose.

Happily I no longer look towards my own interpretation ANY book as affecting my own" salvation" .

Thanks.

 

[-57]

No it is not. There are various issues ( e.g. of the need for baptism or not ) that have been a constant source of dispute between the various Protestant denominations and between Catholic and Protestant.

You yourself pick and choose.

Happily I no longer look towards my own interpretation ANY book as affecting my own" salvation" .

Thanks.

There always will be dispute. In the above I see one view as correct and the other as incorrect....both can't be correct.
Swedenborgism would align more with the Protestant view rather than the catholic view.

 

[awitch]

Basics:

• God is infinitely loving and at the center of every life.

Is he at the center of the life of abused, diseased, and starving children who die slow painful deaths? If he's supposed to be infinitely loving, then, no, I don't think so.

Truth is love in action. Actions performed out of love are genuine expressions in a physical form of what love means.

This sounds like a failed attempt to sound really deep and intellectual.

There is one God whose essence is Divine Love and Wisdom. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all aspects of God just as body, mind, and soul are all aspects of one person.

My personal belief happens to entail multiple deities with unique personalities so I'll pass on this one.

The Bible is the inspired Word of God that provides inspiration and help to lead better and more fulfilling lives. The literal sense of Scripture tells the story of the people of God, and contains a deeper meaning that illumines the journey of the human soul.

Sure the Bible has some good stuff in it, but it also has a lot of stuff that I find horrifyingly bad. A real word of god, or even a real inspired word of god could never be wielded as a weapon to take away/deny people rights or justify bigotry and violence. Again, especially if it supposedly came from an infinitely loving god.

People are essentially spirits clothed with material bodies. At death, the material body is laid aside and the person continues to live on in the world of spirit choosing a heavenly life or a hellish one, based on the quality of life choices made here.

I reject the idea of an eternal heaven and hell. Any speculation of an afterlife is really wishful thinking.

God gives everyone the freedom to choose their beliefs and live their lives accordingly.

I'll agree with that.

Salvation is available for people of all religions.

I don't personally believe salvation is a thing, however, I expect deities to appreciate any sincere attempt to contact the divine. Additionally, they are cool with atheists as well because, as mentioned above, gods give everyone the freedom to choose and believe accordingly.

The Second Coming has taken place—and in fact still is taking place. It is not an actual physical appearance of the Lord, but rather his return in spirit and truth that is being effected as a present reality.

This sounds scripturaly based and since I don't really adhere to Biblical scripture, I'm going to pass.

 

[Fizzywig]

There always will be dispute. In the above I see one view as correct and the other as incorrect....both can't be correct.
Swedenborgism would align more with the Protestant view rather than the catholic view.

Indeed, there will always be dispute.

Until it is seen that all are saved by grace. Not by allegiance to particular interpretations of a book.

Yet please dispute THAT if you so wish

I have engaged enough on this thread.

Thanks

 

[Albion]

Swedenborgism would align more with the Protestant view rather than the catholic view.

Not necessarily.

If we are saved in accordance with our works, it's more Catholic than Protestant.

If revelation is given to Swedenborg and this is considered, along with the Bible, to be the word of God, that's more Catholic than Protestant.

 

[-57]

Indeed, there will always be dispute.

Until it is seen that all are saved by grace. Not by allegiance to particular interpretations of a book.

Yet please dispute THAT if you so wish

I have engaged enough on this thread.

Thanks

I don't disagree...people are saved by the gift of faith and grace. That's what the bible teaches. No special interpretation needed.

 

[-57]

Not necessarily.

If we are saved in accordance with our works, it's more Catholic than Protestant.

If revelation is given to Swedenborg and this is considered, along with the Bible, to be the word of God, that's more Catholic than Protestant.

My bad....the discussion was pertaining to water baptism.
I also agree with what you said, swedenborgism is works related and more close to the Catholic Church on that issue.

 

[Arthra]

I think Emanuel Swedenborg had some valid insights and he also had a scientific background in his time.. also he influenced Suzuki:

http://www.quantuminteractive.net/q...swedenborg/swedenborg-influence-on-suzuki.htm

The first American Baha'i was a Swedenborgian. Ralph Waldo Emerson called him "the Aristotle of the North."

 

[Albion]

It's unfortunate that we list the names of people who were "influenced by" Swedenborg, because that suggests that they accepted most of his teachings. In reality, most of them held beliefs that were nothing like those that Swedenborg emphasized. But they took inspiration from him in one way or another, which, however, is quite a different matter.

 

[Fizzywig]

I think Emanuel Swedenborg had some valid insights and he also had a scientific background in his time.. also he influenced Suzuki:

http://www.quantuminteractive.net/q...swedenborg/swedenborg-influence-on-suzuki.htm

The first American Baha'i was a Swedenborgian. Ralph Waldo Emerson called him "the Aristotle of the North."

I actually have a little ebook cheapy, "Swedenborg: Buddha of the North" by Suzuki. I understand it was written in Suzuki's early years when he was eagerly abdorbing a lot of western religious ideas and writings. Unfortunately I have not given the book more than a cursory glance, having bigger fish to fry, such as 'The Hungry Caterpillar" and "Willy Wonka".

Thank you for the link.

 

[nightflight]

Swedenborg also taught that the apostle Paul was in hell, that his teaching of salvation by grace was wrong.

http://spiritualpracticeandconsciousness.blogspot.com/2010/10/swedenborg-on-st-paul.html

I think that's nuts, since Paul was the major factor in the early spread of Christianity.

 

[Chesterton]

Swedenborg also taught that the apostle Paul was in hell, that his teaching of salvation by grace was wrong.

http://spiritualpracticeandconsciousness.blogspot.com/2010/10/swedenborg-on-st-paul.html

I think that's nuts, since Paul was the major factor in the early spread of Christianity.

Wow, did not know that. Big red flag to say the least.

Interesting article. But being ‘attacked by adulterers’ in your sleep? I could think of worse people to be attacked by.

 

[Albion]

Wow, did not know that. Big red flag to say the least.

Interesting article. But being ‘attacked by adulterers’ in your sleep? I could think of worse people to be attacked by.

By the way, we're told that this material comes from Swedenborg's diaries. He could be entirely wrong about all of this information and it wouldn't mean much except for what we might think of him as an individual. His published works, OTOH, are what he and his followers consider to be a new testament, divine revelation. That's the religion.

 

[Chesterton]

By the way, we're told that this material comes from Swedenborg's diaries. He could be entirely wrong about all of this information and it wouldn't mean much except for what we might think of him as an individual. His published works, OTOH, are what he and his followers consider to be a new testament, divine revelation. That's the religion.

Yeah I knew that about his writings. So, he'll have to get in line with the other prophets who have "official published" new gospel.

 

[Albion]

Yeah I knew that about his writings. So, he'll have to get in line with the other prophets who have "official published" new gospel.

Maybe, but there is a difference. Self-proclaimed prophets typically do not deliver a third Testament of Holy Scripture but instead deal in lesser info. They do, however, seem to cultivate the devotion of those who believe them. Swedenborg, on the other hand, claimed to have been the conduit for a new Testament but was quite unimpressed with himself and had no idea why God had chosen him to be the one to do this.

 

[Chesterton]

Maybe, but there is a difference. Self-proclaimed prophets typically do not deliver a third Testament of Holy Scripture but instead deal in lesser info.

Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, but their "info" usually gets "canonized", or deemed to be official by their followers.

They do, however, seem to cultivate the devotion of those who believe them. Swedenborg, on the other hand, claimed to have been the conduit for a new Testament but was quite unimpressed with himself and had no idea why God had chosen him to be the one to do this.

You're saying he expressed humility? So did Muhammad, Ellen White, Joe Smith, et al.

 

[Albion]

Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, but their "info" usually gets "canonized", or deemed to be official by their followers.

Well, there's no set and unalterable pattern, of course, but the nature of Swedenborg's revelations was way above what the ordinary prophet, whether genuine or not, reveals. That makes him either more important or, if we look at it the other way, much less credible.

You're saying he expressed humility? So did Muhammad, Ellen White, Joe Smith, et al.

There's no comparison. Really.