It's a False Doctrine That People Go To Heaven Immediately After Death

[MarcATL]

How do you know? Have you died?

I base all my beliefs on God's Word...The Bible.

What do you base your beliefs on sir?

I am willing to bet you don't actually base your beliefs on the Bible. One of the names of God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Since He is God of the living, not the dead, those people are obviously alive right now. Then we have the transfiguration where Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus before Peter, James, and John.

Have you thought about John 3:36 and 11:26?

Let us examine one particular verse, John 6:47.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

The verb to be in that sentence is in the present active indicative tense, which means that the person is presently doing the action.

Present Active Indicative

Unless you are willing to argue that Jesus did not mean what he said you are going to have a hard time justifying soul sleep.

John 3:36, John 3:36 KJV - He that believeth on the Son hath - Bible Gateway

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Not sure what that has to do w/the discussion, it covers what to do to have salvation, which is to believe in Jesus, doesn't cover the state of the dead. So scratch one for you.

John 11:26, John 11:26 KJV - And whosoever liveth and believeth in - Bible Gateway

And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Again, same thing, doesn't address anything with death. Scratch two.

John 6:47, John 6:47 KJV - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that - Bible Gateway

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

Again, on the topic of salvation and the path to eternal life.

Dude...what conversation are you having? Are you cognizant? Sane? In your right mental faculties?

None of these verses address the issue at hand, which is the state of the dead....WAKE UP!!!

You don't know what you're talking about...dot you?

Sheesh!!!



BTW, I'm no Jehovah's Witness, I celebrate birthdays and I don't have issues with blood transfusions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What happened Marc, find out that the John class didn't tell you everything?

What's your answer to Eccl. 9:5, Ecclesiastes 9:5 KJV - For the living know that they shall - Bible Gateway ??

And Rev. 22:12, Revelation 22:12 KJV - And, behold, I come quickly; and my - Bible Gateway ??

Like I always say, most everything can be sorted out in Genesis.

Let's take a look at what it means to be a living soul, aka living being.

Gen. 2:7 sorts that out for us quite nicely, Genesis 2:7 KJV - And the LORD God formed man of the dust - Bible Gateway

What we have here is a formula, as in 1 + 1 = 2

In this case the formula is dust + God's breath = living soul.

Dust w/o God's breath isn't a soul.
God's breath w/o the dust isn't a soul.
It's the two combined that makes a soul.
Once the two are separated the dusts returns to dust. Hence the term dust to dust.
The breath returns to God, not the soul, as we see in Eccl. 12:7, Ecclesiastes 12:7 KJV - Then shall the dust return to the earth - Bible Gateway. Again, Eccl. 9:5 covers the state of the dead quite directly as seen above.

As I stated before, the confusion on the state of the dead was introduced by the Roman Catholic Church who invented purgatory, another mixture of pagan beliefs. It filtered through the rest of Christian denominations as such, however, it's not Biblically based.

Why do I need an answer? Did I say that one particular interpretation is more right than another? The simple fact is that any theology that does not deal with the bible and all of its verses is going to be flawed.

Jesus said that anyone that believes in him possesses eternal life now, not at some vague point in the future. That is far from the only fault with the soul sleep doctrine, but it is the one that you have to deal with if you are going to insist that you are correctly interpreting the Bible and that everyone who does not agree with you is wrong. Unfortunately, you really have no idea how to deal with a doctrinal challenge, you are taught never to question the John class, and that even reading things that do not come from them is wrong. Could that be because they don't want you to think for yourself?

 

[MarcATL]

What happened Marc, find out that the John class didn't tell you everything?

What's your answer to Eccl. 9:5, Ecclesiastes 9:5 KJV - For the living know that they shall - Bible Gateway ??

And Rev. 22:12, Revelation 22:12 KJV - And, behold, I come quickly; and my - Bible Gateway ??

Like I always say, most everything can be sorted out in Genesis.

Let's take a look at what it means to be a living soul, aka living being.

Gen. 2:7 sorts that out for us quite nicely, Genesis 2:7 KJV - And the LORD God formed man of the dust - Bible Gateway

What we have here is a formula, as in 1 + 1 = 2

In this case the formula is dust + God's breath = living soul.

Dust w/o God's breath isn't a soul.
God's breath w/o the dust isn't a soul.
It's the two combined that makes a soul.
Once the two are separated the dusts returns to dust. Hence the term dust to dust.
The breath returns to God, not the soul, as we see in Eccl. 12:7, Ecclesiastes 12:7 KJV - Then shall the dust return to the earth - Bible Gateway. Again, Eccl. 9:5 covers the state of the dead quite directly as seen above.

As I stated before, the confusion on the state of the dead was introduced by the Roman Catholic Church who invented purgatory, another mixture of pagan beliefs. It filtered through the rest of Christian denominations as such, however, it's not Biblically based.

Why do I need an answer? Did I say that one particular interpretation is more right than another? The simple fact is that any theology that does not deal with the bible and all of its verses is going to be flawed.

Jesus said that anyone that believes in him possesses eternal life now, not at some vague point in the future. That is far from the only fault with the soul sleep doctrine, but it is the one that you have to deal with if you are going to insist that you are correctly interpreting the Bible and that everyone who does not agree with you is wrong. Unfortunately, you really have no idea how to deal with a doctrinal challenge, you are taught never to question the John class, and that even reading things that do not come from them is wrong. Could that be because they don't want you to think for yourself?

Quantum, if you are indeed a student of the Bible, you should be aware of the precept that states that Scripture interprets Scripture. That means that one uses Scripture to help you to interpret other ones, meaning that they all go together, which ultimately means that they aren't contradictory, as many falsely believe.

What actually happens is, that instead of Scripture contradacting Scrtipture, Scripture is falsely interpreted by the reader/believer, it gets regurgitated and perpetuated until it becomes a solid belief and doctrine for many. That's how it goes down.

With that being said, you should answer the question, because they all go together. The fact that you won't or can't rather, speaks volumes.

Now, you've brought up some John texts which speak about salvation, eternal life. You just repeated the one that says to have eternal life you just have to believe in Jesus. And you're using it in a context in a discussion of the state of the dead. What this tells me is that you believe in the "once-saved, always saved" doctrine. Interesting. Because that purports that at the time of your accepting Christ as your personal Lord and savior you are then awarded eternal life and become an eternal being from that point on. That belief is so far off-base it's not even funny.

Again, ignoring all the other texts that specifically address death, salvation and the second coming. The Lord said that he's coming and His reward is coming with Him. What does that tell you Quantum?

Think for a change, don't react....respond.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I base all my beliefs on God's Word...The Bible.

What do you base your beliefs on sir?

I am willing to bet you don't actually base your beliefs on the Bible. One of the names of God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Since He is God of the living, not the dead, those people are obviously alive right now. Then we have the transfiguration where Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus before Peter, James, and John.

Have you thought about John 3:36 and 11:26?

Let us examine one particular verse, John 6:47.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

The verb to be in that sentence is in the present active indicative tense, which means that the person is presently doing the action.

Present Active Indicative

Unless you are willing to argue that Jesus did not mean what he said you are going to have a hard time justifying soul sleep.

John 3:36, John 3:36 KJV - He that believeth on the Son hath - Bible Gateway

Not sure what that has to do w/the discussion, it covers what to do to have salvation, which is to believe in Jesus, doesn't cover the state of the dead. So scratch one for you.

John 11:26, John 11:26 KJV - And whosoever liveth and believeth in - Bible Gateway

And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Again, same thing, doesn't address anything with death. Scratch two.

John 6:47, John 6:47 KJV - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that - Bible Gateway

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

Again, on the topic of salvation and the path to eternal life.

Dude...what conversation are you having? Are you cognizant? Sane? In your right mental faculties?

None of these verses address the issue at hand, which is the state of the dead....WAKE UP!!!

You don't know what you're talking about...dot you?

Sheesh!!!



BTW, I'm no Jehovah's Witness, I celebrate birthdays and I don't have issues with blood transfusions.

I actually linked to an article explaining the Greek present active indicative tense for you, try reading. The Scriptures you cited actually reinforce my argument. In fact, the second aorist tense used in John 11:26 actually weakens your position because it implies that it is a continuous action from the time Jesus is speaking and continuing on without interruption into the future.

καὶ πᾶς ὁ ζῶν καὶ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ οὐ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα πιστεύεις τοῦτο

Do you remember posting this?

Good interpretation of Scripture includes at least three things.
1. What's the context of the Scripture
2. What was God saying to the people then
3. What's God saying to/mean for us today

If you can't deal with the original language of the Scripture how do you expect to understand what God was saying?

 

[Avatar4321]

Or hell for that matter.

You guys do realize that don't you?

I'm here watching the service live and it's just one false doctrine after the other.

Christiandom as it's today is in a state of confusion.

Depends how you define heaven or hell. If you are talking about our Final judgment, you are absolutely correct. We are not judged until the resurrection from the dead.

After we die, the righteous go to paradise, the wicked go to prison. You can view this as a heaven/hell situation or purgatory. It doesn't matter what you call it. There we await the resurrection of the dead.

We know this because Christ promised the theif on the cross that they would meet that day, the day they died in paradise. Yet, we also know that Christ didnt rise until 3 days after He died and we have no clue whether the theif has been raised yet at all.

So we know that a paradise exists after death, yet prior to the resurrection. Peter described the place of the wicked who have died and where Christ preached deliverence to the wicked as prison. Christ's death and appearance in the place where the dead are awaiting was where He preached and declared deliverence to those in prison. He tore down the barrier between the righteous and wicked and preached repentence. Because until the day of Judgment, we can repent.

So yes, much of the Christian world is ignorance. Even those who do know, don't know as much. God will reveal more in His own due time.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What's your answer to Eccl. 9:5, Ecclesiastes 9:5 KJV - For the living know that they shall - Bible Gateway ??

And Rev. 22:12, Revelation 22:12 KJV - And, behold, I come quickly; and my - Bible Gateway ??

Like I always say, most everything can be sorted out in Genesis.

Let's take a look at what it means to be a living soul, aka living being.

Gen. 2:7 sorts that out for us quite nicely, Genesis 2:7 KJV - And the LORD God formed man of the dust - Bible Gateway

What we have here is a formula, as in 1 + 1 = 2

In this case the formula is dust + God's breath = living soul.

Dust w/o God's breath isn't a soul.
God's breath w/o the dust isn't a soul.
It's the two combined that makes a soul.
Once the two are separated the dusts returns to dust. Hence the term dust to dust.
The breath returns to God, not the soul, as we see in Eccl. 12:7, Ecclesiastes 12:7 KJV - Then shall the dust return to the earth - Bible Gateway. Again, Eccl. 9:5 covers the state of the dead quite directly as seen above.

As I stated before, the confusion on the state of the dead was introduced by the Roman Catholic Church who invented purgatory, another mixture of pagan beliefs. It filtered through the rest of Christian denominations as such, however, it's not Biblically based.

Why do I need an answer? Did I say that one particular interpretation is more right than another? The simple fact is that any theology that does not deal with the bible and all of its verses is going to be flawed.

Jesus said that anyone that believes in him possesses eternal life now, not at some vague point in the future. That is far from the only fault with the soul sleep doctrine, but it is the one that you have to deal with if you are going to insist that you are correctly interpreting the Bible and that everyone who does not agree with you is wrong. Unfortunately, you really have no idea how to deal with a doctrinal challenge, you are taught never to question the John class, and that even reading things that do not come from them is wrong. Could that be because they don't want you to think for yourself?

Quantum, if you are indeed a student of the Bible, you should be aware of the precept that states that Scripture interprets Scripture. That means that one uses Scripture to help you to interpret other ones, meaning that they all go together, which ultimately means that they aren't contradictory, as many falsely believe.

What actually happens is, that instead of Scripture contradacting Scrtipture, Scripture is falsely interpreted by the reader/believer, it gets regurgitated and perpetuated until it becomes a solid belief and doctrine for many. That's how it goes down.

With that being said, you should answer the question, because they all go together. The fact that you won't or can't rather, speaks volumes.

Now, you've brought up some John texts which speak about salvation, eternal life. You just repeated the one that says to have eternal life you just have to believe in Jesus. And you're using it in a context in a discussion of the state of the dead. What this tells me is that you believe in the "once-saved, always saved" doctrine. Interesting. Because that purports that at the time of your accepting Christ as your personal Lord and savior you are then awarded eternal life and become an eternal being from that point on. That belief is so far off-base it's not even funny.

Again, ignoring all the other texts that specifically address death, salvation and the second coming. The Lord said that he's coming and His reward is coming with Him. What does that tell you Quantum?

Think for a change, don't react....respond.

The precept you are trying to use to justify your errors does not mean that you are right simply because you find Scripture that supports your position. If we accept the premist that Scripture is without error, then we have to explain the contradictions that come about from clear readings of the Scripture. Let us compare Ecclesiastes 9:5 with John 3:36 and see if we can explain the contradiction that you think exists.

The dead know not anything seems pretty straightforward, but who did Jesus say were the dead? Is it the people who believe, or the people who reject him? Would it be fair to look at these two verses and conclude that, in reality, they actually compliment each other the same way Jesus's teaching about divorce in Mathew 19 compliments his bald statements about it in Mathew 5 and Luke 16?

Trust me Marc, I have thought about this. In fact, I think about it a lot, and always wonder if I have it right. I am not reacting to anything you say, I am just enjoying poking holes in your pretentious assumption that you understand the Bible. You barely have the knowledge to make yourself look stupid in American history, there is no way your psuedo-intellectual approach to interpreting Scripture is going to trump my years of study.

 

[MarcATL]

Why do I need an answer? Did I say that one particular interpretation is more right than another? The simple fact is that any theology that does not deal with the bible and all of its verses is going to be flawed.

Jesus said that anyone that believes in him possesses eternal life now, not at some vague point in the future. That is far from the only fault with the soul sleep doctrine, but it is the one that you have to deal with if you are going to insist that you are correctly interpreting the Bible and that everyone who does not agree with you is wrong. Unfortunately, you really have no idea how to deal with a doctrinal challenge, you are taught never to question the John class, and that even reading things that do not come from them is wrong. Could that be because they don't want you to think for yourself?

Quantum, if you are indeed a student of the Bible, you should be aware of the precept that states that Scripture interprets Scripture. That means that one uses Scripture to help you to interpret other ones, meaning that they all go together, which ultimately means that they aren't contradictory, as many falsely believe.

What actually happens is, that instead of Scripture contradacting Scrtipture, Scripture is falsely interpreted by the reader/believer, it gets regurgitated and perpetuated until it becomes a solid belief and doctrine for many. That's how it goes down.

With that being said, you should answer the question, because they all go together. The fact that you won't or can't rather, speaks volumes.

Now, you've brought up some John texts which speak about salvation, eternal life. You just repeated the one that says to have eternal life you just have to believe in Jesus. And you're using it in a context in a discussion of the state of the dead. What this tells me is that you believe in the "once-saved, always saved" doctrine. Interesting. Because that purports that at the time of your accepting Christ as your personal Lord and savior you are then awarded eternal life and become an eternal being from that point on. That belief is so far off-base it's not even funny.

Again, ignoring all the other texts that specifically address death, salvation and the second coming. The Lord said that he's coming and His reward is coming with Him. What does that tell you Quantum?

Think for a change, don't react....respond.

The precept you are trying to use to justify your errors does not mean that you are right simply because you find Scripture that supports your position. If we accept the premist that Scripture is without error, then we have to explain the contradictions that come about from clear readings of the Scripture. Let us compare Ecclesiastes 9:5 with John 3:36 and see if we can explain the contradiction that you think exists.

The dead know not anything seems pretty straightforward, but who did Jesus say were the dead? Is it the people who believe, or the people who reject him? Would it be fair to look at these two verses and conclude that, in reality, they actually compliment each other the same way Jesus's teaching about divorce in Mathew 19 compliments his bald statements about it in Mathew 5 and Luke 16?

Trust me Marc, I have thought about this. In fact, I think about it a lot, and always wonder if I have it right. I am not reacting to anything you say, I am just enjoying poking holes in your pretentious assumption that you understand the Bible. You barely have the knowledge to make yourself look stupid in American history, there is no way your psuedo-intellectual approach to interpreting Scripture is going to trump my years of study.

Now you're mixing up an analogy that Jesus used to the actual concept the Jews were taught on the state of the dead.

OK...now I've seen everything.

 

[turzovka]

Or hell for that matter.

You guys do realize that don't you?

I'm here watching the service live and it's just one false doctrine after the other.

Christiandom as it's today is in a state of confusion.

Is that Malcolm X in your avatar? That's a "good start" to start telling us exactly what God means.

I keep wondering what the early Christians did without the Bible? I guess Jesus left them to think for themselves and hope it comes out allright?

I also keep wondering who assembled the Bible since it was not codified until the late 300's a.d. Were these the same Catholic leaders and teachers who formed the councils which determined inspired Scritpure the same ones who you claim have a church that is anti-Christian and deceiving the faithful? What a shame. God let all believers be deceived for 1500 years until that special protestant prophet came along. Of course just about everything Luther taught you would find fault with as well.

Finally... you have a lot of chutzpah to use Scripture to defend your beliefs, because we could easily indict you with the same Book. Although you no doubt would twist it to sastisfy your own special theology.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Quantum, if you are indeed a student of the Bible, you should be aware of the precept that states that Scripture interprets Scripture. That means that one uses Scripture to help you to interpret other ones, meaning that they all go together, which ultimately means that they aren't contradictory, as many falsely believe.

What actually happens is, that instead of Scripture contradacting Scrtipture, Scripture is falsely interpreted by the reader/believer, it gets regurgitated and perpetuated until it becomes a solid belief and doctrine for many. That's how it goes down.

With that being said, you should answer the question, because they all go together. The fact that you won't or can't rather, speaks volumes.

Now, you've brought up some John texts which speak about salvation, eternal life. You just repeated the one that says to have eternal life you just have to believe in Jesus. And you're using it in a context in a discussion of the state of the dead. What this tells me is that you believe in the "once-saved, always saved" doctrine. Interesting. Because that purports that at the time of your accepting Christ as your personal Lord and savior you are then awarded eternal life and become an eternal being from that point on. That belief is so far off-base it's not even funny.

Again, ignoring all the other texts that specifically address death, salvation and the second coming. The Lord said that he's coming and His reward is coming with Him. What does that tell you Quantum?

Think for a change, don't react....respond.

The precept you are trying to use to justify your errors does not mean that you are right simply because you find Scripture that supports your position. If we accept the premist that Scripture is without error, then we have to explain the contradictions that come about from clear readings of the Scripture. Let us compare Ecclesiastes 9:5 with John 3:36 and see if we can explain the contradiction that you think exists.

The dead know not anything seems pretty straightforward, but who did Jesus say were the dead? Is it the people who believe, or the people who reject him? Would it be fair to look at these two verses and conclude that, in reality, they actually compliment each other the same way Jesus's teaching about divorce in Mathew 19 compliments his bald statements about it in Mathew 5 and Luke 16?

Trust me Marc, I have thought about this. In fact, I think about it a lot, and always wonder if I have it right. I am not reacting to anything you say, I am just enjoying poking holes in your pretentious assumption that you understand the Bible. You barely have the knowledge to make yourself look stupid in American history, there is no way your psuedo-intellectual approach to interpreting Scripture is going to trump my years of study.

Now you're mixing up an analogy that Jesus used to the actual concept the Jews were taught on the state of the dead.

OK...now I've seen everything.

Umm, what?

The Jews do not think Ecclesiastes is Scripture. Want to back up and try that one again?

 

[Avatar4321]

I keep wondering what the early Christians did without the Bible? I guess Jesus left them to think for themselves and hope it comes out allright?

The Lord provided them revelation through the Holy Spirit. At least, He did until they stopped listening to Him and went into Apostasy. It's not a coincidence that the coming forth of the scriptures and the printing press led to an end of the dark ages. It's not a coincidence that once the people had the scriptures in their hand, they realized there was something wrong with the Church. Wasn't the Church's fault though, It was organized after the Apostasy and loss of revelation.

It's also not a coincidence that the New World was found at the same time the people were starting to come out of darkness and study the scriptures. The Lord's hand is in everything.

 

[turzovka]

I keep wondering what the early Christians did without the Bible? I guess Jesus left them to think for themselves and hope it comes out allright?

The Lord provided them revelation through the Holy Spirit. At least, He did until they stopped listening to Him and went into Apostasy. It's not a coincidence that the coming forth of the scriptures and the printing press led to an end of the dark ages. It's not a coincidence that once the people had the scriptures in their hand, they realized there was something wrong with the Church. Wasn't the Church's fault though, It was organized after the Apostasy and loss of revelation.

It's also not a coincidence that the New World was found at the same time the people were starting to come out of darkness and study the scriptures. The Lord's hand is in everything.

Your many assumptions in your response are startling. Only because you appear to be well-read and thoughtful on this subject matter.

I have no desire or time on this day to suggest to you why I believe you are very much mistaken. But I would be glad to some other time.

The Joseph Smith quotes are throwing me a little, too. But do not assume I have this resignation of judgment on Latter Day Saints or anything of the sort. I do not.

 

[retro]

Gosh, you guys make things complicated - maybe you just like arguing who has the 'true' viewpoint.

Start here - 'Scripture' means written - written implies by men - men can not be trusted because they always have an agenda.

Therefore, no 'religious texts' of any organised religion are worth studying. All their priests, imams, vicars and other organisational officials are irrelevant.

Concepts of 'heaven' and 'hell' are religious psycho-tools, nothing more.

Am I saying there is no 'God' ?

No I'm not - just that as humans we have no senses or brain functions that can discern, let alone understand such things. No human has ever seen or heard or contacted any 'otherworld' entity - and never will.

Further, conceptualising a 'God' as some kind of compassionate or vengeful old guy, is the height of arrogance. Consider the vast variance among even the lifeforms we can detect - never mind those we can't. And sidelining women in these vain ideas, since feminine variants comprise half of creation, is just silly.

Having said that there's no merit in any man-made religion, I have to say that personally I'm convinced from experience, that universal powers beyond our comprehension are immanent. The powers can be 'contacted' by directed (I'll use the word) prayer.

In other words, our thoughts can bring about change in our universe.

We are dealing with many aspects of power, which even ancient civilisations tried to personify as Gods and Goddesses (the latter having been pushed to oneside by male oriented religions).

So overall, it's simple - we are not endowed with senses to ever know these things.

Just enjoy the testable feeling of being cared for by powers that we can imagine as Gods and Goddesses, and that there is every possibility that we are on a reincarnation cycle.

Enjoy this life - and the next ..

Peace.

 

[turzovka]

Gosh, you guys make things complicated - maybe you just like arguing who has the 'true' viewpoint.

Start here - 'Scripture' means written - written implies by men - men can not be trusted because they always have an agenda.

Therefore, no 'religious texts' of any organised religion are worth studying. All their priests, imams, vicars and other organisational officials are irrelevant.

Concepts of 'heaven' and 'hell' are religious psycho-tools, nothing more.

Am I saying there is no 'God' ?

No I'm not - just that as humans we have no senses or brain functions that can discern, let alone understand such things. No human has ever seen or heard or contacted any 'otherworld' entity - and never will.

Further, conceptualising a 'God' as some kind of compassionate or vengeful old guy, is the height of arrogance. Consider the vast variance among even the lifeforms we can detect - never mind those we can't. And sidelining women in these vain ideas, since feminine variants comprise half of creation, is just silly.

Having said that there's no merit in any man-made religion, I have to say that personally I'm convinced from experience, that universal powers beyond our comprehension are immanent. The powers can be 'contacted' by directed (I'll use the word) prayer.

In other words, our thoughts can bring about change in our universe.

We are dealing with many aspects of power, which even ancient civilisations tried to personify as Gods and Goddesses (the latter having been pushed to oneside by male oriented religions).

So overall, it's simple - we are not endowed with senses to ever know these things.

Just enjoy the testable feeling of being cared for by powers that we can imagine as Gods and Goddesses, and that there is every possibility that we are on a reincarnation cycle.

Enjoy this life - and the next ..

Peace.

We may be making it complicated but you are making it all sound irrelevant. Eeek!

Put it this way: Jesus would not have come to this earth to be ridiculed, tortured and put to death if such an act was inconsequential, and if He did not have some very important message for mankind.

Also: there are many well documented and verified signs of divine intervention, which contradicts your claim that man cannot be in contact with the divine.

 

[Avatar4321]

I keep wondering what the early Christians did without the Bible? I guess Jesus left them to think for themselves and hope it comes out allright?

The Lord provided them revelation through the Holy Spirit. At least, He did until they stopped listening to Him and went into Apostasy. It's not a coincidence that the coming forth of the scriptures and the printing press led to an end of the dark ages. It's not a coincidence that once the people had the scriptures in their hand, they realized there was something wrong with the Church. Wasn't the Church's fault though, It was organized after the Apostasy and loss of revelation.

It's also not a coincidence that the New World was found at the same time the people were starting to come out of darkness and study the scriptures. The Lord's hand is in everything.

Your many assumptions in your response are startling. Only because you appear to be well-read and thoughtful on this subject matter.

I have no desire or time on this day to suggest to you why I believe you are very much mistaken. But I would be glad to some other time.

The Joseph Smith quotes are throwing me a little, too. But do not assume I have this resignation of judgment on Latter Day Saints or anything of the sort. I do not.

No worry. Not trying to throw you. Just speaking my mind. If you dont want to talk or are busy that's fine. The world hasnt ended. That's Friday apparently.

 

[Avatar4321]

Gosh, you guys make things complicated - maybe you just like arguing who has the 'true' viewpoint.

Start here - 'Scripture' means written - written implies by men - men can not be trusted because they always have an agenda.

Therefore, no 'religious texts' of any organised religion are worth studying. All their priests, imams, vicars and other organisational officials are irrelevant.

Concepts of 'heaven' and 'hell' are religious psycho-tools, nothing more.

Am I saying there is no 'God' ?

No I'm not - just that as humans we have no senses or brain functions that can discern, let alone understand such things. No human has ever seen or heard or contacted any 'otherworld' entity - and never will.

Further, conceptualising a 'God' as some kind of compassionate or vengeful old guy, is the height of arrogance. Consider the vast variance among even the lifeforms we can detect - never mind those we can't. And sidelining women in these vain ideas, since feminine variants comprise half of creation, is just silly.

Having said that there's no merit in any man-made religion, I have to say that personally I'm convinced from experience, that universal powers beyond our comprehension are immanent. The powers can be 'contacted' by directed (I'll use the word) prayer.

In other words, our thoughts can bring about change in our universe.

We are dealing with many aspects of power, which even ancient civilisations tried to personify as Gods and Goddesses (the latter having been pushed to oneside by male oriented religions).

So overall, it's simple - we are not endowed with senses to ever know these things.

Just enjoy the testable feeling of being cared for by powers that we can imagine as Gods and Goddesses, and that there is every possibility that we are on a reincarnation cycle.

Enjoy this life - and the next ..

Peace.

You lost me at the "No religious texts are worth studying". No honest seeker of truth can find the truth by NOT reading something. More information is not bad. In fact, getting more information is can clarify alot of questions.

 

[MarcATL]

Gosh, you guys make things complicated - maybe you just like arguing who has the 'true' viewpoint.

Start here - 'Scripture' means written - written implies by men - men can not be trusted because they always have an agenda.

Therefore, no 'religious texts' of any organised religion are worth studying. All their priests, imams, vicars and other organisational officials are irrelevant.

Concepts of 'heaven' and 'hell' are religious psycho-tools, nothing more.

Am I saying there is no 'God' ?

No I'm not - just that as humans we have no senses or brain functions that can discern, let alone understand such things. No human has ever seen or heard or contacted any 'otherworld' entity - and never will.

Further, conceptualising a 'God' as some kind of compassionate or vengeful old guy, is the height of arrogance. Consider the vast variance among even the lifeforms we can detect - never mind those we can't. And sidelining women in these vain ideas, since feminine variants comprise half of creation, is just silly.

Having said that there's no merit in any man-made religion, I have to say that personally I'm convinced from experience, that universal powers beyond our comprehension are immanent. The powers can be 'contacted' by directed (I'll use the word) prayer.

In other words, our thoughts can bring about change in our universe.

We are dealing with many aspects of power, which even ancient civilisations tried to personify as Gods and Goddesses (the latter having been pushed to oneside by male oriented religions).

So overall, it's simple - we are not endowed with senses to ever know these things.

Just enjoy the testable feeling of being cared for by powers that we can imagine as Gods and Goddesses, and that there is every possibility that we are on a reincarnation cycle.

Enjoy this life - and the next ..

Peace.

You lost me at the "No religious texts are worth studying". No honest seeker of truth can find the truth by NOT reading something. More information is not bad. In fact, getting more information is can clarify alot of questions.

That's absolutely right. Gospel knowledge is progressive.

 

[MarcATL]

Gosh, you guys make things complicated - maybe you just like arguing who has the 'true' viewpoint.

Start here - 'Scripture' means written - written implies by men - men can not be trusted because they always have an agenda.

Therefore, no 'religious texts' of any organised religion are worth studying. All their priests, imams, vicars and other organisational officials are irrelevant.

Concepts of 'heaven' and 'hell' are religious psycho-tools, nothing more.

Am I saying there is no 'God' ?

No I'm not - just that as humans we have no senses or brain functions that can discern, let alone understand such things. No human has ever seen or heard or contacted any 'otherworld' entity - and never will.

Further, conceptualising a 'God' as some kind of compassionate or vengeful old guy, is the height of arrogance. Consider the vast variance among even the lifeforms we can detect - never mind those we can't. And sidelining women in these vain ideas, since feminine variants comprise half of creation, is just silly.

Having said that there's no merit in any man-made religion, I have to say that personally I'm convinced from experience, that universal powers beyond our comprehension are immanent. The powers can be 'contacted' by directed (I'll use the word) prayer.

In other words, our thoughts can bring about change in our universe.

We are dealing with many aspects of power, which even ancient civilisations tried to personify as Gods and Goddesses (the latter having been pushed to oneside by male oriented religions).

So overall, it's simple - we are not endowed with senses to ever know these things.

Just enjoy the testable feeling of being cared for by powers that we can imagine as Gods and Goddesses, and that there is every possibility that we are on a reincarnation cycle.

Enjoy this life - and the next ..

Peace.

We may be making it complicated but you are making it all sound irrelevant. Eeek!

Put it this way: Jesus would not have come to this earth to be ridiculed, tortured and put to death if such an act was inconsequential, and if He did not have some very important message for mankind.

Also: there are many well documented and verified signs of divine intervention, which contradicts your claim that man cannot be in contact with the divine.

Very well said!

 

[retro]

I don't expect you guys to understand - you've been too heavily brainwashed.

Not a single idea taken on board - and of course it's entirely up to you what you want to believe.

Try this - one night wander outside under the night sky in your pyjamas .. take your preferred book of study with you.

Feel the quietness - the wind wafting past - the universe stretching out before you - sense the teraquads of molecules beneath your feet that constitutes our home planet.

What does your micro consciousness detect or understand ?

Your book is in your hand - think about that - it's been re-written many times, each with somebody's objective to tell the stories again in some simplified way. Even if you choose to believe that each re-write was inspirationally guided, it's far more likely to be a chinese whisper. And it's original was scribed long ago in some other World by guys in the middle East - not by women - you might wonder about that.

If I'm right, you'll be able to detect - nothing. You could do the same thing for the rest of your lives - still nothing. All you are still reading about in your book are ideas from thousands of years ago, in a time when there were no books - just story tellers who made a living telling stories. Nothing has been added since then - nothing has happened since then. Your time scales are pitifully weak - the universal powers don't march to your timescale.

Neither logically could they consider homo-sapiens as any more significant than all other lifeforms in creation.

All you can do is express your gratitude for life and the beauty all around you. Your conciousness is like a tiny radio transmitter - your thoughts will travel, and have a tiny effect.

The very fact that grass is still growing (despite Monsanto's worst efforts) shows that new life is still being created - and at the other end of life's cycle, dying away into the molecular pool.

You are wanting to believe that some guy arrived on Earth from 'God' looking just like a man (heaven forbid, a woman) thousands of years ago, on a mission to 'save' you from something or other. (Why not a woman - because they were, and still are lesser beings in that part of the World).

Why not arrive as an Eagle or a Sheep or a strange Rock as in 2001 the film ? That would make just as much sense. There can be no direct experience of the creators in our present form.

Now, if you are still outside in the night, with no distractions - offer up a little prayer to the dieties, whoever or whatever they are - for health, for understanding maybe.

You may find some effect does occur as serendipity - or in your dreams - a state in which we spend half our lives, ever wondered why ?

So bury yourselves in your 'studies' of the ancient dry scripts if you wish.

I prefer the immanent joy that's available to everyone, without churches, their rules and officials.

You're quite free to believe whatever you wish of course ..

I don't wish to belittle your beliefs, they are important guides to life for many people. But for me, far too restrictive, too focussed on wringing your hands as to what a sinning wretch you are - worried about the 'punishment' coming your way.

Lighten up folks - speak to the 'gods and goddesses' that exist today - and tomorrow, directly. They are freely available without all the ceremonials of the multifarious churches around the World.

Stand on your own two feet as a creature containing a spark of the divine - you are allowed to speak to the gods and goddesses as part of the family. For myself, I'd make my words good and positive - I'm not going to tempt Zeus

Here's Demeter; Earth Mother archetype. Goddess where birthing or small children are involved.

 

[Gadawg73]

Or hell for that matter.

You guys do realize that don't you?

I'm here watching the service live and it's just one false doctrine after the other.

Christiandom as it's today is in a state of confusion.

And you know this how? For some religion is a comfort, as is belief in heaven. Who the hell do you think you are to take that away from them? Maybe you oughta just STFU.

My friend, The Gospel isn't about feelings, as in what individuals feel about certain issues.

It's about The Truth.

It's very comforting for humans to believe that their loved ones aren't really dead, but looking down on them in heaven, that doesn't make it true.

I believe in Thus Said The Lord, and The Lord didn't say we get an instant trip to Heaven upon death.

Love thy neighbor is the truth.
A truth rarely practiced the way Christ envisioned it 2000 years ago by Christians today.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's absolutely right. Gospel knowledge is progressive.

That would depend how you define progressive